TRIPARTITE SYNTHESIS OF RESEARCH AND DATA ON RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION OF STEM TEACHERS FRANCES LAWRENZ JIM APPLETON MARJORIE BULLITT BEQUETTE ANN OOMS DEENA WASSENBERG University of Minnesota

Ongoing Collaborative Evaluation of the Robert Noyce Scholarship Program The program provides funds for scholarships and stipends for STEM content specialists to complete teacher credentialing programs, including both traditional and alternative certification programs Recipients are required to complete two years of teaching in a high-need school district for each year of support We are developing a program-wide evaluation plan in consultation with individual projects

Picture of web site

Resources for Recruitment and Retention of STEM Teachers (R 3 ) Theoretical framework: Logic model Literature database Noyce monitoring data Project evaluation resources: –Variables and methods –Instrument descriptions Policy briefs

Theoretical Framework: Noyce Logic Model Our proposed Noyce Logic Model contains our efforts to delineate several perspectives: –The Noyce Program Ideal Depicted by the main path as well as bold headings preceded by addition signs (e.g., “+Plan to teach”) –Decision points en route to becoming a STEM teacher Indicated by diverging routes from the main path describing alternative options and the Noyce Ideal in bold headings Dashed boxes denote retention/recruitment by school or program –Important STEM major decision factors Influenced by attributes of the candidate, pre-service program, and school/district (depicted as bulleted lists on the main path) Depicted as thought bubbles emerging from the decision point

Logic model

Literature Database Online searchable database 500 articles, updated quarterly Categorized according to topic –recruitment or retention –grade level –discipline –teacher, student, setting attributes –whether or not it is about alternative certification –type of research

Noyce Monitoring Data Whether the institution uses selected activities such as mentoring, early field experiences, etc. Information on the students in the program –e.g., the numbers of students graduating, the numbers of career changers Information on the applicants for the Noyce awards –e.g., numbers, GPA, support provided Information on the faculty involved in the program –e.g., numbers, discipline areas and roles. Information about both current and prior recipients of the Noyce funding. This includes –demographic information, GPA, prior background, intended teaching areas and levels, levels of funding, and completion dates. –prior recipients also includes if and where they are teaching and if so, what. List of the districts involved with the Noyce program.

Project Evaluation Resources 63% of sites submitted evaluation information Plans were analyzed to determine the variables they were examining; variables were then categorized Instruments were also categorized

Evaluation Variables Database

Evaluation Variable Data: Pre-Service Program Program Recruitment (61.0%) Noyce Student Performance in Program (61.0%) Demographics (58.5%) Program Retention (24.4%)

Evaluation Variable Data: Post-Program Monitoring Noyce Teacher Effectiveness (63.4%) Monitoring of Noyce Teachers (61.0%) School/District Retention (41.5%) Transition Experiences/Support for Teachers (39.0%) Coordination Between Programs or Institutions (31.7%) Fulfillment of Scholarship Requirements (29.3%) School/District Recruitment (22.0%) School/District Characteristics (14.6%) Teaching Assignment Characteristics (2.4%)

Evaluation Variable Data: Ways of Gathering Information Interpret carefully: These were only used if the documents, observations, self-report data could not be better classified elsewhere. Formative Program Effectiveness Data (63.4%) Summative Program Effectiveness Data (61.0%) Self-Report Data (61.0%) Specific Analyses or Methodologies (56.1%) Research Questions/Evaluation Goals (34.1%) Observations (19.5%) Document Analysis (4.9%)

Evaluation Variable Data: Summary Program itself: many are gathering data on recruitment, demographics, and student performance; fewer on program retention Post-program monitoring: several to many are gathering data on teacher effectiveness, monitoring/fulfillment of scholarship requirements, school/district retention, teacher transition experiences/support, and inter-program/institution coordination; fewer on school/district recruitment and characteristics (including teaching assignment characteristics) Ways of gathering data: mostly formative and summative program effectiveness, and self-report (caution)

Evaluation Plans Quite disparate Little information about what the certification programs actually included Two-thirds of the projects plan to collect data about the effectiveness of the teachers they have prepared About a third of the projects report that they include information on transition experiences Very few projects include descriptions of the school setting

Instrument Descriptions Database

Implications: What Existing Research Shows Attention to recruitment and retention has varied over time Different types of incentives to affect recruitment and retention have been tried Alternative certification is one type of incentive Alternative certification has a variety of definitions Money is a clear incentive for STEM teachers Retention in a school is highly dependent on the context of the school (supportive colleagues and administration, optimism and focus on student success)

Implications for evaluation Three types of data matter in evaluations involving teacher certification. Numbers and demographics at each stage in the process of developing a teacher Description of what the experience is like at each stage Assessment of the state of the candidate (performance, attitudes, plans, beliefs) at each stage

Implications: Overall More research needs to be conducted to determine the effects of interactions among different activities/contexts at different stages More precise definitions of variables are needed so information more accurately synthesized Alternative certification is defined differently in almost every study. What are the critical elements that make a certification program alternative? –Is it the type of people? activities? length of time? Notions of recruitment into a certification program (regardless of alternative status) need to be separated from the notions of recruitment into a district Same distinction needs to be made for retention –What retains students in certification programs and how is this different or the same as what retains them in their schools?

Contact Us! Frances Lawrenz Marjorie Bullitt Bequette R 3 URL: Additional input to the site is welcomed