It’s All Connected:

STEM Teacher Education and Retainment Using

Community-Based, Integrated STEM Methods
Kate R. Allman, Ph.D.

Johns Hopkins University

Abstract: There is a long-standing shortage of qualified and highly qualified middle grades math and
science teachers in high-need school districts (Aragon, 2016; Curran, Abrahams, & Clarke, 2001; Murphy,
DeArmond, & Guin, 2004; Oakes, Franke, Quartz, & Rogers, 2002; Quartz et al., 2008). This shortage
forces many schools -- disproportionately many in high-minority and high-poverty communities -- to lower
hiring standards to fill teaching vacancies, in turn leading to high levels of underqualified mathematics
and science teachers and lower student achievement in STEM subjects (Liu, Rosenstein, Swann, & Khalil,
2008; U.S. Department of Education, 2009). While STEM teacher recruitment remains a policy priority,
recent research has highlighted the need for more concentrated research directed toward STEM teacher
retention (Allen & Sims, 2017; Felder, 2016). This paper highlights findings from a six-year longitudinal,
mixed-methods research study at a Research 1 university in the southern United States that followed 35
highly-successful STEM majors and professionals during and after a secondary MAT STEM teacher
licensure program. Findings highlight the importance of community-based, integrated STEM teacher
education in preparing effective STEM teachers for long-lasting teaching careers.

Introduction

There is a long-standing shortage of qualified and highly qualified middle grades math and science
teachers in high-need school districts (Curran, Abrahams, & Clarke, 2001; Murphy, DeArmond, & Guin,
2004; National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future, 1996, 1997; Oakes, 1990; Oakes, Franke,
Quartz, & Rogers, 2002; Quartz et al., 2008). This shortage forces many schools -- disproportionately
many in high-minority and high-poverty communities -- to lower hiring standards to fill teaching
vacancies, in turn leading to high levels of underqualified mathematics and science teachers and lower
student achievement in STEM subjects (Blank & Langesen, 2003; Liu, Rosenstein, Swann, & Khalil,
2008; U.S. Department of Education, 2009). Teacher retention literature over the past decade has
identified that the term “teacher shortage” is actually misleading (Ingersoll, 2001). Teacher preparation
programs are licensing enough STEM teachers to fill vacancies created by retirees; however, many early-
career STEM teachers leave the profession within their first five years of teaching. A 2012 report of The
New Teacher Project (2012) characterizes “irreplaceable” teachers as those who are particularly effective
in producing academic growth in their students—about the top 20% of teachers nationally. These highly
effective teachers are leaving large urban school districts at a disproportionate rate (10,000 of them leave
the 50 largest school districts every year, while nearly ten times that many low-performing teachers stay).

This study presents findings from a longitudinal, six-year study funded by the National Science
Foundation that followed 35 highly-successful STEM graduates and professionals who participated in an
MAT teacher education program at a Research 1 university in the southern United States. The findings
highlight the effectiveness of community-based, integrated STEM teacher education in preparing and
effective STEM teachers for lasting teaching careers.

Context

This study took place in the MAT program of a private, Research 1 university in the southern United
States. The MAT program at the institution aims to attract exceptionally well-qualified candidates with
strong liberal arts backgrounds into the teaching profession. The program also seeks to develop teacher
leaders who are highly-effective in supporting diverse groups of learners through a depth of content
knowledge and a repertoire of powerful pedagogical practices.
Applicants to the MAT Program have majors in their intended teaching fields and during the
admission process are interviewed by tenured or tenure-track faculty members in that field. Once
admitted to the Program, these students take five graduate-level courses in their teaching field alongside
Ph.D. students. Through these means, the institution tries to ensure that their graduates are highly
qualified in their respective disciplines and teaching areas.
The pedagogical training common for all MAT students, but the graduate coursework in the
disciplines is tailored to enhance each student’s strengths and to remedy gaps in content knowledge.
Students take two courses in the summer prior to their internship. The first of these courses, MAT-702:
Educating Adolescents, is a three-unit graduate course focused on adolescent development and learning, with
special emphasis on the socioeconomic and cultural impacts on the learning process. The second course,
MAT-703: Effective Teaching Strategies, is a three-unit graduate course focused on designing effective units of
study, planning daily lessons, teaching for maximum student learning, communicating with students, and
managing classroom behavior. All MAT students work together in the first portion of this course; then
they break into subject area groups for the second portion, Subject Area Methods, which focuses on strategies
specific to each content area. The second portion is designed specifically to impart emerging pedagogical
content knowledge to beginning teachers, with the understanding that they will practice these emerging
strategies in the high school and assess both the effectiveness of these methods and their own success in
delivering them. The two summer courses are preparation for the internship, where students practice
using this training under the careful supervision of both highly-trained mentors and university faculty.
The institution’s MAT Program puts extraordinary emphasis on community-based education with the
development of a 27-week teaching internship located in two different internship placements (18 and 9
weeks, respectively) under the direction of two different experienced mentor teachers who: (1) are fully
licensed in the mathematics or science teaching area; (2) have achieved career status (tenure); and (3) have
been trained in the theory and practice of mentoring adults—training which the institution both requires
and provides. These mentor teachers are hired by the Dean of the Graduate School as instructors within
the MAT Program and are considered important methodology instructors for MAT students. They also
serve as adjunct faculty within the Graduate School, and they are compensated for their work.
Relationships with partner schools and mentors are long-lasting and intentionally fostered through
reciprocal teaching and learning. The program places all interns in the public school district in which the
IHE is located. Sample demographic data on the student bodies of each of the instiution’s partner schools
is listed in Table 1. The institution outlines that, in order to be successful teachers of diverse learners,
teachers-in-training need experience working with broad cross-sections of student performance levels, age
groups, socioeconomic groups, and cultural and ethnic groups. The program ensures that each of its
students teaches in high school classrooms that are racially and socioeconomically diverse, and that
include students who have been identified as having special learning needs as well as students with limited
English proficiency. In addition, all MAT students work with both academically gifted and academically
challenged students. All of these conditions are found in high-need school districts, thus preparing MAT
students to be successful as they teach in similar schools across the country.

Table 1. IHE Partner School Demographics*

Total African- White Hispanic Other Low-Income

School Enroll- American Ethnicity Students
ment # % # % # % # % (F/R lunch)

School 1 1,316 1,093 83% 38 3% 147 11% 38 3% 65%

School 2 1,719 636 37% 592 34% 313 18% 178 10% 39%

School 3 1,417 774 55% 319 23% 259 18% 65 5% 56%

School 4 1,759 793 45% 533 30% 361 21% 72 4% 50%

School 5 1,554 611 39% 527 34% 282 18% 134 9% 38%

Totals 7,765 3,907 50% 2,009 26% 1,362 18% 487 6% 50%
* School data from 2012-2013

The program facilitates candidate development through two, semester-long teaching internships,
conducted under the supervision of both mentor teachers and university faculty. During this internship,
candidates test theories of working with all student populations in real-world situations and analyze the
resulting changes in student performance. In their fall seminar course, all program students work with an
ESL instructor to learn how to adapt instruction for high school students who have limited English
proficiency. In this way, the institution ensures that its beginning teachers are prepared for work in high-
need school systems that serve diverse populations. At the end of the teaching internship, in order to be
considered for degree candidacy, all MAT students must demonstrate how they have specifically impacted
the learning of at least three of their students with special needs.
As part of the students’ final exam, administered by both university and school-based faculty, all MAT
candidates are required to demonstrate their instructional expertise, their ability to assess student
outcomes and modify instruction based on those assessments, and increased student learning based on
their instruction. Through these means, which are explicitly explained to all candidates during the
summer prior to their internship, Duke ensures that all MAT teachers in training are focused on student
achievement for each student they teach.
The program at the institution has been extremely successful, as measured by teacher retention and
longevity in the classroom. Virtually all graduates of the Program (100% of graduates from the past 10
years) enter the classroom within two years of graduation. Principals who completed evaluations rated
those graduates as either successful or highly successful at the end of their first year in the classroom.
While national statistics indicate that more than 25% of the nation’s teachers leave the profession after
their first year and 50% of all teachers leave the classroom within the first five years (Chen, et. al, 2000;
Ingersoll & Smith, 2003), 69% of the program graduates remain in the classroom at the end of their fifth
year of teaching.

Participants

This study highlights the teacher education experiences of a sub-set of the program’s graduates (35)
who were STEM educators and supported with a National Science Foundation (NSF) Noyce Fellowship
grant from 2006 to 2013. The National Science Foundation Noyce Fellowship project is designed to
support institutions of higher education in recruiting and preparing STEM majors and undergraduates to
become highly-effective STEM Educators. The NSF Noyce Fellowship project is committed to creating a
pipeline of highly-effective STEM Educators in high-needs schools, requiring that Noyce awardees teach
STEM subjects for at least two years in a high-needs school district, as defined by the NSF.
The institution involved in this study was awarded a National Science Foundation Phase I grant in
2006 to support the recruitment and preparation of 35 highly-successful STEM undergraduates to
become highly-effective secondary Science and Math educators. Awardees at the institution were given a
$10,000 Noyce Fellowship that was matched with an additional $20,000 of institutional support.
Awardees also received a $1,000 monthly stipend ($1,500 for mid-career awardees). Awardees were issued
the Noyce fellowship in the form of a forgiveable loan, which was distributed in two increments after the
successful completion of each year of STEM teaching service in a high-needs school district.
The participants in this study include all 35 Noyce fellows at the described partner institution. Fourteen
participants (40%) were preparing to be secondary Science educators, with undergraduate majors in
diverse disciplines such as Environmental Science, Chemistry, Biology, and Engineering. Twenty-one
participants (60%) were secondary Mathematics Education candidates, possessing an undergraduate
major in Mathmatics. Seventy-one percent (25) of the research participants graduated from top 30
undergraduate institutions, and the average participant had an undergraduate GPA of 3.5.

Table 2. Participant Demographic Summary Table

Award Year Total Science Math Average STEM % Female % Students of

Noyce Fellows Fellow UGrad Professionals Color
Fellows s GPA

2006-07 9 4 5 3.60 2 100% 22%

2007-08 5 4 1 3.66 3 60% 0%

2008-09 5 1 4 3.44 2 80% 20%

2009-10 2 2 0 3.50 1 100% 0%

2010-11
4 1 3 3.10 1 50% 50%

2011-12
4 1 3 3.68 3 75% 0%

2012-13 6 1 5 3.47 1 67% 17%

Total or
35 14 21 3.49 13 76% 15.6%
Average
 Fifty-percent (50%) of the coursework completed by the research participants was similar to the other
MAT Program candidates. However, participants completed six courses unique to Science and Math
Education candidates: Science/Math Teaching Methods and five graduate-level courses in their teaching
field alongside Ph.D. students. The Mathematics and Science Teaching Methods components were taught
by faculty who taught high school Science and Mathematics using integrated methods. Research
participants were able to select graduate coursework from any of schools and departments located at the
larger university, based on advice from their faculty advisors. 85% of the candidates (30) participated in
two courses taught by STEM faculty who worked closely with the program to foster an integrated
approach to STEM teaching.

Data Collection

This data was collected during a 6-year longitudinal study that tracked 35 highly-successful STEM
majors and professionals after receiving teacher licensure through a Master of Arts in Teaching Program
located in a Research 1 institution in the southern United States. During admissions, baseline data was
collected using the program’s Internship Evaluation measure, an adapted form of the state’s teacher
evaluation rubric designed to assess: 1) content knowledge in the sciences and mathematics, 2) pedagogical
content knowledge, 3) capacity to work with diverse adolescent learners, 4) technological competence, 5)
professionalism, and 6) potential for teacher leadership. A sample rubric line item from the Internship
Evaluation measure is highlighted below:

Item 1. Sample Teacher Evaluation Instrument Rubric Item

1a. Teachers lead in their classrooms. Teachers demonstrate leadership by taking responsibility for the progress of all students to ensure
that they graduate from high school, are globally competitive for work and postsecondary education, and are prepared for life in the 21st
Ar century. Teachers communicate this vision to their students. Using a variety of data sources, they organize, plan, and set goals that meet the
Obs needs of the individual student and the class. Teachers use various types of assessment data during the school year to evaluate student
tif
erva progress and to make adjustments to the teaching and learning process. They establish a safe, orderly environment, and create a culture that
ac empowers students to collaborate and become lifelong learners.
tion
t
Emergent Not Demonstrated
Developing Candidate Proficient Candidate Accomplished Candidate
Candidate

Acknowledges Demonstrates how Evaluates the progress of Takes responsibility for

the importance teachers contribute to students toward high school student progress toward      
of high school students’ progress toward graduation using a variety high school graduation
graduation for high school graduation of assessment data by aligning instruction
students. by following the North measuring goals of the and assessment with the
Carolina Standard North Carolina Standard North Carolina Standard
Course of Study. Course of Study. Course of Study.

Uses data to identify the Draws on appropriate data Maintains or supports a

Identifies the skills and abilities of
types of data students.
that are
commonly
available to and Describes the
used in schools. A characteristics and
N importance of a safe and
D orderly classroom
environment.
Understands positive
management of student
behavior, including
strategies of conflict
resolution and anger
management, effective
communication for
defusing and
deescalating disruptive or
dangerous behavior, and
safe and appropriate use
of seclusion and restraint.
to develop classroom and classroom culture that
instructional plans. empowers students to
collaborate and become
Maintains a safe and lifelong learners.
orderly classroom that
A facilitates student learning.
N
D Uses positive management
of student behavior,
including strategies of
conflict resolution and
anger management,
effective communication for
defusing and deescalating
disruptive or dangerous
behavior, and safe and
appropriate seclusion and
restraint.
 Once baseline data was collected, teacher candidate growth and performance was measured using the
Internship Evaluation tool at three key check-points: 1) middle of fall internship; 2) end of fall internship;
3) end of spring internship. During the final summer of the program, candidates complete a survey and
participate in one content-specific focus group. After one year of teaching, candidates complete a self-
evaluation survey, and the program’s teacher evaluation measure is completed by one of the graduate’s
administrators.

Analysis

Data were analyzed using a side-by-side, mixed-methods analytic approach (Creswell & Creswell,
2017). Categorical survey questions were analyzed using descriptive statitistical methods to identify counts
and percentages of responses. Ordinal and ordered categorical survey questions were analyzed by
assigning a numeric value to each response and descriptive statistics were used to summarize and compare
responses.
Open-ended survey questions were analyzed by coding the data and collapsing codes into broad
themes. Themes were then quantified to enumerate the frequency of themes among the respondendents
and the percentage of people identifying specific themes in their responses (Onwuegbuzie & Teddlie
2003). Themes were refined and new themes were incorporated into the analysis, as needed.

Findings

In the six years since the National Science Foundation’s funding of the Phase I Noyce Fellowship grant,
the participant institution was awarded 35 fellowships to graduate students with undergraduate degrees in
mathematics or the sciences. Of these 35 fellows, 14 were in science, having majored in diverse disciplines
such as Environmental Science, Chemistry, Biology, and Engineering, and 21 were in mathematics.
Seventy-one percent (25) of the research participants graduated from top 30 undergraduate institutions,
and the average participant had an undergraduate GPA of 3.5.

Table 3. Noyce Graduate Summary Table

Award Total Science Math Average STEM % Female % Students Avg % Still
Year Noyce Fellows Fellows UGrad Profess- of Color graduate Teaching in
Fellows GPA ionls GPA 2012-2013

2006-07 9 4 5 3.60 2 100% 22% 3.8 67%

2007-08 5 4 1 3.66 3 60% 0% 3.82 60%

2008-09 5 1 4 3.44 2 80% 20% 3.8 80%

2009-10 2 2 0 3.50 1 100% 0% 3.9 100%

All of the 35 Noyce Fellows have graduated, earning state licensure at the M (Master’s) level as well as
2010-11
their MAT degree.
4 Following
1 graduation,
3 100% of the
3.10 1 35 participants
50% were
50%hired as full-time
3.75 high school
100%
teachers, 92% (33) of whom were hired in high-need school districts. Twenty-four (30) of the 35 Noyce
2011-12(86%) currently teach full-time in school districts across the country. Eighteen of these 29 students
Fellows
4 1 3 3.68 3 75% 0% 3.75 100%
(62%) are still teaching in high-need schools.
2012-13 6 1 5 3.47 1 67% 17% 3.8 100%

Total or
35 14 21 3.49 13 76% 15.6% 3.8 86.7%
Average
 The study found evidence to support the relationship between the program’s rigorous coursework/
internships and early-career teacher success. During their teaching preparation, participants excelled in
their graduate coursework, earning an average GPA of 3.8. At the end of their teaching internships,
100% of participants were evaluated as “Effective” or “Very Effective” teachers, as measured by an
adapted form of the institution’s state teacher evaluation instrument.
After a year of teaching, participants performed two standard deviations higher than the average
teacher using the adopted state standards, as evaluated by school administrators. One administrator
elaborated on their evaluation by stating thata participant teacher was “the most prepared, thoughtful,
and talented beginning teacher [she had] ever worked with.” Another administrator wrote: “Mrs.
Nemonth is an awesome educator. She was named West County’s Outstanding First Year. Mrs. Nemonth
has been the spark needed to move our Physical Science students from a 55% chance of being successful
to an 86% chance of success.”

Table 4. Teacher Candidate Summary

Teacher Candidate Intership Evaluation Average Growth Fall 2006-Spring 2013

1= Emergent, 2=Developing, 3= Proficient, 4=Accomplished

Avg Avg Avg

STANDARDS & INDICATORS
Fall Winter Spring

STANDARD I: TEACHERS DEMONSTRATE LEADERSHIP

A. Leads in the classroom 2.6 3.4 3.8

B. Leads in the school 2.5 3.2 3.8

C. Leads in the teaching profession 2.7 3.3 3.7

D. Advocates for the school and students 2.7 3.2 3.5

E. Demonstrates high ethical standards 2.9 3.2 3.6

Standard I Average 2.7 3.3 3.7

STANDARD II: TEACHERS ESTABLISH A RESPECTFUL ENVIRONMENT

FOR A DIVERSE
POPULATION

A. Provides an environment that is inviting, respectful, supportive, 3.9

3.0 3.7
inclusive and flexible

B. Embraces diversity in the school community and in the world 2.7 3.3 3.7

C. Treats students as individuals 2.8 3.6 3.7

D. Adapts teaching for the benefit of students with special needs 2.3 2.9 3.3

E. Works collaboratively with families and significant adults in the lives 3.4
2.2 3.2
of their students

Standard II Average 2.6 3.3 3.6

 STANDARD III: TEACHERS KNOW CONTENT THEY TEACH

A. Aligns instruction with the NC Standard Course of Study 2.8 3.3 3.5

B. Knows the content appropriate to the teaching specialty 2.8 3.5 3.7

C. Recognizes the interconnectedness of content areas 2.5 3.2 3.5

D. Makes instruction relevant to students 2.4 3.3 3.6

Standard III Average 2.6 3.3 3.6

STANDARD IV: TEACHERS FACILITATE LEARNING

A. Knows the ways in which learning takes place, and appropriate

levels of intellectual, physical, social and emotional development of 2.6 3.3 3.8
students

B. Plans instruction appropriate for students 2.5 3.2 3.3

C. Uses a variety of instructional methods 2.7 3.3 3.7

D. Integrates and utilizes technology in instruction 2.6 3.2 3.5

E. Helps students develop critical-thinking and problem solving skills 2.3 3.1 3.6

F. Helps students work in teams, develop leadership qualities 2.6 3.2 3.6

G. Communicates effectively 2.5 3.1 3.5

H. Uses a variety of methods to assess what each student has learned 2.4 3.2 3.7

Standard IV Average 2.5 3.2 3.6

STANDARD V: TEACHERS REFLECT ON THEIR PRACTICE

A. Analyzes student learning 2.8 3.3 3.4

B. Links professional growth to professional goals 2.7 3.2 3.5

C. Functions effectively in a complex, dynamic environment 2.7 3.0 3.2

Standard V Average 2.7 3.2 3.2

Ninety-two percent (92%) of participants attributed their early-career success to the MAT’s intensive,
two-semester teaching internship. One graduate wrote: “I think the MAT Program was the best program
for Masters-level teaching preparation that I could have completed. I don’t feel like there is anyway a
program could have prepared me more for my 1st year of teaching. The student teaching experience (with
its length and opportunity to work at 2 different high schools) was fabulous and my mentors were
exceptional.” 100% of participants who taught in the high-needs school district (12) where they conducted
their teaching internship attributed their success during their early careers to the community-based
approach of the program. One student explained in the survey, “I can’t overemphasize the value of
learning to teach in [this city]. The schools in [the partner city] are virbrantly diverse, with students from
so many different racial, ethnic, and linguistic backgrounds. At another institution, I might have been
placed in a predominantly white charter or private school, which would not have prepared me well for my
first year of teaching. [The institution] also has such strong relationships with schools here and so many of
the program’s mentors are graduates of the program. The graduates of this program truly feel like a
family, and this network has made my first year so much more successful.” This comment echoed many
participant comments, which highlighted the strengths of a community-based teacher education that
emphasizes learning with and among communities.
Participants also remained in the teaching profession for a statistically significant longer amount of
time than the average teacher in the United States. On average, 45% of entering public school teachers
leave teaching within three years (U.S. Department of Education, 2009). High-need public schools
experience an annual teacher attrition rate of approximately 20% (Ingersoll, 2001). Sixteen out of 21
(76%) Noyce graduates remained in the teaching profession after completing their two-year teaching
commitment. Fourteen (14) out of 19 (74%) tenured Noyce graduates (3+ years) are still teaching.
Tenured participants attributed their longevity to their teaching preparation, specifically their methods
coursework, high-quality mentoring, and two different teaching internships. Participants attributed their
lasting success to the strong collegial relationships that they developed at their schools and the teacher
leadership opportunities that became available to them, many of which were perceived to occur due to
their unique integrated STEM Education preparation. Participants also highlighted the importance of the
Noyce Scholarship Program in the recruitment of highly-successful STEM graduates into teaching. 100%
of the participants stated that they would not have attended the institution for STEM teacher education,
if they had not received the Noyce Scholarship. Participants also spoke to the strength of the MAT
Program’s rigorous graduate coursework and two teaching internships in preparing Noyce Fellows for the
demands of teaching in high-need school districts.

Implications

These findings speak to the strength of the program’s rigorous graduate coursework and two teaching
internships in preparing STEM teacher educators for the demands of teaching in high-need school
districts. They also attest to the importance of the Noyce Scholarship Program in the recruitment of
highly-successful STEM graduates into teaching. The research calls for continued research to examine
what factors of the two-semester internship are most helpful in preparing and retaining STEM teachers in
high-need districts.
 References:

Allen, R., & Sims, S. (2017). Improving Science Teacher Retention: do National STEM Learning
Network professional development courses keep science teachers in the classroom. Wellcome
Trust and FFT Education Datalab.

Aragon, S. (2016). Teacher shortages: What we know. Teacher Shortage Series. Education Commission of the
States.

Curran, B., Abrahams, C., & Clarke, T. (2001). Solving teacher shortages through license reciprocity. State
Higher Education Executive Officers.

Felder, R. (2016). Rethink traditional teaching methods to improve learning and retention. Journal of
STEM education, 17(1).

Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American

Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499-534.

Jacob, A., Vidyarthi, E., & Carroll, K. (2012). The Irreplaceables: Understanding the real
retention crisis in America's urban schools. TNTP.

Liu, E., Rosenstein, J. G., Swan, A. E., & Khalil, D. (2008). Grappling with teacher shortages: Urban
school recruiting and retaining mathematics teachers. Leadership and policy in schools.

Murphy, P., DeArmond, M., & Guin, K. (2003). A national crisis or localized problems? Getting
perspective on the scope and scale of the teacher shortage. Education policy analysis archives, 11,
23.

Oakes, J. , Franke, M.L. , Quartz, K.H. , & Rogers, J. ( 2002). Research for high-quality urban teaching:
Defining it, developing it, assessing it. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(3), 228-234.

Quartz, K.H. , Lyons, K.B. , Masyn, K. , Olsen, B. , Anderson, L. , Thomas, A. Horng, E. ( 2004). Urban
teacher retention policy: A research brief. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA’s Institute for Democracy,
Education, and Access (IDEA).

Smith, T. M., & Ingersoll, R. M. (2004). What are the effects of induction and mentoring on beginning
teacher turnover?. American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 681-714.