New teacher attrition has long been a problem in high-poverty urban districts. So it was a sign of hope last fall when the School District of Philadelphia announced that the percentage of new teachers who completed their first year of teaching had risen from 73 percent in 2002–2003 to 91 percent in 2003–2004. An ambitious set of initiatives launched by the district to retain novice teachers made this gain in retention possible.
Retaining new teachers matters for many reasons. School improvement efforts require a reasonable degree of staff stability; it is almost impossible to create change with a transient, inexperienced staff. School systems with high teacher turnover typically fill many vacant positions with uncertified teachers, making it harder to meet the requirement under the No Child Left Behind Act that all teachers be “highly qualified” by June 2006. Further, replacing new teachers is expensive, costing on average about $11,000 per recruit (Benner, 2000).
Making Teacher Retention a Top Priority
New teacher retention was a major problem when new district CEO Paul Vallas arrived in Philadelphia in the summer of 2002. Fewer than half of new teachers were staying in the school district after three years on the job, and only one-third were staying in the school to which they were originally assigned (Neild, Useem, Travers, & Lesnick, 2003). In addition, the school district had just begun operating under a “diverse provider” model; external organizations would soon be managing 44 of the district's lowest-performing schools (Bulkley, Mundell, & Riffer, 2004). Vallas quickly established teacher recruitment and retention as priorities, appointing a special assistant, Tomás Hanna, to oversee the effort.
The drive to recruit and keep teachers developed momentum rapidly. Breaking from traditional patterns, district officials reached out to colleges and universities, business and civic groups, and external consultants, asking them to help design and implement teacher recruitment and training programs. The district's long-term tendency to guard its administrative turf gave way to the view that the challenge of keeping new teachers was too big for any one organization to solve.
Starting With Strong Recruiting
- An aggressive marketing effort to attract applicants, using billboards, radio spots, and a polished Web site.
- A focus on closer relationships with program directors and deans of local colleges of education.
- Better follow-up with teaching applicants to show the district's strong interest in them.
- A more streamlined application process.
- Tuition reimbursement for new teachers pursuing their master's degree—$2,400 a year for those teaching in hard-to-staff schools and $1,000 a year for those in all other schools.
- $1,000 awards for “Teacher Ambassadors”—teachers who recruit new candidates into high need areas of the district.
- A $1,000 stipend and partial reimbursement of Praxis exam fees for student teachers who sign on as teachers in the district.
- A hiring bonus of $4,500 for new district teachers, paid out in two installments over three years.
Another key effort was developing six alternative certification programs to be administered through local colleges and universities aimed at training uncertified new teachers working on emergency permits (Useem, Neild, & Farley, 2005). Approximately 500 new teachers hired by the district each year during the last two years participated in one of these certification programs.
The largest of these models is the Literacy Intern program, conducted in partnership since 1999 with the nonprofit Philadelphia Education Fund (PEF). Before being hired as stand-alone teachers, literacy interns coteach with a veteran teacher in a primary grade classroom for several years, concentrating on teaching reading and receiving nearly full pay and benefits. While coteaching, interns participate in intensive professional development in literacy and take courses to become certified for teaching elementary school. This program provided the school district with approximately 600 fully trained new teachers over the last two school years. Literacy interns are more likely than other new teachers to plan a long teaching career in the district.
In 2004, the school district and the Philadelphia Education Fund began using the Literacy Intern model in Philadelphia middle schools, piloting a program in which new teachers coteach with a veteran teacher for four days of the week and take courses for certification on the fifth day. In addition, the New York City based New Teacher Project piloted the Philadelphia Teaching Fellows program, aimed at filling mid-year vacancies in subject areas in which teacher shortages exist. The 61 participants, chosen from 700 applicants within the Philadelphia area, had degrees in a key content area but no teaching certification and little teaching experience. They received four weeks of training in January 2005 and stepped into vacant positions in Philadelphia schools in February, simultaneously starting courses toward certification.
During the 2003–2004 school year, the national organization Teach for America supplied 200 teachers to teach in content areas with teacher shortages in Philadelphia middle schools. Two additional alternative programs—the federally funded Transition to Teaching initiative and a state-funded Accelerated Certification for Teachers pilot program—also provided new teachers.
As a result of these efforts, the number of teachers applying for jobs in the School District of Philadelphia rose by 44 percent between 2002 and 2004. Because district officials know they may not find enough fully certified teachers to fill the more than 1,000 positions that open up each year, they have embraced the strategy of hiring teachers who are pursuing certification through alternative means and have emergency permits. Pennsylvania regulations consider a teacher candidate who has passed the Praxis exam and who is enrolled in a teacher education program—credentials they term “intern-certified”—to be highly qualified.
Strategies for Teacher Support
New Teacher Coaches
In addition to enhancing recruitment efforts, in 2003, Philadelphia officials launched a set of initiatives to support and retain teachers new to the system.
One crucial change was bringing new teacher coaches into all district schools to provide mentoring and in class assistance to new teachers. Philadelphia had experimented with in class coaching in some middle and high schools since 1995 through the Johns Hopkins University Talent Development program. Although fewer schools are now formally participating in the Talent Development program, the district adopted this model of in class coaching for all new teachers. The model stresses sustained coaching tailored both to subject areas and to grade levels.
Sixty-one new teacher coaches (veteran local teachers who had retired or who were put on special assignment) were hired and trained during the summer. Each coach was matched with 20 teachers whose subject matter and grade level generally dovetailed with the coach's expertise. In contrast to the district's traditional “colleague mentors” (practicing classroom teachers who mentored new colleagues at their school), the new teacher coaches were based outside the schools and did not have classroom teaching responsibilities. Coaches helped in whatever way the new professionals needed: finding scarce classroom supplies, suggesting or bringing in resources, setting up the room, modeling lessons, observing classes and giving feedback, and providing emotional support and advice about working in the system.
The positive impact of this kind of mentoring on new teacher retention has been documented in national studies (Smith & Ingersoll, 2004). Interviews, surveys, and focus groups indicate that these coaches played a key role in boosting new teacher retention during 2003–2004 (Useem & Costelloe, 2004; Useem et al., 2005), and the district is continuing the practice for all new recruits. New teachers were overwhelmingly positive in describing the support they received from their coaches:My new teacher coach was a godsend. She was there the day I started. I felt like I was walking in cold, but I got instant support. She helped me set up my room and gave suggestions. She came by once a week, and we talked on the phone and e-mailed. She also modeled lessons and observed in my room. She was a big help because she is familiar with special education.—Middle school special education teacherMy new teacher coach saved my life, saved my sanity. She has shown up at the most appropriate times and is the most consistent [support]. She cut out [material for] bulletin boards and ran interference with the principal. She was everything I needed. She covered classes when I needed to cry.—5th grade bilingual teacher
Improved Resources and Working Conditions
Philadelphia also introduced a common core curriculum in 2003–2004, which made choosing subject matter easier for new teachers. In addition to the scope and sequence, texts, and materials, the curriculum included suggested lesson plans and resources. Although some veteran teachers have found the curriculum constraining, new teachers expressed appreciation:The core curriculum was important to me. I wasn't overwhelmed with developing lesson plans. This year would have been much tougher without the core curriculum.—9th grade math teacher
In addition, the district intensified its induction activities for teachers new to the system. Certified new teachers were required to attend a paid two-week summer orientation; those who were not fully certified attended a four-week orientation. Once school began, new teachers took part in an after school New Teacher Academy run by staff from Teachers College, Columbia University, in partnership with the district.
To ensure that principals made supporting new teachers a priority, regional superintendents began to assess principals' success in reducing attrition as part of their performance appraisals. In the summer of 2003, all principals in the district participated in mandatory training in how to improve retention and were required to draw up a teacher retention plan for the fall. New teachers starting in 2003 reported feeling welcomed and supported by administrators at a higher rate than had new teachers in past years.
The district has also improved working conditions for all teachers, creating smaller classes in grades K–3, improving school facilities, and tightening up disciplinary policies—including transferring seriously disruptive pupils to alternative schools. The Philadelphia school system is moving away from its centralized method of assigning new teachers to schools to an expanded system of school-based hiring. All new teachers can now interview at a school before choosing to teach there, which enables new teachers and the school's principal to engage in a mutual choice process.
The Ongoing Challenge
These steps have reduced the number of new teachers who quit during their first year in Philadelphia's city schools and increased the number of teachers returning for a second year. The next challenge is to sustain and strengthen these initiatives. For one thing, these efforts are not cheap. The annual price tag for the Literacy Intern program alone was approximately $93,000 per participant over two years.
Another worry is that teacher vacancies may escalate after June 2006, when the NCLB requirement that all teachers be “highly qualified” goes into effect. This will be especially likely in core 7th and 8th grade subjects that are now mostly taught by elementary-certified teachers who lack content-area specialization. Although the district is sponsoring training to help teachers pass middle-level Praxis subject tests and the state has created a middle-level credentialing option that allows current teachers to bypass the tests, some teachers may still fail to meet these new requirements.
An even more serious challenge will be filling special education positions, especially in middle schools. Because there is a shortage of certified special educators across Pennsylvania, Philadelphia has relied increasingly on uncertified “apprentice” teachers or intern-certified teachers for these positions.
Attracting and keeping new and veteran teachers in high-poverty, low-performing schools is the toughest challenge of all. The steepness of this challenge, however, should not obscure Philadelphia's progress in retaining first-year teachers. This success shows how much is possible when a city deliberately directs energy and resources toward a solution.
