The Kansas City Teacher Residency program launched in 2016 to recruit, develop, and retain teachers for the Kansas City region. After three years of operation, the program underwent a strategic planning process to refine its business model and ensure long-term sustainability. The planning process included evaluating KCTR's current financial model and benchmarking other teacher residency programs. It revealed that KCTR relies heavily on philanthropic funding and has opportunities to optimize expenditures. The new strategic plan developed by KCTR focuses on strengthening partnerships, optimizing costs, exploring new revenue sources, and gradually growing enrollment while ensuring program quality. The changes are expected to lower KCTR's per-resident costs and reduce its long-term fundraising needs.
A Guide for School Districts: Exploring Alternative Measures of Student Learn...Tanya Paperny
Districts across the country play a crucial role in ensuring schools effectively serve students and families. Beyond federal requirements in the Every Student Succeeds Act and state-level accountability systems, locally developed school performance frameworks are a key lever for holding schools accountable, particularly for student learning and wellness.
Today — with unfamiliar school configurations and unknown impacts on student outcomes — it is more important than ever that districts are diligent about assessing schools’ impact on students. But the ways that districts have done so in the past may no longer be appropriate. And districts that previously did not engage in school-level performance assessments now have a new incentive to do so.
This toolkit is a resource to help districts adapt existing school performance frameworks to the current moment or create new ones. These slides identify and walk through the fundamental questions districts need to consider in designing school performance frameworks that acknowledge the challenges that schools and students are facing, as well as a continued need to monitor performance and continuously improve.
Unfinished: Insights From Ongoing Work to Accelerate Outcomes for Students Wi...Jeremy Knight
Despite some gains over the past 20 years, significant numbers of students are not meeting grade-level expectations as defined by performance on academic assessments. Meanwhile, few schools are able to support the sort of accelerated academic learning needed to catch students up to grade-level expectations.
Evidence indicates this is not for lack of educator commitment or dedication. Instead, many educators lack clarity about how to help students catch up. Common messages about holding a high bar for academic rigor and personalizing learning to meet students where they are can be perceived as being at odds with one another.
“Unfinished: Insights From Ongoing Work to Accelerate Outcomes for Students With Learning Gaps” synthesizes a broad body of research on the science of learning in order to inform efforts to help students close gaps and meet grade-level expectations. This deck argues that helping students catch up is not about rigor or personalization — classrooms need both.
Closing learning gaps requires students to be motivated and engaged to grapple with challenging, grade-level skills and knowledge — while also having their individual learning needs met.
The report identifies what must happen among educators, systems-level leaders, teacher developers, instructional materials providers, and technology experts to move beyond the dichotomy of “rigor versus personalization” and toward a future that effectively blends the two.
Autonomous District Schools: Lessons From the Field on a Promising StrategyJeremy Knight
Autonomous district schools (sometimes called “in-district charters”) use some of the same freedoms that public charter schools enjoy while remaining part of the district. Enabled by innovative policies that support school-level autonomy, Springfield, Massachusetts; Indianapolis, Indiana; Denver, Colorado; and San Antonio, Texas, are experimenting with these types of schools. While these efforts are too new to have clear student impact data, autonomous district schools could be a promising strategy to improve districts’ ability to meet families’ and students’ needs and to improve outcomes.
“Autonomous District Schools: Lessons From the Field on a Promising Strategy” summarizes Bellwether’s work with San Antonio Independent School District (SAISD) over the past 18 months. The district has authorized three networks of autonomous district schools using a law that supports and incentivizes the creation of these schools. Bellwether provided program design support, strategic advice, and capacity building to SAISD’s Network Principal Initiative, and this deck offers an overview of the initiative and the lessons we learned about the launch of autonomous district schools.
This slide deck is accompanied by a tool kit, “Autonomous District Schools: Tools for Planning and Launching,” which offers concrete resources for leaders interested in planning an autonomous school or network.
A School Leader’s Guide to Effective Stakeholder EngagementTanya Paperny
Families, teachers, and communities all have varying perspectives on what
the school year can and should hold for students. School leaders need to
balance these voices in decision-making through effective and authentic
stakeholder engagement.
Stakeholder engagement is essential for school leaders confronting change
and uncertainty. And yet there are better and worse ways for school leaders
to engage stakeholders in their decision-making processes: It’s far too easy to
neglect important groups, spend too much time with some groups and not
enough with others, or fail to take into account how past decisions and
community context may affect the perception of leadership decisions.
“A School Leader’s Guide to Effective Stakeholder Engagement” [LINK TK]
can help school leaders avoid these pitfalls. This slide deck provides an
overview of stakeholder engagement and easy-to-understand steps, and a
linked workbook (on slide 5) provides a resource to support school leaders as
they implement their approach.
Charter schools currently serve 3 million students in more than 7,000 schools across 44 states and Washington, D.C. And their reach continues to grow: Since 2005, the number of charter schools in the U.S. has nearly doubled, and the number of charter students has nearly tripled.
Despite being an enduring presence in the nation’s education space, charter schools remain a topic of ongoing debate. The State of the Charter Sector provides the latest available information on charter schools across the country, including updated data on growth, performance, and geographic trends. It also includes analyses of the challenges that charter schools face and how the sector is trying to address them.
This comprehensive slide deck updates our 2015 State of the Charter School Movement, and together, these resources serve as a fact base to cut through the rhetoric that often accompanies conversations about charter schools.
The goal of this analysis is not to persuade, but to inform. As the charter sector continues to grow and improve, it needs a rigorous, evidence-based debate around its weaknesses and strengths. Accurate information is crucial for thoughtful policymaking and, ultimately, to ensuring all students have access to a high-quality education.
The Challenges and Opportunities in School Transportation TodayJeremy Knight
Every day, America’s fleet of roughly 480,000 school buses transports more than a third of students to and from school. This fleet is more than twice the size of all other forms of mass transit combined, including bus, rail, and airline transportation.
Teacher Pension Plans: How They Work, and How They Affect Recruitment, Retent...Jeremy Knight
About 90 percent of public school teachers today are enrolled in defined benefit pension plans operated by their state. Most of these state-run plans were created decades ago, and they have not adjusted to serve the mobile teaching workforce in today’s modern society. While they do serve some long-serving veteran teachers well, the plans also leave many short- and medium-term teachers with less-than-adequate benefits.
In “Teacher Pension Plans: How They Work, and How They Affect Recruitment, Retention, and Equity,” we look at the history of these plans and how they interact with key education issues facing our schools today, including attracting and retaining high-quality teachers and providing equitable resources for disadvantaged students. While there are no easy or one-size-fits-all solutions, this deck concludes with examples of states that have re-designed their retirement systems to better meet the needs of teachers, taxpayers, and the general public.
Toward Equitable Access and Affordability: How Private Schools and Microschoo...Jeremy Knight
In recent decades, tuition increases in independent schools have outpaced inflation and wage growth, while thousands of Catholic parochial schools — which historically have provided private education at a much lower cost — have closed, leaving middle- and low-income families with few affordable options.
Meanwhile, families across socioeconomic groups express interest in private schooling. While private schools consistently serve about 10% of U.S. students, 40% of parents say they would prefer private schools. These trends suggest a need to look more closely at efforts to increase affordability in private schools and ensure that all families have equitable access to the schools of their choice.
In “Toward Equitable Access and Affordability: How Private Schools and Microschools Seek to Serve Middle- and Low-Income Students,” we sought to understand the landscape of private schools working to provide an affordable education by looking at the approaches they are taking and how they are revisiting traditional operating models. We profile a variety of strategies used by schools to improve access for middle- and low-income families. Some schools rely on reducing the costs to families (i.e., tuition) by providing significant financial aid or partnering with scholarship programs, some have found inventive new revenue streams, and some have streamlined operations and leveraged technology to reduce their per-pupil expenditures.
One category of private schools, the microschool, merited a closer look due to its profoundly different operational and financial model. Through surveys and interviews with microschool leaders and experts around the country, this report seeks to further define this emerging sector of intentionally small, educationally innovative schools and to explore their potential as an affordable independent school option.
Ultimately, this overview of low-cost private schools and microschools surfaced questions about improving equity in private education. The profiles of schools aiming to serve middle- and low-income families highlight unsolved puzzles about how to balance that mission with financial sustainability. The analysis also raises questions about the role of private schools in serving families with more limited means, and about the potential of low-cost models to scale and innovate. Further exploration of these questions is essential to ensuring that in the private sector as well as the public sector, all families have equal access to high-quality options.
A Guide for School Districts: Exploring Alternative Measures of Student Learn...Tanya Paperny
Districts across the country play a crucial role in ensuring schools effectively serve students and families. Beyond federal requirements in the Every Student Succeeds Act and state-level accountability systems, locally developed school performance frameworks are a key lever for holding schools accountable, particularly for student learning and wellness.
Today — with unfamiliar school configurations and unknown impacts on student outcomes — it is more important than ever that districts are diligent about assessing schools’ impact on students. But the ways that districts have done so in the past may no longer be appropriate. And districts that previously did not engage in school-level performance assessments now have a new incentive to do so.
This toolkit is a resource to help districts adapt existing school performance frameworks to the current moment or create new ones. These slides identify and walk through the fundamental questions districts need to consider in designing school performance frameworks that acknowledge the challenges that schools and students are facing, as well as a continued need to monitor performance and continuously improve.
Unfinished: Insights From Ongoing Work to Accelerate Outcomes for Students Wi...Jeremy Knight
Despite some gains over the past 20 years, significant numbers of students are not meeting grade-level expectations as defined by performance on academic assessments. Meanwhile, few schools are able to support the sort of accelerated academic learning needed to catch students up to grade-level expectations.
Evidence indicates this is not for lack of educator commitment or dedication. Instead, many educators lack clarity about how to help students catch up. Common messages about holding a high bar for academic rigor and personalizing learning to meet students where they are can be perceived as being at odds with one another.
“Unfinished: Insights From Ongoing Work to Accelerate Outcomes for Students With Learning Gaps” synthesizes a broad body of research on the science of learning in order to inform efforts to help students close gaps and meet grade-level expectations. This deck argues that helping students catch up is not about rigor or personalization — classrooms need both.
Closing learning gaps requires students to be motivated and engaged to grapple with challenging, grade-level skills and knowledge — while also having their individual learning needs met.
The report identifies what must happen among educators, systems-level leaders, teacher developers, instructional materials providers, and technology experts to move beyond the dichotomy of “rigor versus personalization” and toward a future that effectively blends the two.
Autonomous District Schools: Lessons From the Field on a Promising StrategyJeremy Knight
Autonomous district schools (sometimes called “in-district charters”) use some of the same freedoms that public charter schools enjoy while remaining part of the district. Enabled by innovative policies that support school-level autonomy, Springfield, Massachusetts; Indianapolis, Indiana; Denver, Colorado; and San Antonio, Texas, are experimenting with these types of schools. While these efforts are too new to have clear student impact data, autonomous district schools could be a promising strategy to improve districts’ ability to meet families’ and students’ needs and to improve outcomes.
“Autonomous District Schools: Lessons From the Field on a Promising Strategy” summarizes Bellwether’s work with San Antonio Independent School District (SAISD) over the past 18 months. The district has authorized three networks of autonomous district schools using a law that supports and incentivizes the creation of these schools. Bellwether provided program design support, strategic advice, and capacity building to SAISD’s Network Principal Initiative, and this deck offers an overview of the initiative and the lessons we learned about the launch of autonomous district schools.
This slide deck is accompanied by a tool kit, “Autonomous District Schools: Tools for Planning and Launching,” which offers concrete resources for leaders interested in planning an autonomous school or network.
A School Leader’s Guide to Effective Stakeholder EngagementTanya Paperny
Families, teachers, and communities all have varying perspectives on what
the school year can and should hold for students. School leaders need to
balance these voices in decision-making through effective and authentic
stakeholder engagement.
Stakeholder engagement is essential for school leaders confronting change
and uncertainty. And yet there are better and worse ways for school leaders
to engage stakeholders in their decision-making processes: It’s far too easy to
neglect important groups, spend too much time with some groups and not
enough with others, or fail to take into account how past decisions and
community context may affect the perception of leadership decisions.
“A School Leader’s Guide to Effective Stakeholder Engagement” [LINK TK]
can help school leaders avoid these pitfalls. This slide deck provides an
overview of stakeholder engagement and easy-to-understand steps, and a
linked workbook (on slide 5) provides a resource to support school leaders as
they implement their approach.
Charter schools currently serve 3 million students in more than 7,000 schools across 44 states and Washington, D.C. And their reach continues to grow: Since 2005, the number of charter schools in the U.S. has nearly doubled, and the number of charter students has nearly tripled.
Despite being an enduring presence in the nation’s education space, charter schools remain a topic of ongoing debate. The State of the Charter Sector provides the latest available information on charter schools across the country, including updated data on growth, performance, and geographic trends. It also includes analyses of the challenges that charter schools face and how the sector is trying to address them.
This comprehensive slide deck updates our 2015 State of the Charter School Movement, and together, these resources serve as a fact base to cut through the rhetoric that often accompanies conversations about charter schools.
The goal of this analysis is not to persuade, but to inform. As the charter sector continues to grow and improve, it needs a rigorous, evidence-based debate around its weaknesses and strengths. Accurate information is crucial for thoughtful policymaking and, ultimately, to ensuring all students have access to a high-quality education.
The Challenges and Opportunities in School Transportation TodayJeremy Knight
Every day, America’s fleet of roughly 480,000 school buses transports more than a third of students to and from school. This fleet is more than twice the size of all other forms of mass transit combined, including bus, rail, and airline transportation.
Teacher Pension Plans: How They Work, and How They Affect Recruitment, Retent...Jeremy Knight
About 90 percent of public school teachers today are enrolled in defined benefit pension plans operated by their state. Most of these state-run plans were created decades ago, and they have not adjusted to serve the mobile teaching workforce in today’s modern society. While they do serve some long-serving veteran teachers well, the plans also leave many short- and medium-term teachers with less-than-adequate benefits.
In “Teacher Pension Plans: How They Work, and How They Affect Recruitment, Retention, and Equity,” we look at the history of these plans and how they interact with key education issues facing our schools today, including attracting and retaining high-quality teachers and providing equitable resources for disadvantaged students. While there are no easy or one-size-fits-all solutions, this deck concludes with examples of states that have re-designed their retirement systems to better meet the needs of teachers, taxpayers, and the general public.
Toward Equitable Access and Affordability: How Private Schools and Microschoo...Jeremy Knight
In recent decades, tuition increases in independent schools have outpaced inflation and wage growth, while thousands of Catholic parochial schools — which historically have provided private education at a much lower cost — have closed, leaving middle- and low-income families with few affordable options.
Meanwhile, families across socioeconomic groups express interest in private schooling. While private schools consistently serve about 10% of U.S. students, 40% of parents say they would prefer private schools. These trends suggest a need to look more closely at efforts to increase affordability in private schools and ensure that all families have equitable access to the schools of their choice.
In “Toward Equitable Access and Affordability: How Private Schools and Microschools Seek to Serve Middle- and Low-Income Students,” we sought to understand the landscape of private schools working to provide an affordable education by looking at the approaches they are taking and how they are revisiting traditional operating models. We profile a variety of strategies used by schools to improve access for middle- and low-income families. Some schools rely on reducing the costs to families (i.e., tuition) by providing significant financial aid or partnering with scholarship programs, some have found inventive new revenue streams, and some have streamlined operations and leveraged technology to reduce their per-pupil expenditures.
One category of private schools, the microschool, merited a closer look due to its profoundly different operational and financial model. Through surveys and interviews with microschool leaders and experts around the country, this report seeks to further define this emerging sector of intentionally small, educationally innovative schools and to explore their potential as an affordable independent school option.
Ultimately, this overview of low-cost private schools and microschools surfaced questions about improving equity in private education. The profiles of schools aiming to serve middle- and low-income families highlight unsolved puzzles about how to balance that mission with financial sustainability. The analysis also raises questions about the role of private schools in serving families with more limited means, and about the potential of low-cost models to scale and innovate. Further exploration of these questions is essential to ensuring that in the private sector as well as the public sector, all families have equal access to high-quality options.
Teacher quality and related issues (i.e., teacher preparation, recruitment, and professional development) ranked among the highest priority areas among a sample of education policymakers surveyed by the Institute of Education Sciences. And it is not surprising that quality teaching also emerged as a central theme in one recent series of Policy Forums.
Jeff C. Palmer is a teacher, success coach, trainer, Certified Master of Web Copywriting and founder of https://Ebookschoice.com. Jeff is a prolific writer, Senior Research Associate and Infopreneur having written many eBooks, articles and special reports.
Source: https://ezinearticles.com/?Overcoming-Challenging-School-Environments&id=10174636
Teacher evaluations-and-local-flexibilityDavid Black
School Improvement Network conducted study of 50 state department of education officials who are responsible for implementing teacher evaluation policy to better understand state teacher evaluation policy and how much flexibility districts have at the local level to implement state requirements. The goal was to inform ourselves, school districts and local schools how much freedom and flexibility, or lack thereof, they have to innovate on behalf of their own teachers and students particularly when it comes to using technology to achieve their professional development needs.
Launched in 2005, Liberal Education and America’s Promise (LEAP) is a national initiative that champions the importance of a twenty-first-century liberal education—for individual students and for a nation dependent on economic creativity and democratic vitality.
Educating Youth in Short-Term DetentionTanya Paperny
Each year thousands of youth in America are uprooted from their schools and communities and sent to a juvenile justice detention center. The majority of these confined youth are there for nonviolent offenses, including technical violations, such as failing to complete treatment or violating probation. Even youth awaiting foster care placement can be placed in a detention center. Over the course of a year, we estimate between 90,000 and 170,000 youth spend at least one day in a short-term detention center, and over 40% are detained for more than a month.
While in these facilities, young people are entitled to the same educational opportunities that they would have in the outside world. However, there is little research or data about this population.
In “Educating Youth in Short-Term Detention,” we found that youth’s educational experiences in these facilities often compound, rather than alleviate, the challenges they face. They are commonly unenrolled from their home school once they are arrested, and while detained, youth often do not receive coursework aligned with their needs, nor do they receive credit for the work they complete. Moreover, once they’re released, youth face significant challenges reenrolling in school, so even a brief period in confinement can severely disrupt a youth’s education.
Helping students navigate an interconnected world — What to expect from PISA ...EduSkills OECD
Today’s students live in an interconnected, diverse and rapidly changing world. In this complex environment, a student’s ability to understand the world and appreciate the multiple different perspectives they are likely to encounter is key to their success.
In 2018, the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) conducted its first evaluation of students’ capacity to live in an interconnected world. The assessment focused on students’ knowledge of issues of local and global significance, including public health, economic and environmental issues, as well as their intercultural knowledge, skills and attitudes. The results of this assessment – PISA 2018 Volume VI – will be launched on 22 October.
Want to get a head start on what this latest Volume is all about? Andreas Schleicher, OECD Director for Education and Skills, unveils the main themes addressed in Volume VI and what to expect from the data.
Optimistic About the Future, But How Well Prepared? College Students' Views o...Robert Kelly
Key findings from survey among 400 employers and 613 college students conducted in November and December 2014 for The Association of American Colleges and Universities by Hart Research Associates.
From November 13 to December 3, 2014, Hart Research conducted an online survey on behalf of the Association of American Colleges and Universities among 613 college students—all of whom were ages 18 to 29 and within a year of obtaining a degree, or in the case of two-year college students, within a year of obtaining a degree or transferring to a four-year college. These students included 304 four-year public college seniors, 151 four-year private college seniors, and 158 community college students who plan to receive their associate degree or transfer to a four-year college within the next 12 months.
Prior to the survey, in September 2014, Hart Research conducted three focus groups among current college students. One group was convened in Waltham, Massachusetts, among seniors at private four-year colleges and universities. Two groups were held in Dallas, Texas—one group among seniors at public four-year colleges and universities and another group among students at community colleges who expect to receive their associate degree or transfer to a four-year college within the next 12 months.
The focus groups and survey were undertaken to explore college students’ views on what really matters in college, including what learning outcomes are most important to them personally and for their future success. The research also explored current college students’ sense of the job market today, their confidence in being able to secure a job, and how effectively they think that their college learning has prepared them for this. The research was designed to understand the learning outcomes students believe are most important to acquire to be able to succeed in today’s economy and how well they feel that their college or university has prepared them in these areas. It also explored their participation in various applied and project-based learning experiences, as well as their perceptions of the degree to which employers value these experiences when hiring recent college graduates.
The survey of college students was conducted in tandem with a survey of 400 employers, and explored many of the same topics to provide a comparison between these two audiences.
This report highlights key findings from the research among college students. Selected comparisons with employers are included where relevant. A report of selected findings from the survey of employers was released by AAC&U in January 2015.
Cleveland plan strategy power point 2013danmoulthrop
This presentation was prepared by the Cleveland Metropolitan School District to help students, families, and other members of the community understand how the new plan will be implemented.
Teacher quality and related issues (i.e., teacher preparation, recruitment, and professional development) ranked among the highest priority areas among a sample of education policymakers surveyed by the Institute of Education Sciences. And it is not surprising that quality teaching also emerged as a central theme in one recent series of Policy Forums.
Jeff C. Palmer is a teacher, success coach, trainer, Certified Master of Web Copywriting and founder of https://Ebookschoice.com. Jeff is a prolific writer, Senior Research Associate and Infopreneur having written many eBooks, articles and special reports.
Source: https://ezinearticles.com/?Overcoming-Challenging-School-Environments&id=10174636
Teacher evaluations-and-local-flexibilityDavid Black
School Improvement Network conducted study of 50 state department of education officials who are responsible for implementing teacher evaluation policy to better understand state teacher evaluation policy and how much flexibility districts have at the local level to implement state requirements. The goal was to inform ourselves, school districts and local schools how much freedom and flexibility, or lack thereof, they have to innovate on behalf of their own teachers and students particularly when it comes to using technology to achieve their professional development needs.
Launched in 2005, Liberal Education and America’s Promise (LEAP) is a national initiative that champions the importance of a twenty-first-century liberal education—for individual students and for a nation dependent on economic creativity and democratic vitality.
Educating Youth in Short-Term DetentionTanya Paperny
Each year thousands of youth in America are uprooted from their schools and communities and sent to a juvenile justice detention center. The majority of these confined youth are there for nonviolent offenses, including technical violations, such as failing to complete treatment or violating probation. Even youth awaiting foster care placement can be placed in a detention center. Over the course of a year, we estimate between 90,000 and 170,000 youth spend at least one day in a short-term detention center, and over 40% are detained for more than a month.
While in these facilities, young people are entitled to the same educational opportunities that they would have in the outside world. However, there is little research or data about this population.
In “Educating Youth in Short-Term Detention,” we found that youth’s educational experiences in these facilities often compound, rather than alleviate, the challenges they face. They are commonly unenrolled from their home school once they are arrested, and while detained, youth often do not receive coursework aligned with their needs, nor do they receive credit for the work they complete. Moreover, once they’re released, youth face significant challenges reenrolling in school, so even a brief period in confinement can severely disrupt a youth’s education.
Helping students navigate an interconnected world — What to expect from PISA ...EduSkills OECD
Today’s students live in an interconnected, diverse and rapidly changing world. In this complex environment, a student’s ability to understand the world and appreciate the multiple different perspectives they are likely to encounter is key to their success.
In 2018, the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) conducted its first evaluation of students’ capacity to live in an interconnected world. The assessment focused on students’ knowledge of issues of local and global significance, including public health, economic and environmental issues, as well as their intercultural knowledge, skills and attitudes. The results of this assessment – PISA 2018 Volume VI – will be launched on 22 October.
Want to get a head start on what this latest Volume is all about? Andreas Schleicher, OECD Director for Education and Skills, unveils the main themes addressed in Volume VI and what to expect from the data.
Optimistic About the Future, But How Well Prepared? College Students' Views o...Robert Kelly
Key findings from survey among 400 employers and 613 college students conducted in November and December 2014 for The Association of American Colleges and Universities by Hart Research Associates.
From November 13 to December 3, 2014, Hart Research conducted an online survey on behalf of the Association of American Colleges and Universities among 613 college students—all of whom were ages 18 to 29 and within a year of obtaining a degree, or in the case of two-year college students, within a year of obtaining a degree or transferring to a four-year college. These students included 304 four-year public college seniors, 151 four-year private college seniors, and 158 community college students who plan to receive their associate degree or transfer to a four-year college within the next 12 months.
Prior to the survey, in September 2014, Hart Research conducted three focus groups among current college students. One group was convened in Waltham, Massachusetts, among seniors at private four-year colleges and universities. Two groups were held in Dallas, Texas—one group among seniors at public four-year colleges and universities and another group among students at community colleges who expect to receive their associate degree or transfer to a four-year college within the next 12 months.
The focus groups and survey were undertaken to explore college students’ views on what really matters in college, including what learning outcomes are most important to them personally and for their future success. The research also explored current college students’ sense of the job market today, their confidence in being able to secure a job, and how effectively they think that their college learning has prepared them for this. The research was designed to understand the learning outcomes students believe are most important to acquire to be able to succeed in today’s economy and how well they feel that their college or university has prepared them in these areas. It also explored their participation in various applied and project-based learning experiences, as well as their perceptions of the degree to which employers value these experiences when hiring recent college graduates.
The survey of college students was conducted in tandem with a survey of 400 employers, and explored many of the same topics to provide a comparison between these two audiences.
This report highlights key findings from the research among college students. Selected comparisons with employers are included where relevant. A report of selected findings from the survey of employers was released by AAC&U in January 2015.
Cleveland plan strategy power point 2013danmoulthrop
This presentation was prepared by the Cleveland Metropolitan School District to help students, families, and other members of the community understand how the new plan will be implemented.
Contract Position: EARLY YEARS COMMUNITY DEVELOPERHelen Davidson
The Vancouver Early Years Partnership is contracting an early years community developer for 8 months to coordinate day-to-day operations and implement community planning.
Presentation for the 2017 AACC conference featuring three ATD initiatives: Adjunct Faculty, Teaching & Learning National Institute, and the OER Degree Initiative
HCC will be a leader in providing high quality, innovative education leading to student success and completion of workforce and academic programs. We will be responsive to community needs and drive economic development in the communities we serve.
In this session, we’ll delve into the ways that institutions have been engaging faculty, creating courses and pathways, and working to build sustained infrastructure for civic learning and community engagement.
Wide Open Spaces: Schooling in Rural America TodayJeremy Knight
Fourteen percent of the nation’s population lives in rural communities, and one in five K-12 students attends a rural school — a substantial proportion of America’s school population. Despite increased attention from the national education policy community in recent years, too many rural communities and schools continue to struggle to provide their students with quality educational opportunities. Common approaches to education reform that may work in urban communities often fail to take into account the unique assets and challenges facing rural schools.
“Wide Open Spaces: Schooling in Rural America Today” provides education policymakers with a factbase on America’s rural schools and communities: the economic and academic challenges they face, their unique assets, and opportunities for improvement. This resource highlights some of the challenges facing schools and students, including limited economic opportunity, poor access to healthcare, and social challenges like drug addiction. It also provides an overview of available data on student outcomes, including National Assessment of Educational Progress data and graduation rates. These data reveal that while rural students appear to be doing better on average than students in some other geographies, there are real gaps among subgroups and barriers to postsecondary opportunities that hinder many rural students from achieving their full academic potential.
Even so, rural communities’ assets provide opportunities to create and sustain meaningful change. Compared with other geographies, rural communities tend to place high value on civic and community engagement and support tight-knit networks among residents. Community members tend to have a deep sense of and commitment to place that dates back generations. And at a state and national level, rural communities represent a powerful political voice.
“Wide Open Spaces: Schooling in Rural America Today” aims to equip advocates, decision-makers, and other stakeholders with a shared understanding of rural education to generate a more accurate and nuanced policy response.
Patterns and Trends in Educational Opportunity for Students in Juvenile Justi...Jeremy Knight
Every two years the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights conducts the Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC), which includes information about school demographics, course enrollment, discipline, and other measures of school quality. For the first time in 2013-14 and again in 2015-16, the CRDC included juvenile justice schools, which serve approximately 50,000 adjudicated youth placed in secure facilities across the country.
Students’ educational experiences in juvenile justice facilities have historically gone unnoticed. Due to the unique and relatively small population they serve, these schools are typically exempt from traditional state and federal data collection. The two most recent surveys from the CRDC offer limited insight, leading our team to analyze only 18 states in 2013-14 and 15 states in 2015-16. Our analysis includes a comparison of student access to critical math and science courses disaggregated by race and ethnicity.
In “Patterns and Trends in Educational Opportunity for Students in Juvenile Justice Schools: Updates and New Insights,” we found that juvenile justice facilities fail to provide adjudicated youth with sufficient access to the courses they need to graduate high school. For example, students in juvenile justice facilities are 25 percent less likely to have access to Algebra I, a foundational class required for graduation. Moreover, these facilities offer only limited access to credit recovery programs, which are critical to helping students recoup course credits that they missed or failed to complete earlier in their academic careers.
A closer look at the data reveals that while all youth in juvenile justice facilities experience inadequate access to important classes, no group of students has less access than Native American youth. Only 63% of Native youth in juvenile justice schools have access to Algebra I compared with 79% of white students. This pattern persists in the sciences. Forty-seven percent of Native students have access to biology compared with 70% of white students. Indeed, among all groups of students in juvenile justice facilities, Native students have the lowest access to math and science courses.
These alarming statistics make clear that juvenile justice systems must do a better job providing incarcerated youth with the educational opportunities they need to get back on track. Improving the quality of data about students’ educational experiences in juvenile justice facilities is a critical first step. States — which typically run these schools — can then use improved data to increase resources to these facilities and ensure students are enrolled in the proper classes. These steps will help juvenile justice facilities perform their rehabilitative functions rather than further punishing youth by severely limiting their educational opportunities.
Education in the American South: Historical Context, Current State, and Futur...Jeremy Knight
The deck provides a detailed analysis of academic outcomes in Southern states, placing them in historical, economic, and political context. It also traces the development of public schools in the South and shows that the modern education reform movement has its roots in the South, where strategies like accountability, charter schools, private school choice, and school governance reform were first piloted.
Education in the American South: Historical Context, Current State, and Futur...Jeremy Knight
The deck provides a detailed analysis of academic outcomes in Southern states, placing them in historical, economic, and political context. It also traces the development of public schools in the South and shows that the modern education reform movement has its roots in the South, where strategies like accountability, charter schools, private school choice, and school governance reform were first piloted.
Education in the American South: Historical Context, Current State, and Futur...Jeremy Knight
The deck provides a detailed analysis of academic outcomes in Southern states, placing them in historical, economic, and political context. It also traces the development of public schools in the South and shows that the modern education reform movement has its roots in the South, where strategies like accountability, charter schools, private school choice, and school governance reform were first piloted.
Overview of the History and Status of Teachers’ UnionsJeremy Knight
Teachers’ unions are a powerful force in local, state, and federal politics, but Janus vs. the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) could change that. At the heart of this case is a key source of union revenue: agency fees.
Public sector unions, including teachers’ unions, collect revenue from the professionals they represent. From members, they collect membership dues that can be used for a wide range of activities, including political advocacy. In 22 states and D.C., unions can collect so-called “agency fees” from nonmembers. These fees are typically less than full membership dues and enable workers to opt out of supporting unions’ political activities while still supporting unions’ collective bargaining activities that benefit all workers.
If the Court overturns long-standing precedent and rules mandatory agency fees unconstitutional, it will likely have far-reaching effects on unions’ finances, and subsequently, on their power and influence. But to fully understand the potential effects of the Janus decision, it is necessary to first understand the history and current context in which teachers’ unions are operating. We created this slide deck to ensure that sector leaders, reporters, and commentators have a reliable resource to access this key information.
The deck begins with an overview of the history of public and private sector unions dating back to the early 1900s. It then provides a summary of the history and current status of teachers’ unions specifically: major successes related to collective bargaining, controversy and criticism surrounding their increasing political activities, and their response to the increasing accountability in federal education legislation. We then offer current data and information on the nation’s two largest teachers’ unions, including membership data, financial data, a description of their organizational structure and the services they provide, and an overview of recent activities including teacher strikes and walkouts. We conclude the deck by summarizing the Janus case and its potential impacts on teachers’ unions and offering questions yet to be answered about the future of teachers’ unions post-Janus.
This analysis offers an accurate and objective set of information to those wanting to inform their understanding of this historic case.
Measuring Educational Opportunity in Juvenile Justice SchoolsJeremy Knight
Every two years, the Office for Civil Rights, a division of the U.S. Department of Education, conducts a civil rights data collection that includes information about school demographics, course enrollment, discipline, and other measures of school-based experience. In 2013, the office collected data from schools identified as juvenile justice schools for the first time. These schools serve only students placed in secure facilities by law enforcement or courts, and there are approximately 50,000 young people across the country in these on any given day.
Because of their unique position and small student populations, juvenile justice schools are historically exempt from most common state and federal measures of education achievement. In fact, this 2013 data set offers the first opportunity to establish a data baseline across states.
However, in attempting to conduct an analysis of the available data from 2013, the Bellwether team discovered troubling inconsistencies in the data set that suggested inaccurate or incomplete data collection. In order to conduct a credible analysis, we cross-referenced the Office for Civil Rights data with residential facility census data collected by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. This revealed serious deficiencies in most states’ data; in fact, only 18 states provided credible data about enrollment and achievement in their juvenile justice schools.
We were able to draw some conclusions about higher-level math and science course access and enrollment from the available data. However, without more accurate and more nuanced data collection from the Office for Civil Rights, these conclusions are of limited utility to policymakers and program leaders. Both the conclusions and recommendations for improved data collection practices are presented in this deck.
Retaining High Performers: Insights from DC Public Schools’ Teacher Exit SurveyJeremy Knight
As school districts across the country report various kinds of teacher shortages, how to retain teachers has emerged as a key area of interest for district leaders and policymakers. There are a variety of incentives and strategies to keep teachers in the profession, but which ones are most effective? Asking teachers themselves yields answers, some of which cut against the grain of conventional wisdom in the education community.
In order to better understand why teachers leave the profession, we analyzed teacher exit survey data from the District of Columbia Public Schools to determine what could have retained them or what would have had no effect. Because we believe that retention efforts should be focused on effective teachers, we broke down teachers’ responses by their latest teacher evaluation performance rating and focused our analysis on high-performing teachers.
Although DCPS is unique in some ways, lessons about what could have retained high-performing teachers may be transferable to other urban districts. The slide deck below presents our findings and offers considerations for other urban school districts.
Welcome to TechSoup New Member Orientation and Q&A (May 2024).pdfTechSoup
In this webinar you will learn how your organization can access TechSoup's wide variety of product discount and donation programs. From hardware to software, we'll give you a tour of the tools available to help your nonprofit with productivity, collaboration, financial management, donor tracking, security, and more.
Read| The latest issue of The Challenger is here! We are thrilled to announce that our school paper has qualified for the NATIONAL SCHOOLS PRESS CONFERENCE (NSPC) 2024. Thank you for your unwavering support and trust. Dive into the stories that made us stand out!
How to Create Map Views in the Odoo 17 ERPCeline George
The map views are useful for providing a geographical representation of data. They allow users to visualize and analyze the data in a more intuitive manner.
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...Sandy Millin
http://sandymillin.wordpress.com/iateflwebinar2024
Published classroom materials form the basis of syllabuses, drive teacher professional development, and have a potentially huge influence on learners, teachers and education systems. All teachers also create their own materials, whether a few sentences on a blackboard, a highly-structured fully-realised online course, or anything in between. Despite this, the knowledge and skills needed to create effective language learning materials are rarely part of teacher training, and are mostly learnt by trial and error.
Knowledge and skills frameworks, generally called competency frameworks, for ELT teachers, trainers and managers have existed for a few years now. However, until I created one for my MA dissertation, there wasn’t one drawing together what we need to know and do to be able to effectively produce language learning materials.
This webinar will introduce you to my framework, highlighting the key competencies I identified from my research. It will also show how anybody involved in language teaching (any language, not just English!), teacher training, managing schools or developing language learning materials can benefit from using the framework.
Students, digital devices and success - Andreas Schleicher - 27 May 2024..pptxEduSkills OECD
Andreas Schleicher presents at the OECD webinar ‘Digital devices in schools: detrimental distraction or secret to success?’ on 27 May 2024. The presentation was based on findings from PISA 2022 results and the webinar helped launch the PISA in Focus ‘Managing screen time: How to protect and equip students against distraction’ https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/managing-screen-time_7c225af4-en and the OECD Education Policy Perspective ‘Students, digital devices and success’ can be found here - https://oe.cd/il/5yV
Operation “Blue Star” is the only event in the history of Independent India where the state went into war with its own people. Even after about 40 years it is not clear if it was culmination of states anger over people of the region, a political game of power or start of dictatorial chapter in the democratic setup.
The people of Punjab felt alienated from main stream due to denial of their just demands during a long democratic struggle since independence. As it happen all over the word, it led to militant struggle with great loss of lives of military, police and civilian personnel. Killing of Indira Gandhi and massacre of innocent Sikhs in Delhi and other India cities was also associated with this movement.
Model Attribute Check Company Auto PropertyCeline George
In Odoo, the multi-company feature allows you to manage multiple companies within a single Odoo database instance. Each company can have its own configurations while still sharing common resources such as products, customers, and suppliers.
The Art Pastor's Guide to Sabbath | Steve ThomasonSteve Thomason
What is the purpose of the Sabbath Law in the Torah. It is interesting to compare how the context of the law shifts from Exodus to Deuteronomy. Who gets to rest, and why?
Synthetic Fiber Construction in lab .pptxPavel ( NSTU)
Synthetic fiber production is a fascinating and complex field that blends chemistry, engineering, and environmental science. By understanding these aspects, students can gain a comprehensive view of synthetic fiber production, its impact on society and the environment, and the potential for future innovations. Synthetic fibers play a crucial role in modern society, impacting various aspects of daily life, industry, and the environment. ynthetic fibers are integral to modern life, offering a range of benefits from cost-effectiveness and versatility to innovative applications and performance characteristics. While they pose environmental challenges, ongoing research and development aim to create more sustainable and eco-friendly alternatives. Understanding the importance of synthetic fibers helps in appreciating their role in the economy, industry, and daily life, while also emphasizing the need for sustainable practices and innovation.
2. This is a report funded by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation utilizing content and data from
multiple sources and external contributors. Every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of
the information contained in this report and is believed to be correct as of the publication date.
Nonetheless, this material is for informational purposes and you are solely responsible for
validating the applicability and accuracy of the information in any use you make of it.
2
3. Executive Summary
◼ In 2016, Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation launched the Kansas City Teacher Residency
(KCTR), a program that recruits, certifies, and develops teachers in the Kansas City region.
◼ Led by Executive Director Charles King, KCTR has successfully launched and established a high-
quality and diverse teacher preparation program for the Kansas City Metro
◼ In late 2018, KCTR redesigned its program model to bring it in line with peer benchmarks and
ensure long-term impact and sustainability
◼ The new program features includes:
○ Strengthening partnerships: develop revenue-sharing agreements with Institute of
Higher Education, and increase district contribution and value to schools
○ Optimizing KCTR expenditure: differentiate resident and coaching support, maximize
coaching efficiency, and benchmark stipend with national peers
○ Exploring new revenue sources based on community needs
○ Gradually growing to full-scale, with continued monitoring of progress
◼ After implementing its new program model, KCTR’s per resident funding need will be $15k lower
than today, decreasing its total 5-year fundraising need by $4.6M
◼ KCTR will continue to refine its offering in order to bring more value to the sector and positively
affect Kansas City students
3
5. Since 2016, KCTR has been charged with high-quality preparation of
teachers in the Kansas City area
◼ KCTR is committed to increasing the number of quality classrooms that are available to
children in Kansas City, MO’s urban schools by training, coaching, and certifying effective
teachers. There is a need in Kansas City (and across the country) for highly-qualified educators
prepared and placed in urban schools.
◼ KCTR's mission is to recruit, develop, place, and retain mission-oriented individuals who want
to make a deep commitment to working in high need urban schools in the Kansas City area.
◼ KCTR welcomed its first resident cohort in Fall of 2016 and is now in the third year of operation.
◼ KCTR has provided a diverse pipeline of quality teachers; 45% of KCTR Residents and
Graduates are teachers of color, and 35% are male
5
6. Today, KCTR delivers a Residency +3 model
◼ Residents complete coursework during Residency Year and upon becoming teacher of record,
complete a Master’s Degree
◼ The model relies heavily on coaching from school-employed mentors and KCTR employed coaches;
employs a gradual release model
◼ Years 2-4 provide supports designed to improve practice and increase probability that the resident
stays in the classroom
◼ Graduates are expected to commit to remain in the classroom for the duration of the program
Resident Graduate
Year 2:
• First Year as Teacher of
Record
• Completing Master’s
Degree
• Summer Session
• Coaching Support
• Quarterly Professional
Learning Opportunities
Years 5+:
• Continued access to
KCTR’s network
• Opportunity to mentor
KCTR residents
• Access to ongoing
professional development
and resources
Years 3 & 4:
• Second Year and Third
Year as Teacher of Record
• Coaching & Professional
Learning Opportunities
Year 1:
• Residency year –
serving in classroom
with mentor teacher
• Coursework through
seminar and methods
classes
Alumn
6
7. To achieve the mission, we have established strong and meaningful
partnerships with a range of organizations
The Sherman
Family Foundation
The Oppenstein
Brothers Foundation
University of Missouri - Kansas
City (UMKC) is KCTR’s
University partner. Residents
have opportunity to earn a
master’s degree from UMKC.
KCTR is honored to be supported by local and national philanthropic partners. Generous
contributions sustain ongoing operational, program, and innovation work at KCTR.
National Center for Teacher
Residencies (NCTR) is KCTR’s
design partner, providing
research-based support
AmeriCorps is a network of
national service programs, that
aims to improve lives and
fostering civic engagement.
City Year is KCTR’s strategic
pipeline partner. Many City Year
alumni have matriculated into
KCTR’s residency program.
7
8. During school year 2018-2019, KCTR supported 50 residents and 60
graduates serving across 31 school sites
KCTR educators are prepared to teach in a range of elementary and middle schools, in
both district and charter school settings. The model is designed for flexibility.
When KCTR reaches scale in 2022, the residency program will develop 65 educators per
year. Completers of the program will be engaged as part of KCTR’s alumni network.
8
9. The supports that KCTR builds leads to long term benefits for school
systems and the communities served
KCTR’s Supports
Impact to Partner Schools
Recruitment
Source high-quality and
diverse teacher applicants
Coaching
Support new teachers during
critical learning period
Development
Continue to develop content and
pedagogical expertise for
graduates and mentors
Network
Lasting resources and
peer network in Kansas
City
Teacher Retention
87% of KCTR teachers have
stayed in the profession
Diversity
45% of KCTR residents are
teachers of color, 35% are male
Financial Benefits
Urban districts spend on
average >$20,000 per new
hire1; KCTR supports schools
in optimizing this cost
Source: 1) Learning Policy Institute
9
10. As KCTR approached maturity, it looked for support to refine the
business and financial model to ensure long term sustainability
The Opportunity
KCTR could engage in a strategic planning process to pressure test assumptions about its model, learn
from established peer organizations, and where needed, revise its model to align with practices that
both strengthen KCTR’s impact and promote long-term financial and organizational sustainability
Promising Market Signals
● KCTR has proven to be a valuable
education partner in Kansas City, building a
high-quality and diverse teacher pipeline
for high-need schools.
● There is an ongoing unmet need for
teachers in the region and KCTR is well
positioned to fill that gap.
● Residents and partner schools are mission-
aligned, and there’s strong demand to both
become and to hire KCTR educators.
Forward-Looking Challenges
● Since launch, KCTR relied heavily on a few
philanthropic donors, 87% of KCTR funding
came from philanthropy
● The program service model (i.e., supports
for educators) did not reflect the diverse
needs of residents and graduates and was
therefore, unnecessarily costly.While
valuable to partners, KCTR had not built a
business case that would help it to capture
a greater share of program revenues.
10
11. Phase I: Evaluate the Business Model
Phase II: Option Assessment & Plan
Development
October - November
● Conduct landscape analysis
● Engage stakeholder interviews
● Evaluate current-state financial model
● Benchmark like-minded organizations
● Identify high-leverage options for the
go-forward model
November - January
● Evaluate future state program options
● Draft business model
● Build financial model
● Discuss and decide on future state
business model
● Create implementation roadmap
KCTR engaged Bellwether Education Partners, a nonprofit consulting firm, to support
the strategic planning efforts.
Over four months, the KCTR team engaged in an intensive strategic
planning process
11
12. The project included collaborative teams, comprised of a variety of
stakeholders
Team Participants Planning Phase Role
Working Group KCTR Executive Director,
selected board members,
funding partners, and KCTR
staff
● Provide input to KCTR’s go-forward model
● Participate in monthly working session discussions
and decisions
Steering
Committee
Community members
including school partners,
university partners, and
other local nonprofit leaders
● Stay informed and pressure-test ideas with key
stakeholders
● Participate in two virtual sessions
KCTR Team KCTR leadership team and
staff members
● Provide input and perspectives via one-on-one
interviews
● Get up to speed on emerging plans via updates
from KCTR Executive Director
Support Team Bellwether Education
Partners
● Support research and facilitation to lead to
recommended KCTR go-forward model
12
13. To guide the process, the team collaborated to identify a set of key
guiding questions...
Local context and demand: What is the local landscape and need for educators in
Kansas City? How does KCTR best support the local needs in Kansas City?
Program and design: What has KCTR learned from three years of operation? What
innovations can KCTR make to improve quality and sustainability? What can KCTR learn
from others in the field?
Go-forward strategy: What strategies could lead KCTR on a path to sustainability while
maintaining quality? What is the organizational design, outcome metrics, timeline, and
sequencing of the strategies?
13
14. ...and a set of guiding principles to steer decision making
Provide a reliable pipeline of high-quality teachers, particularly in high
need and interest areas such as teachers of color, males
Raise the bar for teacher preparation by preparing strong teachers
Build an efficient, continually improving organization that is sustainable
for the long term
Make an impact in Kansas City and the nearby communities
Over the course of the planning process, the team consulted with over 40 stakeholders,
experts, program participants, and researchers to determine a path forward for KCTR
14
16. In the first phase, the working group explored 4 research areas,
leading to the development of a factbase
◼ Conducted a landscape analysis with a view to understanding the current and
future demand for educators in Kansas City
◼ Engaged stakeholders to understand KCTR’s value proposition
◼ Evaluated current-state financial model to identify major sources of revenue,
expenses, and philanthropic need
◼ Benchmarked like-minded organizations to understand how they achieve
similar mission and the extent to which they do it sustainably
These activities led to the development of a factbase about KCTR that helped the team to
set priorities for improving the business model in Phase II
1
2
3
4
Phase I: Evaluate the Business Model
16
17. The landscape analysis revealed the local demand forecast for
teacher hires far outstrips supply in the Kansas City Metro Area
NOTES: KCTR Peers include Avila University, Park University (trad. program only), Rockhurst University, University of Missouri-Kansas City, and William
Jewell College; KC metro districts include: Belton 124, Blue Springs R-IV, Center 58, Grandview C-4, Hickman Mills C-1, Independence 30, Kansas City 33,
Kearney R-I, Lee‘s Summit R-VII, Liberty 53, North Kansas City 74, Park Hill, Platte Co. R-III, Raytown C-2, and Smithville R-II
Source(s): Bellwether analysis of Fowles (November 2016) Trends in Teacher Supply and Demand in Missouri Public Schools
184 = program
completers from
KCTR peers,
2016
Current demand is
4x local supply
1 Landscape Analysis
17
18. The labor market for STEM and SPED teachers is incredibly tight,
with a dramatic undersupply of locally trained teachers in KC
Notes: Specials include PE, Art, Music, Business / Marketing, Agriculture, Theatre, Library, and Dance; KCTR Peers include Avila
University, Park University (trad. program only), Rockhurst University, University of Missouri-Kansas City, and William Jewell College
Source(s): BW analysis of US Dept. of Education – 2017 Title II data for Missouri from https://title2.ed.gov/Public/
KC no. as pct. of
KC total
31% 9% 17% 3% 10% 11% 14% 2% 2% –
Statewide no. as
pct. of total
37% 14% 13% 9% 9% 8% 6% 3% 1% <1%
KCTR peers produce
strikingly few STEM and
Special Education teachers
KCTR peers produce
strikingly few STEM and
Special Education teachers
1 Landscape Analysis
18
19. All the while, Kansas City preparation programs have been declining
in output and enrollment
Source(s): Bellwether analysis of US Dept. of Education – 2017 Title II data for Missouri; Includes University of Missouri - Kansas City, Rockhurst
University, Avila University, Park University, and William Jewell College
1 Landscape Analysis
The decline in teacher preparation enrollment has been consistent across the country. Total national
enrollment has declined by 33% in 5 years (from 662K in 2011-12 to 441K in 2015-16)
19
20. Through interviews, stakeholders shared areas of strengths that
revealed its value...
◼ Over three years, KCTR was established as the main source for diverse candidates in
Kansas City - [KCTR] “is absolutely a source for teachers of color, it’s a mutual focus… The
qualifier for partnership was that the program was committed to providing a pipeline of teachers
of color.” “For us, KCTR brings diversity that we tend to struggle to find through our universities”
◼ KCTR’s program is respected and considered high quality, and aligned with local need
- “The culturally responsive approach and talking about race were good - [KCTR] did that in a
constructive way.” “Our relationship has gone extremely well thus far…we have hired all but one
resident into full-time classroom positions – they are all great fits.”
◼ The KCTR staff is top-knotch - “Every staff member and stakeholder is fully committed. I
have yet to come across anyone who doesn’t feel that way.” “My coach has been able to help
me with useful and applicable things I am struggling with, being helpful with areas I can do
better.”
◼ Residents and Graduates value the program and are grateful for the opportunity -
“I’m really grateful for KCTR — that we get a stipend to pursue a Master’s. Otherwise I wouldn’t
be able to go to grad school without having a full-time job.” “This wouldn’t be feasible for me any
other way. The student debt would be debilitating and I have a family.”
Source: Bellwether Interviews
2 Value Proposition
20
21. ...interviews also surfaced opportunities to improve
◼ Both residents and KCTR staff surfaced the need to provide differentiated
supports - “I have a building instructional coach, a KCTR coach, and a mentor teacher.
They’re helpful but not really coordinated.” “I would like to see us think through what
coaching looks like each year and how it shifts over time.”
◼ Program participants identified an opportunity to improve the design and
relevance of coursework - “The Saturdays are just scratching the surface - it’s a lot of
theory and not a lot of application.” “I’d love for the format to be more flexible.”
◼ Partners highlighted a need to fill certain critical content / subject matter/
grade level gaps - “[We are] Always looking for ELL and Special Education expertise…
some of those critical need areas that are harder to recruit from. ” “We want them to help
fill the gaps for the hard to fill subjects for math and science” “If KCTR had an offering
that was 2 years with a paraprofessional as a pipeline to residency—that’s something we’d
be interested in.”
2 Value Proposition
Source: Bellwether Interviews
21
22. In 2019, KCTR operated on an annual budget that relied heavily on
philanthropic investment to support program delivery
Note: Other Grants include unsecured funding
Source: KCTR FY19 Budget
3 Financials
Analysis showed that expenditures would continue to rise (nearly 10% annually) despite
declining anticipated revenue, resulting in unsustainable philanthropic needs
22
23. Benchmarking research revealed that while most residency
programs remain reliant on philanthropy, KCTR had room to improve
4 Benchmark Analysis
Findings from Benchmark Implications for KCTR
Of the six benchmark organizations, only one
is near sustainability on earned revenue; most
remain reliant on philanthropy
The need for ongoing fundraising will likely
remain. However, KCTR should tighten
business model as startup capital diminishes
KCTR contributes more generously than a
range of peers in net fees to residents
While this may fuel recruitment, it also makes
it more difficult to achieve sustainability at
scale
KCTR’s total cost to placement schools is also
lower than comparison range of peer
programs
Low placement fees may have been necessary
in startup phase, but could be reexamined as
KCTR matures into an enduring organization
Some residencies serve just one partner
district or type of school; those that diversify
partner schools differentiate
KCTR should differentiate program offerings to
meet the diverse needs of its partner schools
Funding for residency programs can come
from a variety of sources beyond philanthropy
KCTR should be actively exploring and
pursuing these sources, including tuition-
sharing with university partner
23
25. In the second phase, the working group generated, evaluated, and
decided upon a set of options for the go-forward plan
◼ Generate future-state options for sustainability improvements
◼ Develop criteria and assess the future-state options
◼ Decide go-forward plan and conduct sustainability analysis
◼ Develop implementation plan, including workplan, outcome metrics, and go/no-
go framework
This all led to a following implementation phase, where KCTR staff worked to launch,
plan, and refine the go-forward plan
1
2
3
4
Phase II: Option Assessment & Plan Development
25
26. To ensure long-term sustainability, several options emerged for
KCTR to consider
Adjust stipend amount: bring stipend in line with other benchmark programs and/or share
responsibility for stipends by supporting districts or schools to reallocate funds
Reduce graduate support: reduce support provided in years 3 and 4, and replace with lower-cost
networking or community of practice events
Differentiate resident support: implement a sliding scale of supports, differentiating supports based
on mastery / competency; may include volume pricing discounts for schools / placement sites
Shift customer mix: concentrate residents with larger customers at fewer sites, and/or with
customers willing to pay full district contribution
Optimize Institute of Higher Education (IHE) relationship: renegotiate share of tuition and
reimbursement, establish lower-cost university partnership, and/or eliminate partnership
Change cohort size: grow or reduce size of resident cohort
Adjust fee paid by placement schools: increase percentage of schools paying full district
contribution, and/or charge higher fee in line with benchmark
Offer fee-based services aligned with KCTR offering: generate new revenue sources based on
KCTR’s capability and partner school demand. May include: a) provide and charge for induction service
to graduates and/or non-KCTR teachers at placement sites, b) provide and charge for mentor coaching
and instructional supports, and/or c) develop partner-funded programs for high-need content areas
CostSaving
1
2
3
4
RevenueGenerating
5
6
7
8
1 Generate Options
26
27. Additionally, several strategies emerged as must-pursue for KCTR
regardless of the option(s) ultimately selected
◼ Build business case: build a ‘pitch’ to potential partners that articulates the value of
KCTR in economic and mission terms. KCTR could do this by demonstrating affordability by
connecting program to available funds and by highlighting the programmatic cost savings
(e.g., reduction in recruiting and onboarding)
◼ Build partnerships that engage the business and policy community: launch
sponsorship for funding residents aligned with interest and need (e.g., STEM and other
high need subjects, initiatives such as early childhood) with potential local partners
including corporations, foundations, and government entities
◼ Diversify philanthropic contributions: continue to seek additional funding sources to
diversify revenue pipeline
◼ Optimize high-impact time: reduce and/or repurpose in-class time for residents and
graduates, and combine with coaching, debriefs, and/or collaboration time, within credit-
attaining requirements
1 Generate Options
27
28. To evaluate the options up for consideration, KCTR used specific
criteria aligned with mission, program, and sustainability goals
Criteria Description
Reduces costs Option will decrease per-participant and/or total costs (as forecast in financial
model)
Increases revenue Brings in new revenues and/or increases total program revenue (particularly
earned fee revenue)
Aligned with current
capacity
Achievable with KCTR’s current resources, staffing, interests; does not require
significant up front investment
Increases value
proposition
Improves the business case and value proposition as perceived by funders,
principals, residents, and other stakeholders
Builds brand Differentiates KCTR within a crowded market; won't derail existing work or erode
KCTR’s brand (e.g., trust from partners)
Increases # of effective
teachers
Enables KCTR to continue to attract high-quality applicants; broadens KCTR’s
impact in the sector (largely a scale metric); increases the ability of KCTR teachers
to improve student outcomes
Increases retention Boosts longevity/retention of KCTR graduates in the classroom
Increases teacher
diversity
Increases diversity of cohort along relevant dimensions (particularly race/ethnicity
and gender)
Catalyzes change Option would spur building or district-wide improvement through “tipping” of
organizations via critical mass
SustainabilityProgramImpact
2 Develop Criteria
28
29. When evaluated across developed criteria, most options had a
positive impact to sustainability
Positive impact Neutral Negative impact
Sustainability Program Impact Risks
Reduce stipend amount Low
Reduce graduate support Low
Differentiate resident
support
Moderate
Shift customer mix Low
Optimize IHE relationship Moderate
Change cohort size 1) Moderate
Adjust fee paid by schools Moderate
Offer fee-based services Minimal
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Cost
Saving
Revenue
Generating
2 Develop Criteria
1) Evaluation assumes growth of cohort to 65 residents
29
30. The team decided to launch several strategies immediately,
recognizing others require additional lead time
3 Decide Plan
Implement Immediately (FY20) Implement in FY21 and beyond
Adjust stipend amount: bring stipend in line
with other benchmark programs and/or share
responsibility for stipends by supporting districts or
schools to reallocate funds
Change cohort size: gradually grow size of
resident cohort
Adjust fee paid by placement schools:
increase percentage of schools paying full district
contribution, and/or charge higher fee in line with
benchmark
Offer fee-based services aligned with
KCTR offering: generate new revenue sources
based on KCTR’s capability and partner school
demand. May include: a) provide and charge for
induction service to graduates and/or non-KCTR
teachers at placement sites, b) provide and charge
for mentor coaching and instructional supports,
and/or c) develop partner-funded programs for
high-need content areas
12
3
4
5
6
7
8
Reduce graduate support: reduce support
provided in years 3 and 4, and replace with lower-
cost networking or community of practice events
Differentiate resident support: implement a
sliding scale of supports, differentiating supports
based on mastery / competency; may include
volume pricing discounts for schools / placement
sites
Shift customer mix: concentrate residents with
larger customers at fewer sites, and/or with
customers willing to pay full district contribution
Optimize Institute of Higher Education
(IHE) relationship: renegotiate share of tuition
and reimbursement, establish lower-cost university
partnership, and/or eliminate partnership
Change cohort size: temporarily reduce size of
resident cohort6
30
31. With strategic changes, the 5-year fundraising need decreased from
by $4.6M or 26%, reducing per resident funding need by ~$15K
Source: FY19 KCTR Budget
Revenue Growth Expenditure Reduction Net funding need decrease
3 Decide Plan
New revenue stream
via tuition-share with
university partner
Growth in partner
school contribution
Reduction in residency
and graduate expenses
Optimization of other
operating expenses
$4.6M reduction
(26%) in 5-year
fundraising need
$15K reduction in
funding need per
resident
13% earned revenue to nearly
25% earned revenue
10% to 18% reduction in
annual total expenditures
31
32. The resulting funding flow results in a more sustainable KCTR as
stakeholders share the benefits and costs
Resident Mentor
University
Placement
School
Stipend in
line with
benchmarks
Mentor
Stipend
Unchanged
Increase in average
placement fee per
partner
Salary
(Determined by
schools)
Tuition
(Determined by
University)
New tuition
revenue-share
University now shares
tuition revenue with
KCTR for KCTR’s
coursework and
coaching supports
All placement schools
provide district
contribution for a
KCTR resident
KCTR is able to be more
financially sustainable while
maintaining strong partnerships
Residents continue to
receive generous living
stipend while pursuing
their Master’s Degree
Mentors continue to
receive a stipend for
supporting KCTR’s
residents
3 Decide Plan
32
33. To implement the go-forward plan, the team developed a set of 5
priorities, each with initiatives and owners to lead the work
4 Implementation
Priority Sample Initiatives
Prepare for 2020 Develop alumni engagement program, negotiate university partnership,
update business plan, operationalize metrics and milestones
Implement Residency
Model 2.0
Design new coaching / residency model, establish pricing, align team
structure, refine mentor teacher support, differentiate offering
Optimize
Partnerships
Develop and execute fundraising plan, adjust fee structure, develop
business case for school partners
Streamline
Operations
Develop system for capturing impact data, finalize budget and staffing
decisions
Research &
Development
Explore state-level funding sources, design and pilot additional revenue-
generating program services
1
2
3
4
5
33
34. Additionally, the team developed measures and goals for impact
metrics aligned to the original guiding principles of this work
Guiding Principles Measures
Provide a reliable and diverse pipeline of
high-quality teachers, particularly in high
need and interest areas such as teachers of
color, males
# of residents placed
Selectivity (accepted applicants to total applicants)
% of teachers placed in high-need areas (e.g., STEM, ECE, SPED)
% POC | % male
% PELL Grant Recipients | % 1st Gen College Students
Raise the bar for teacher preparation by
preparing strong teachers
5 year retention rate in high-needs school
% of residents are performing at “Developing” or higher on the KCTR Instructional Rubric
% of residents who are fully certified at the completion of the residency year
Resident and Principal net promoter score
Build an efficient, continually improving
organization that is sustainable for the long
term
Fundraising need per resident
Earned revenue as percentage of costs
Days of cash reserve
Committed funds as percentage of 3-year budget need
APR and NCTQ Rating
KCTR Staff % male | % teachers of color
KCTR Staff % PELL Recipients | % 1st Gen. College
Make an impact in Kansas City and the
nearby communities
Student achievement
Student growth / teacher value added
Number of schools with > 25% KCTR teachers
% of alumni teaching in KC metro
Number of LEAs with >10% KCTR teachers
4 Implementation
34
35. To assess organizational readiness to increase the size of resident
cohort, KCTR developed a go/no-go framework for decision-making
4 Implementation
Factors Measure(s) “No go” Maybe “Go”
Capacity of
schools
Capacity of schools to fund the number of
residents in the targeted content area
Capacity of schools to provide mentors that
can support the residents
< scale goal = scale goal > scale goal
Fundraising
% of overall funds likely to come in for
next fiscal year
<80% 80-100% >100%
Efficiency
Are your executing on the revised, more
sustainable KCTR model
No In Progress Yes
Support
capacity
# of KCTR staff vacancies >2 1-2 0
Recruitment
pipeline
Past-year selectivity
Candidate numbers
Diversity (% POC | % Male | avg. age)
>35%
<150
<40%|<25%| 23
30%
150-200
40%| 25%| 23
25%
200 +
50%| 35%| 25
Program
quality
Resident satisfaction
Graduate retention
Classroom performance of graduates
School satisfaction
60%
<80%
<50% of Ss
<80%
70-80%
80%
50% of Ss
80%
>80%
>80%
>50% of Ss
>80%
35
37. The planning effort uncovered key learnings that we believe can
inform the future work of others. First, engage your stakeholders
1. Actively engage stakeholders. With any strategic changes, you should strive to be
proactive in communications with partners and ensure that the go-forward model is informed by
key perspectives. Furthermore, you should thoughtfully collaborate with your team to ensure
the messages are clear, consistent, and streamlined to mitigate potential confusion.
Examples from KCTR’s Planning Process:
◼ Planning phases included formal touch-points with KCTR’s board, staff, school partners, university
partners, funders, residents, gradates, and local nonprofits. Participants provided inputs through the
working group, steering committee, focus groups, and/or interviews. In total, the working group
conducted over 40 interviews with stakeholders.
◼ To ensure diversity of perspectives, KCTR intentionally chose to engage a wide range of stakeholders
including: both long-standing school partners and ones that chose not to partner with KCTR, both new
residents and graduates from prior cohorts.
◼ Following planning phases, KCTR staff collaborated on an implementation stakeholder engagement
map, identifying relevant participants and timing of communication for each initiative.
37
38. Second, communicate your value and impact
2. Articulate your value. As you prove to be a valuable player in your community, using data
and partner feedback, you can more proactively learn from and communicate the program
results and sustainability benefits to partners.
Examples from KCTR’s Planning Process:
◼ As part of the planning process, KCTR’s working group created a set ambitious measurable goals.
These were then refined by KCTR’s leadership team and are monitored quarterly. Selected goals and
metrics are shared with the board, school partners, residents, and graduates, and the consistent set of
goals are used for accountability and decision-making purposes.
◼ In addition, KCTR’s working group stepped back to identify its financial and programmatic benefits
to partners. For school partners, KCTR offers a diverse recruiting pipeline, builds capacity through
coaching supports, and provides high-retention educators, ultimately helping schools avoid recruiting,
training, and turnover costs. For its university partner, KCTR is a reliable source of enrollment and a
quality provider of coursework, ultimately supporting the university’s financial sustainability.
◼ Upon drafting metrics and value proposition, KCTR continues to refine and get feedback from
relevant stakeholders. For example, KCTR held a school partner focus group to solicit feedback on its
communication to improve for additional prospective partners. 38
39. Third, it’s not one-size fits all; differentiation can better optimize use
of time and resources
3. Build in model flexibility. There is tremendous value in diversity, and it’s important to
learn that it’s not one-size fits all. To best support the unique needs of each individual, you can
leverage rubrics and stakeholder feedback to differentiate supports.
Examples from KCTR’s Planning Process:
◼ Through its first several cohorts, KCTR quickly learned that the needs of individual residents and
graduates are different. The topic of support may range from classroom management, to content
knowledge, to passing the state’s certification exam. Learning from Memphis Teacher Residency, KCTR
adopted and modified their differentiated supports rubric to determine individualized supports.
◼ Similarly, KCTR learned that school needs and resources are different. Schools set different
priorities each year, and the priorities may change from year-to-year. Additionally, frequency of school
coaching, availability of curricular resources, and the depth of school-provided professional development
varies. As a result, KCTR coaches work very collaboratively with schools to determine the
complementary supports that best fit the need of each school.
◼ To ensure equitable implementation of differentiation, KCTR program team uses data and allocates
full-team planning time multiple times a year to calibrate and ensure residents, graduates, and schools
are receiving the highest impact supports. 39
40. Lastly, push beyond the status quo to improve and innovate
4. Challenge your assumptions to improve and innovate. As the education sector
continues to evolve, it is vital to both continuously improve and innovate to ensure high-quality,
sustainable, and relevant supports. To achieve this, you can learn from data and others in the
field to challenge assumptions and discover meaningful innovations.
Examples from KCTR’s Planning Process:
◼ Listening was KCTR’s first step of improvement and innovation. In addition to learning from
stakeholders, KCTR also held working sessions with staff to generate opportunities. For example, KCTR
collaborated on pitch presentations to improve the design of the residency experience. During these
idea generation moments, KCTR’s leadership intentionally took a back seat to be an active listener.
◼ Externally, KCTR sought ideas for continuous improvement through peer teacher residency
organizations. In addition, KCTR also sourced innovation ideas from a wider range of professional
learning and education organizations. Through these conversations, KCTR was able to challenge
components of its existing program including the length of coaching support, the role of KCTR coaches,
the use of technology, and partnership structures.
◼ Although the planning process has concluded, KCTR continues to improve and innovate by
incorporating research & development in work plans. The team has identified additional longer-
term revenue opportunities to research, design, and pilot. Additionally, with each change, the team
planned for a cycle of feedback and refinement. 40
41. KCTR’s Executive Director, Charles King, shares his learnings
What was your biggest takeaway coming out of this
planning process?
“Coming out of the planning process I see our biggest takeaway is
understanding the true value that our program brings to the
educational ecosystem, and as a result of that there are
opportunities for us to build a revenue generating business model
that also does not increase our expenses.”
What is your recommendation for others?
“My recommendation to other teacher residency programs is to
examine ways in which partners can be leveraged to offset
costs that programs incur over time. When we ask partners for
what we need to continue supplying their demand at high levels
there is likelihood that they will work to find a way to support us.”
41
42. Thank you for your interest in learning about Kansas City Teacher Residency.
For more information about KCTR, visit http://kcteach.org or contact us here.
This is a report funded by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation utilizing content and data from
multiple sources and external contributors. Every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of
the information contained in this report and is believed to be correct as of the publication date.
Nonetheless, this material is for informational purposes and you are solely responsible for
validating the applicability and accuracy of the information in any use you make of it.
42
