Sanjeev M. Masih
Case Memo IV – Boston Teacher Residency
December 11, 2009
Section I
Founded in 2003, Boston Teachers Residency (BTR) has placed 125 graduates in the Boston Public Schools (BPS). It has had significant success with its past strategy but now it faces a few strategic issues: how to modify its method in order to have a deeper impact on Boston Public Schools system, help under performing schools within the BPS network, provide better support for new graduates and compete with other organizations to place its graduates in BPS.
The current program “had been hailed as one of the 10 best teacher preparation programs in the nation by an industry journal…”(page 1) Boston Teachers Residency was created to “…recruit, prepare, and sustain excellent teachers in and for the Boston Public Schools.”(page 1) BTR worked closely with BPS superintendent Thomas Payzant to establish the goals and program design to help BPS achieve better results. The graduate student selection was rigorous with a heavy focus on classroom experience in the program. After two months of training, the graduate students worked in classrooms with a mentor and taking formal classes on Fridays. The classes provided theoretical approaches to teaching and solving behavioral problems, while the classrooms became the clinic to test the Friday lessons. The effective combinations helped both BPS and BTR.
Founder Jesse Solomon founded the BTR with the help of Strategic Grant Partners (SGP). SGP worked to figure out how they “might help an organization start-up, strengthen their work and/or increase capacity.” (page 2) At the time, the data showed that “only 24% of 4th graders in BPS were proficient in language arts and only 15% were so in math.” (page 3) On the high school level, “fewer than 65% of BPS students graduated from high school.” (page 3) BTR eventually linked with Boston Plan for Excellence(BPE) who’s mission was to be a “…catalyst and support to the Boston Public Schools in transforming instruction to improve the performance of every student.” (page 3) BPE did not have the teaching expertise and dedication that BTR had, while BTR did not have the history, reputation and funding that BPE possessed. There were other programs like the Teach for America but none so dedicated and focused to improve the local Boston Public Schools system. This uniqueness gave BTR the edge above the others.
Section II
Jesse Solomon graduated from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in mathematics but failed to land a job in the BPS. After gaining teaching experience in Cambridge, Solomon took part in the first charter school in the Boston area. The City on a Hill Charter School became the “laboratories through which to introduce new and effective practices and strategies back into the public school systems.” (page 2) For Solomon, this experience further clarified that traditional teacher development methods were a failure and a new form of teacher development must be formed. Solomon started Urban Calculus Initiative which helped teacher development and became the foundation for what was later to become Boston Teacher Residency. As the driving force behind the ideology and innovative methodology, Jesse Solomon is the vital piece of the organization.
The new superintendent of Boston Public Schools, Carol Johnson, is another vital member responsible for BTR’s success. Johnson has set a new focus on “developing, a district-wide improvement strategy that prioritized accelerating the performance of the district’s lowest performing schools.” (page 1) The sole purpose of BTR is to help improve BPS; so it is imperative that BTR and BPS have their goals aligned. Currently the principals from higher performing school recruited BTR graduates aggressively, leaving the under performing schools without needed talent. The new strategy to focus on under performing schools and BTR’s expertise to fulfill those needs will be critical to Johnson’s efforts.
BTR’s recruiter Monique Davis is important to the organization because she will bring in the youth that drive the organizations objective. She must target potential candidates and have them adopt the BTR’s vision. Hollee Freeman, BTR’s field director, is the critical link between school principals and BTR which facilitates the common mission objectives of both organizations.
Section III
Since its inception in 2003, BTR had 100% funding from SGP for two years. As BTR matured and formed programs mutually beneficial to BPS and BTR, they have shared funding while cutting direct funding ties with SGP. In 2005-06 BPS gave 20% while private sources gave 80%; 2006-07 40% BPS and 60% from private sources; 2007-08 60% from BPS and 40% from private sources; 2008-10 BPS 51% and while private sources provided 49%.
In the 2007-08 fiscal year, BTR had the budget of $3.4m, with an increase to $4.7m in 2008-09, estimated $5.6m in 2009-10, estimated $6.7m in 2011-12, and estimated $6.7m in 2012-13. The increased budget is a reflection of increase in resident population and the larger student population they will teach. As the program develops and gets deeply involved with BPS’s transformation of the under performing schools, BTR’s cost to retain graduates will increase over time while cost per student will decrease. In 2007-08, graduate retention cost was $44k while cost per student was $613; 2008-09 retention cost was $56k while cost per student was $664; 2009-10 retention cost was $58k while cost per student was $627; estimated 2010-11 retention cost is $59k while cost per student is $592; estimated 2011-12 retention cost is $58k while cost per student is $515; and estimated 2012-13 retention cost is $59k while cost per student is $467.
Section IV
Strengths
- Motivated, educated, highly skilled,
focused, inspired staff
- Mutual goals that are shared by BPS
- Diverse graduate population reflective of diverse BPS student population
- Well established track record
- Reputation for innovation and ability to adapt to changing school needs
- Inspiring leader with a clear vision
- Ability to work across the board with
BPS, current graduates and BPS students
Weaknesses
- Its sole focus on BPS
- Its ability to integrate non BTR teachers that are working in the BPS
- Long training program
- Graduates have too much dependence on classroom mentors
- Budget and membership is smaller than competing organizations
Opportunities
- Radically changing the way education is provided by BPS
- Facilitating a deep cultural change within BPS
- Creating a stronger partnership with BPS board and principals
- Creating a model that can be replicated across the country
- Providing students with greater opportunities through better education
Threats
- Non-BTR teachers- cultural conflict
- Other organizations; the likes of Teach for America
- Loss of support from BPS
- Change in federal requirements
- Change in state requirements
- Loss of support from Boston College and Boston University
- The decrease in program quality due to new requirements from BPS
As BTR looks to consolidate its program to better serve the BPS needs, it has a few questions to consider: how to place “cohorts of BTR graduates in high priority schools?” (page 1) Is the current model good enough to produce teachers that can effectively turn around the struggling schools? How to improve the program quality while meeting the new strategic goals set forth by the new superintendent of BPS.
Since BTR is heavily intergraded into the BPS strategy, and visa versa; it depends on BPS for funding and employment for its graduates. I strong feel that BTR has too much at stake in its relationship with BPS. I would recommend that BTR have a strategic review of its dependence on BPS and seek ways to expand its educational reach. Since its inception, BTR believes that it should “…recruit, prepare, and sustain excellent teachers in and for the Boston Public Schools.” (page 1) But I believe that it should have a new mission ‘to recruit, prepare and sustain excellent teachers.’ Over the years, it has had great success with its graduates in the BPS system but it should consider expanding into other school systems.
Under the current model, the donor (BPS) is driving the BTR program. BPS’s superintendent set a new strategy which BTR must follow. BPS also provides majority of the funding which keeps BTR in business. At the current state, BTR is just an extension of BPS and has very little control over its organizational objectives. Provided that BTR determines the teaching methods, it has no other control. BTR should regain its independence and focus on providing its expertise at a broader scale.
I recommend that BTR does this in three folds: (1) diversity its funding (2) serve other communities (3) have an incentive based system financed by the schools. BTR should not receive majority of its funding from the “system” (ie Boston Public School system) it serves. The distance between the “system” and BTR will give BTR independence without the fear of retaliation and loss of funding. The independence will allow BTR to serve its hosts with innovative solutions. Jesse Solomon should seek other strategic partner organizations like BPS to expand its programming reach. Although the current mission is set to serve only BPS, it should update its mission statement to reflect the organization maturity. In the beginning, it served well to focus on one organization with innovative style of teaching but that will not serve the organization in the long-term. By expanding outside the BPS system, BTR will have greater impact on the way education is delivered to students. The decrease in direct funding from host organizations can offset by increasing incentive based fees. Under the current arrangement, graduates receive tuition refunds after completing two years with the school. This refund can be financed by the schools which hire the well qualified teacher.
The time for these suggested changed should be in the medium term. I recommend that BTR slowly modify its programs as not to hurt the BPS. It should continue with its current commitments but look to add other hosts starting 2013. The current White House administration favors charter school style teaching which will benefit BTR to gain federal funding. This extra funding will allow it to increase its capacity and expand its teacher based to serve newer hosts in the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment