The first year of teaching can be overwhelming.  Trying to navigate an often illogical system and find your niche in the school culture that you hope to thrive in is stressful enough.  Add in trying to apply all you have learned about teaching and learning during four years of college while struggling with classroom management, student motivation, and parents, and there are a lot of sleepless nights.  I remember questioning my choice to be a teacher often that first year.  So, how can we support new teachers in a way that will give them the best chance at success?

In my experience, as both a teacher and an administrator, new teachers struggle with classroom management.  This is supported by research on common challenges facing new teachers.  Some schools allow new teachers to “sing or swim” on their own.  These teachers may get the often repeated advice from a veteran teacher, “Don’t smile until Thanksgiving.”  Many schools support teachers with mentors and try to lighten their workload by giving them fewer preps along with other adjustments to working conditions.  But the first few years are difficult at best and I believe some of the negative institutional habits present in schools stem from this early experience.  Many schools and classrooms are structured around compliance and consequences.  This is how learning was structured when I was in school (many moons ago) and it persists today.  It is how children are taught to “do school” from their first day as a student.  It is what administrators have traditionally expected from teachers and it is counterintuitive to our understanding of how people learn.

It is difficult to change the habits of an experienced teacher, or administrator, who developed their pedagogy in this paradigm.  There is no one to blame here.  The problem is systemic and the discussion should be focused on changing the system.  There are many leverage points that can be used to initiate change, but the most logical place to focus on long-term systemic change is with new teachers.  That requires leadership willing to commit resources and time to groom new teachers for student success.

The East Hampton School District has traditionally committed resources to support new teachers.  There is a three-day orientation prior to the first day of school.  Sessions are led by District administration, school administration and the teachers union.  Each new teacher is matched with a mentor.  The mentor is chosen by a committee of teachers and administrators.  Getting the right match requires input from all perspectives and is an important decision.  Principals do their best to lighten the load for new teachers and advise them not to take on extracurricular responsibilities they are not ready for.  As assistant superintendent, I have a voluntary monthly meeting with all teachers who have been with us for three years or less.  In the past, these meetings have focused on developing a collaborative team to provide a sounding board for problem-solving and emotional support.  This year we will add a “Unit Design Project” as a vehicle to continue the team building, emotional support, and pedagogy within a structured project.  The project focuses on strengthening habits that will promote classroom management based on student engagement.  Engagement fostered by learning experiences students find interesting and relevant focused on mastery of complex understandings and processes required by the new standards.  When teachers are skilled in planning units of study that properly align what is to be learned with well-crafted assessments and learning experiences that match the complexity and difficulty required for student success, their chances of success are almost guaranteed.

During the three-day orientation, the workshops focused on creating a familiarity with the Danielson Rubric and Webb’s Depth of Knowledge  (DOK).  The rubric has been used in the observation process for four years and DOK is a new initiative.  After an introduction to the observation process in our District and the needed procedural knowledge, we looked at the rubric and the DOK construct in detail.  The learning outcomes I presented were:

• Demonstrate the recall required to find and submit all documents required for the teacher observation process.

• Analyze Domains 1 and 3 of the Danielson Rubric to determine which components require an expertise in the development of questions.

• Demonstrate an understanding of the process used to align the complexity of your instructional outcome with the standard and assessment within a unit of study in  your content area.

• Determine the DOK Level of each of the above objectives.

The second session focused on academic tenacity.  We used the first section “Defining Academic Tenacity” (13 pgs.)  from, Academic Tenacity: Mindsets and Skills that Promote Long-Term Learning; Dweck, Walton, Cohen, 2014.  The outcome for this lesson was:

How will you develop a classroom/school culture that fosters academic tenacity?

After individually reading Academic Tenacity work with your group to determine:

• What is our current reality in promoting academic tenacity in school?

• What is our desired reality to promote academic tenacity in school?

• What actions can we take to reach our desired reality?

This was followed by a discussion of the schools we want and concluded with the focus on professional tenacity.  

These two meetings were intended to narrow down the focus for the new teachers.  The rubric was distilled down to question development as an essential linchpin and the DOK construct in combination with the rubric can guide alignment with the new standards.  The discussion of academic tenacity brings in the non-cognitive factors that promote student success.    This is still a great deal to learn and implement and part of our discussion focused on the multi-year process of developing the skills needed to be a proficient teacher.

As we move into the school year I have designed a Unit Development Project (Appendix A) that requires teachers to use Domain 1 of the Danielson Rubric in conjunction with their understanding of DOK to create a unit of study that they consider “exemplary.”    The project starts with the question “How can we give ourselves the best chance of engaging students in meaningful learning every day?”  Teachers are prompted to, “Design a unit of study addressing appropriate NYS Standards of at least DOK Level 3, culminating in an assessment that illuminates each students’ degree of mastery.”   This will be a collaborative process, each teachers working  with peers and administration.  Second and third-year teachers will participate in the same project but will be able to start with a unit already used in the past and look to improve the outcomes.  This constant revision and improvement is another habit that we want in all teachers.  The quality of the product will also be a shared responsibility, not a reflection of any individual's abilities to be assessed by the administration.  In fact, the only person who should be assessed on the quality of these projects is me.

The guidelines for the unit are:

• requires a minimum of five days of instruction.

• is implemented in the classroom in January or February.

• is presented to your peers for feedback prior to implementation.

• illustrates the alignment of content complexity and difficulty throughout the planning process.

• provides data to determine if the students have met the instructional goals and inform student feedback.

Data, feedback to students, and how these results influence subsequent instruction will be presented to your peers when the unit is completed.

The desired instructional outcomes are:

• You will be able to use Domain 1 of the Danielson Rubric to guide the development of a unit of study and assess the completeness of that unit plan.

• You will develop a “working knowledge” of Domain 1 demonstrated by the ability to evaluate a unit plan using the Rubric.

• You will be able to illustrate the “shadow” cast by Component 1c.

• You will be able to evaluate standards, questions and activities using DOK and align these three within a unit plan.

• You will be able to assess a colleague’s unit plan for DOK alignment and fidelity to the Rubric.

•  

What we are attempting to do is model the type of instruction we desire in the classroom.  The information we want teachers to internalize is framed in the purpose of the project, “How can we give ourselves the best chance of engaging students in meaningful learning every day?”  The project is a DOK Level 4 in complexity.  The less complex skills and information are embedded in the process.  The final assessment will illuminate what skills have been mastered and where we need to continue our work.  Heavy accent on “our work.”

If  administrators are to be instructional leaders, this is the work they need to be involved in.  The success or failure of our teachers, and by extension our students, is the responsibility of administration.  When learning new skills you start with the “fundamentals,” those subsets within the domain that are needed as a foundation.  For teaching, proper planning and question design are two important fundamentals.  If we can support new teachers in developing the right habits in these two areas, early in their careers, they will have a greater chance of success.   We should invest any resources available in the support of new teachers, but not in one-day workshops and conferences.  The Unit Design Project provides ongoing professional growth opportunities for new teachers.  It is aligned with district and building goals, scheduled as conveniently as possible, and focused on building a strong pedagogical foundation.    We should provide this type of support for all new teachers and then see who has the tenacity to become the teachers we need.

Appendix A: The Unit Development Project

Students can do no better than the assignments they are given.  Ruth Mitchell,  Front-End Alignment (1996)

How can we give ourselves the best chance of engaging students in meaningful learning every day?

Unit Development Project

Design a unit of study addressing appropriate NYS Standards of at least DOK Level 3 and culminates in an assessment that illuminates each student’s degree of mastery.

The unit will:

• require a minimum of five days of instruction.

• be implemented in the classroom in December or January.

• be presented to your peers for feedback prior to implementation.

• illustrate the alignment of content complexity and difficulty throughout the planning process.

• provide data to determine if the students have met the instructional goals and inform student feedback.

Data, feedback to students, and how these results influence subsequent instruction will be presented to your peers when the unit is completed.

Instructional outcomes

• You will be able to use Domain 1 of the Danielson Rubric to guide the development of a unit of study and assess the completeness of that unit plan.

• You will develop a “working knowledge” of Domain 1 demonstrated by the ability to evaluate a unit plan using the Rubric.

• You will be able to illustrate the “shadow” cast by Component 1c.

• You will be able to evaluate standards, questions and activities using DOK and align these three within a unit plan.

• You will be able to assess a colleague’s unit plan for DOK alignment and fidelity to the Rubric.   

“In the framework for teaching, purpose is central.  Component 1c (selecting instructional goals) casts a long shadow over the entire framework.  The instructional goals must themselves be valuable and suitable to the students.  In addition, the instructional methods, proposed assessment techniques, and teacher’s reflection on the lesson must address the instructional goals.  Do the activities and materials serve to achieve the instructional purpose that the teachers has established?  Will the assessment techniques actually assess student achievement of the goals, and will they respect both the content and process inherent in the goals?”  Danielson, C.; Enhancing Professional Practice, 1996 p. 26.

The Planning Process

Use the Danielson Rubric Domain 1 and the DOK resources available to guide your decisions in this process.

• Determine the learning standards students will master during the unit of study. (component 1a)

  • Determine the level of complexity is required for each standard.

  • Prioritize the standards.

• Frame the standards into learning outcomes. (component 1c)

  • Try not to use the word “understand.”

• Design task(s) that will demonstrate student mastery of the standard for an end of unit assessment. (component 1e)

  • Align each task at or above the level of complexity required by the standard.

  • Assess each standard at different DOK levels to illuminate the level of mastery for each student.

  • Balance the assessment to reflect your prioritization of the standards included in the unit.

• Design a sequence of experiences for students that will allow them to undertake and manage the process of mastering the desired goals (components 1b, 1d, 1e)

  • Each activity should be aligned with your instructional outcomes.

  • Students should be aware of the purpose of each activity.

  • Activities can build from simple to complex or can begin with the more complex challenge.  The choices depend on the desired outcomes and your knowledge of your content and your students.

  • Formative assessment “benchmarks” should be developed to monitor student progress.

  • When designing the activities that will comprise the learning experience for students keep in mind the concepts of; the gradual release of responsibility, working in a growth mindset, and fostering intrinsic motivation.

Session 1

• Introduction and overview of the project.

• Choosing a Unit and identifying the appropriate standards.

• Determine the DOK level of each standard.

Session 2

Create the learning outcomes that reflect the appropriate level of complexity implied by the standard and meet the criteria from the Danielson Rubric, Component 1c.

Session 3

Create the end of unit assessment that will give the students the opportunity to demonstrate what they have learned.  

Session 4

Create the learning experiences that reflect the appropriate level of complexity implied by the standard and the assessment.

Session 5 - 7

Pre-implementation peer reviews and post implementation presentations.