how illinois districts are inducting their new teachers

College of EducationUniversity of Illinois at Urbana Champaign http://intc.education.illinois.edu/ 217-244-7389

Illinois New Teacher Collaborative

How Illinois districts are inducting their new teachers

Dr. Patricia Brady, Research CoordinatorDr. Mary Elin Barnish, Program Coordinator

Illinois New Teacher Collaborative at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

http://intc.education.illinois.edu/



Introductions

Predictions




Session agenda• Introduction of Illinois landscape• Study methodology and findings• Conclusions and discussion• The present and the future




Illinois District Context871 school districtsIllinois ranks 49th in funding disparities

Number of schools: 1 – 613

Average teacher salary: $28,000 - $103,000

Average teacher experience: 3.4 years – 24 years




History of Illinois induction fundingFiscal year Legislative budget # of programs

2007 $2 million 10 2008 $5 million 40 2009 $14 million 67 2010 $9.4 million 64 2011 $5.6 million 46

2012 $1 0




201067 programs

•34 District •6 CPS Area/Office •21 ROE/ISC•4 College/University•2 Service Provider

4,389 Beginning Teachers

2,538 Mentors

356 Districts

224,180 Students (estimated)

ISBE Funded Programs at a Glance

= funded program

= districts served by a consortium




2011 Illinois Districts Survey




Survey OverviewsFunded programs survey: fall 2010Unfunded districts survey: January 2011

• Online surveys• Sent to superintendent or program coordinator• Questions:

– supports provided to new teachers– mentor training and selection– induction program organization, leadership, and funding




Number of districts

All Illinois districts 866

All funded districts 332

All unfunded districts 534

Unfunded survey responders

289




Findings: Unfunded districts survey




Number of new teachers per district

0 1 2-3 4-5 6-10 11-20 >200%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

21%

16%

24%

14% 13%

8%4%

% of districts



Illinois New Teacher CollaborativeNew teachers attend a special orientation or workshop before school begins. % of districts indicating “required”

Size Small: 63%

Medium: 84%

Large: 99%

Locale Rural: 69%

Town: 84%

Suburb: 92%

City: 100%

Avg. instructional exp.

Low: 80%

High: 89%

% low-income students

High: 76%

Low: 88%




Required induction components

NTs are as

signed a m

entor

Mentors observe

NTs

NTs attend orie

ntation

NTs attend w

orkshops

NTs observe

mentors

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Small districtsMedium districtsLarge districts

% o

f dis

tric

ts




Mentor selection, training, rewards

Required: years of exp

Required: formal app

Mentors receive stipend

Mentors receive training

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%


% o

f dis

tric

ts




Mentor initial training

None Up to 1 day Several days Week +0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%


% o

f dis

tric

ts




Mentor activity requirements• Large districts have more requirements for

mentors’ activities and their frequency– Meet with mentee– Observe mentee teach– Attend mentor training or workshops– Submit a record of mentoring activities




Division of responsibility

Mentor train

ing

NT training

Admin training

Selects

mentors

Pays m

entor sala

ries

Pays N

T stipends

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

Individual schoolsDistrictROE, ISC, or otherDoes not occur or no answer




Findings: Comparison with funded

programs



Illinois New Teacher CollaborativeBeginning teacher requirements

BTs observe

mentors

BTs hav

e time to netw

ork

BTs are vi

deotaped fo

r disc

ussion

BTs enga

ge in

e-mentorin

g0%

20%40%60%80%

100%120%

All unfunded districtsLarge unfunded districtsFunded programs




Mentor selection, training, rewards

0%20%40%60%80%

100%120%

All unfunded districts

Large unfunded districts

Funded programs




Program coordinator role

Program co

ordinator

Administrat

or

Teacher /

mentor

TeamOther

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

All unfunded districts Large unfunded districtsFunded programs



Illinois New Teacher CollaborativeMentor/ mentee meetings provisions

All unfunded districts

Large unfunded districts

Funded programs

Pairs meet before/after school, during free periods

87% 91% 81%

Pairs have common planning periods

25% 32% 59%

Pairs use release time 21% 35% 41%Schools have special meeting times

15% 19% 35%

Other (e.g. full-release or retired mentor)

4% 3% 24%




Conclusions




• There is a vast discrepancy between what beginning teachers receive in certain districts (small, rural, high-poverty) compared with others (large, urban or suburban, well-resourced).




• The unfunded districts which offer the most new teacher supports (large, suburban) still provide less than the average grant-funded induction program—even though the funded programs include small and rural districts in proportion with the state average.




Questions for discussion• How do these research findings compare with

your own experience?• In a time of tight budgets, what advice do you

have for: Small districts? Rural districts? ISBE?• Can you imagine a low-cost statewide induction

program that small/rural districts could tap into—perhaps with shared regional mentors and professional development, online components, and some local services?




Questions for discussion

• What do you need to keep your program functioning well?

• What do you need to develop and grow your program?

• How can INTC be of assistance to you in your program?




Illinois: present and futureBudget Cuts and Repercussions:• Changes in mentor training and support• Fewer new teacher initiatives (lesson study)• Need for local funding support• Fewer opportunities for instructional mentoring• Less contact time for mentors and new teachers




Illinois New Teacher Collaborative 29

• Online professional development• Support for programs statewide• Regional networks• Expanded research• Program evaluation and revision• Illinois State Board of Education expectations• Link with student achievement• Systematic and systemic induction and mentoring

New Challenges




The Future or I & M• Continue with current service provider (NTC,

CEC, ICE21, etc.)• Use local (district or ROE) funds for training

and workshops• Maintain local programs with trained mentors• Work with independent consultants




The Future of I & M• Link induction and mentoring to student

achievement• Online mentoring• Work with INTC regional specialists




Induction and Mentoring Priorities• Trained mentor for each new teacher• Instructional mentoring• Observations• Analyzing student work• Collaborative conversations• Training for administrators




Induction and Mentoring Priorities• Information to the community, parents, board

of education• Training of trainers to maintain the program

internally• Training for new teachers (HR, C&I, “Hot

Topics”)• Research




Discussion

Questions




Contact InformationPatricia Brady, Ph.D., Research Coordinator

[email protected]

Mary Elin Barnish, Ed.D., Program [email protected]

630.569.9556


mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

how illinois districts are inducting their new teachers

Documents

urbana champaign http

new teachersdr

unfunded districts survey

new teachersmentor training

average teacher experience

average teacher salary

program coordinatorquestions

isbe induction grant