Educating the Next Generation of Massachusetts Teachers: Building Effective Partnerships in Preparation and Support

June 2012

A centerpiece of Massachusetts' public education reform agenda is to ensure all children benefit from excellent teaching. The state's $250 million Race to the Top plan includes strategies for attracting and retaining a quality workforce, instituting a new statewide framework for teacher evaluation, and ensuring high-quality educators in high-needs districts. Achieving the state's goals begins by preparing all teachers to enter their classrooms with the tools needed to be successful. This requires a strong foundation in both theoretical and applied practice. A pervasive challenge is that many teacher preparation programs operate in isolation, removed from the realities of working in today's schools. A new model for teacher preparation is needed, based on strong partnerships between institutions of higher education and school districts that allow for extensive field experiences where teacher candidates develop their craft in the settings where they will ultimately work.

In this policy perspective, the Rennie Center presents a new three-year model for post-baccalaureate teacher preparation and development aimed at improving the quality of the educator workforce statewide. The model proposed focuses on partnerships at the district level to achieve joint accountability for the training of a majority of teachers working in the Commonwealth. The "New Partnership-based Model for Massachusetts Teacher Preparation" is built on evidence-based practices in teacher preparation and development, and may serve as a framework for preparation programs in the state through which all teacher candidates can train. Core elements of the model include:

  • recruitment and selection;
  • pre-service orientation;
  • three years in-district training;
  • collaborative supervision and mentoring;
  • co-developed and co-taught program curriculum;
  • peer support, feedback, and reflection; and,
  • program assessment and accountability.

Following the model, considerations are offered for state policymakers, school and district leaders, and teacher preparation programs.

Report Year
2012