Photo of teacher and students

National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality National Issue Forum



A Summary of the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality National Issue Forum: Addressing Personnel Shortages and the Recruitment of Special Education, Mathematics, and Science Teachers in At-Risk Schools

May 24–25, 2006
Sofitel Chicago O'Hare, Rosemont, Illinois

Day 1

Welcome and Introductions

Sabrina Laine, Ph.D., director of the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality , welcomed participants and described how the work of National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality fits in with that of the comprehensive centers. She provided an overview of National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality's mission statement, operating principals, and capacity-building framework and touched on teacher recruitment issues across the country.

Dr. Laine explained that this national forum is the first in a series of forums that will be revised in scope to address a regional audience. The primary goals of the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality forum are the following:

In an effort to help participants organize the vast amount of resources available on teacher quality and build their own resource libraries, a resource binder will be issued at each of these forums.

Keynote Address—Moderator: Dan Reschly, Vanderbilt University

Addressing Personnel Shortages and the Recruitment of Special Education, Mathematics, and Science Teachers in At-Risk Schools

Richard Ingersoll, Ph.D., researcher on teacher quality and supply-and-demand issues with the University of Pennsylvania, presented his perspectives and national data on the teacher shortage—in terms of teachers moving and leaving the profession—and how this crisis specifically relates to mathematics, science, and special education. He discussed some of the quantifiable and nonquantifiable consequences associated with teacher turnover, including the negative impact on community and instructional coherency. The teacher staffing issue also has created an obstacle to meeting No Child Left Behind (NCLB) requirements. Dr. Ingersoll suggests addressing these challenges not by recruiting but by taking a closer look at, and perhaps changing, how schools are organized.

With 55,000 teachers; 12,000 schools; and all 50 states participating, the Schools and Staffing Survey and Teacher Follow-Up Survey are the nation's largest sources of information available on teachers. The following are a few of the revealing results presented by Dr. Ingersoll:

Presentation and Roundtable Discussions

Cortney Rowland, National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality, provided an overview of the Planning Tool to Provide Evidence of Progress Toward Equitable Teacher Distribution and set the stage for the roundtable discussions and remaining activities for the day.

Participants discussed within their groups, recorded notes, and posted them on chart paper around the room.

Best Practices Panel—Moderator: Phoebe Gillespie

Phoebe Gillespie, National Center for Special Education Personnel and Related Service Providers, introduced the panel members after providing a brief overview of her organization's work and objectives, which follow:

The Watkins Group: Engaging the Community in Recruitment and Retention

Vincent Watkins, The Watkins Group, shared his organization's innovative model for involving the community in the recruitment of teachers and highlighted how his approach contrasts with more conventional teacher-recruitment models. Highlights from this presentation include the following:

The Watkins Group has received increased interest in its services throughout the 15 states in which it works, and there have been reports of increased diversity in recruiting.

Clark County Schools in Las Vegas: Recruitment Initiatives

George Ann Rice, Clark County Schools, discussed several community-focused programs currently being implemented in Clark County Schools. Many of the programs are based on the same concepts that drive The Watkins Group's recruiting model. Others were developed to address the school district's unique needs. Based in Las Vegas, Clark County is the fastest growing county in the state and producing only 25 percent of the teachers needed. They also are faced with recruitment and retention challenges indigenous to gaming-industry communities. Following are highlights of some of the district's innovative incentive programs:

Virginia Commonwealth University: META Program

Terry Dozier, Virginia Commonwealth University, discussed some of the current work of the Metropolitan Educational Training Alliance (META) alternative licensure program for special education teachers. The organization, founded in February 2001, is a partnership of the Virginia counties of Chesterfield, Hanover, and Henrico; the Richmond Public Schools; and the School of Education at Virginia Commonwealth University. The organization provides the framework to identify needs and opportunities shared by all of the districts around alternative certification for special education teachers. Following are highlights from Dozier's discussion:

Roundtable Discussion

Based on the information presented by the panelists, participants used a set of guiding questions to discuss in their groups how to apply the recruiting and retention strategies in their own regions and states.

National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality Online Resources

Cortney Rowland provided an introduction to the resources available on the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality website (www.tqsource.org). She discussed how the online resources are linked directly to and support National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality's goals, and they are designed to promote the successful implementation of teacher quality initiatives. Rowland walked participants through the website, focusing on resources relevant to mathematics, science, and special education. She navigated and described the following tools:

Conclusion and Debrief

Amy Jackson, National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality, thanked participants and presenters and provided logistical information for the subsequent events.

Day 2

Keynote Address—Moderator: Paul Kimmelman

American Competitiveness Initiative

Patricia Ross, U.S. Department of Education, opened her discussion by recalling that the first release of the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study data was one of the major events that drew attention to mathematics and science data in this country. The idea that individual schools, districts, and states could be prepared internationally—and compared in mathematics and science—sparked the nation's interest in closely gauging the performance of schools across the country. It had become apparent that American students compete internationally as well as locally.

Ross went on to discuss the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI), introduced by President George W. Bush in January 2006. ACI is an aggressive long-term plan aimed at strengthening the nation's mathematics and science infrastructure. To support the wide range of programs proposed under this initiative, the president has requested $5.9 billion for distribution in 2007 and $136 billion in the next 10 years. As part of the ACI, funding is being proposed to support a variety of programs and innovations, including work in biology, research and development, energy conservation, and workforce training; however, a significant share of the ACI proposals being considered in Congress address mathematics and science education. Following are highlights of some of those plans:

Keynote Q & A

How do teachers become eligible for the federal loan-forgiveness program?

What federal incentives are in place to help elementary and middle school teachers reach their goal of having students proficient in algebra by eighth grade?

How can the federal government create incentives for universities to change their preservice programs to increase mathematics standards?

Has any thought been given to how the adjunct teacher initiative can be reconciled with the highly qualified teacher requirement?

Best Practices Panel—Facilitator: Chris Reising

Chris Reising, Southern California Teacher Recruitment and Support Center, set the context for the upcoming panel and roundtable discussions by emphasizing the importance of mathematics and science and the current teacher recruitment and retention efforts across the country. Reising referred to Ingesoll's May 24, 2006, keynote address, which focused more on retention than recruitment, noting that one issue cannot be discussed in isolation of the other.

California has had the good fortune of stable teacher-retention rates, partly due to the state's induction program. However, with $150 million in recruitment efforts eliminated and the university system's goal of doubling the number of mathematics and science teachers by 2010, California's focus is on reestablishing recruitment centers to replenish the teacher supply.

The New Teacher Project

Ariela Rozman, The New Teacher Project, discussed strategies to effectively recruit and hire mathematics and science teachers in urban areas and presented examples from a New York City case study on how strategies can be implemented to address this critical need.

Even with the New York City Teaching Fellows alternate-certification program, the state still has not produced enough teachers to fill vacancies because many of those created by the New York state mandate in 2000 only replaced noncertified teachers with certified ones. Rozman advised using the following four strategies to help boost the recruitment and hiring of mathematics and science teachers.

The Center for Teaching Quality: 2006 Teaching and Learning Conditions Surveys

Eric Hirsch, Center for Teaching Quality, discussed the 2006 results of the Teaching and Learning Conditions surveys, which gathered data on teacher working conditions from 125,000 educators in six states. Findings across the states were consistent and included the following:

South Carolina Department of Education

Janice Poda, South Carolina Department of Education, discussed state initiatives to recruit teachers into the teaching profession and the classroom. Poda pointed out that while there are distinct differences between recruiting objectives and approaches to bringing teachers into the profession versus the classroom, both are challenging with their own set of obstacles to overcome. Following are some of the current recruiting efforts:

Q & A

Are signing bonuses an effective strategy for recruiting and retaining teachers?

Has the state received opposition from the teachers union with regard to financial incentives for teachers?

How important is technology in addressing teacher shortage? What are the barriers to more implementation of technology?

Expert Roundtable Presentations and Discussions—Eric Hirsch, Kawanda McLendon, Janice Poda, Chris Reising, George Ann Rice, Ariela Rozman, Rebecca Villarreal, and Amanda Riviera

Following the panel presentations and discussions, the roundtable experts each delivered a short presentation on a topic of their choice, stemming from the larger discussions around research, initiatives, barriers, and opportunities in recruitment work. They then used a set of guiding questions to lead discussions at their tables.

Conclusion, Debrief, and Next Steps

Amy Jackson closed the two-day session with thanks and a request for the submission of evaluation surveys. She also informed participants that a summary of the forum and resources will be posted to the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality website.