The harsh criticisms of schooling in America of the early 1980's had a major impact in Cincinnati. Among the proposed solutions were increasing the intellectual rigor of teacher preparation, providing induction for beginning teachers, recognizing and rewarding achievement in teacher knowledge and skill, linking schools with universities, and making schools better places in which to teach and learn. Cincinnati has embraced all of these solutions. The Cincinnati Federation of Teachers, an American Federation of Teachers affiliate, heeded the call to professionalize teaching by entering into partnership with the district and creating a peer assistance and review program in 1985 and a career ladder in 1987. The University of Cincinnati began the redesign of teacher education in 1988. New programs were designed to be dual degree (bachelors in arts and sciences and education) with a year-long teaching internship in a professional practice school. During the internship year, students teach half-time and take graduate level classes. The district, union, and university met to begin planning for professional practice schools (PPS) in 1989. Design parameters were identified and piloting began in 1992. Currently there are 9 PPS in which 100 interns are teaching. Internship positions are created by teacher vacancies in PPS due to attrition or other reasons. The position is identified as a graduate student intern position. The salaries of all the identified positions in all of the PPS are pooled and equally divided among all of the interns. Mentoring and support costs are shared equally between the district and the university.

Although this model is costly and labor-intensive, many benefits have been derived:

Better Prepared Beginning Teachers

• Hiring Rates: 85% of PPS trained teachers are hired in the year following certification in contrast to a 30 to 45% hiring rate for newly certified teachers in Ohio
• Induction Year/ Peer Review: Within Cincinnati Public Schools, PPS trained teachers are rated higher than graduates from other programs
• Principal Assessment: Principals rated PPS trained teachers higher on 17 of 20 instructional performance items than graduates of our old programs (an improvement made clearer given that the survey was conducted when PPS trained teachers were only 4 months into their first full time teaching jobs)
• Leadership and Collaboration: PPS trained teachers report collaborating with other teachers and assuming leadership role among peers more often than graduates of our old programs

Professional Development of Experienced Teachers

• PPS teachers assume more leadership roles than their peers
• PPS teachers are more likely than their peers to become National Board for Professional Teaching Standards certified
• PPS teachers are more likely to use research-based practices than their peers
• PPS teachers are more likely to embrace comprehensive school reform

Professional Development of University Faculty

Because of the intensity and duration of their time in Cincinnati Public Schools, university faculty report an increased sense of efficacy and more innovation in their own practice.

Although a year of classroom teaching should result in a better prepared beginning teacher than the traditional ten to fifteen weeks of student teaching, our research suggests that longevity is not the key to well prepared beginning teachers. Organizing interns, teachers, and university faculty into teams the only economically feasible model has yielded many unanticipated benefits. Our own research shows that teams model the process teaching and learning in ways that cannot be replicated in the university classroom or in the traditional mentoring dyad or triad. Team-members present novices with multiple, valid perspectives on classroom issues. Because of the competing perspectives team members must articulate their thoughts clearly, by linking them to educational standards and by providing evidence to support their opinions. The team structure, then, avoids the traditional power imbalance between novices and experts or proteges and mentors, which can shortcut true understanding. Too often mentors or university supervisors advise, "Try this" or "Try that," without providing the novices with strategies for analyzing the situation and without providing alternative interpretations of the situation. Within the team structure, interns are not given the "right" answer, but must choose from a number of strategies and assess the results.

Team based mentoring also provides an authentic context in which the consequences of one's actions as a beginning teacher, experienced teacher, and teacher educator, are immediate and significant. With the internship a year-long, load-bearing experience, feedback to university faculty about the interns' teacher education program and about the quality of course work is immediate and significant. First of all, faculty observe the beginning teachers in their classrooms (not in co-operating teachers' classrooms). As one faculty member stated, "it's really humble to watch an intern doing exactly what you've said to do and bombing in the classroom." Programmatic weaknesses become apparent. Course sequences have changed, and requirements for practica have been made more stringent. Everyone interns, and experienced teachers and faculty-can decide effectiveness of the latest, research-based strategies.

As the teachers of record, interns learn that the basis of effective teaching is ongoing relationships with students. Interns have an entire year to work with their students and can repair mistakes, resolve issues, and develop trust and mutual respect. Interns have the opportunity to try, fail, and learn. Because of this opportunity, interns can extend the same opportunity to try, fail, and learn to their students.

While our own experience and national organizations - Holmes Partnership, the National Commission on Teaching and America's Future - recommend year-long, authentic teaching internships in professional practice schools, establishing and maintaining such programs is difficult, as evidenced by paucity of them. The presenters will address the strategies and logistics that enabled our success from their various perspectives, including:

1. University politics carving out the time and resources for a historically low status college to design and implement a model program.
2. Professionalizing teaching-building structures and capacity among the ranks.
3. District Administration prioritizing in the face of budget cuts.
4. Change strategies in the university context.
5. New and reallocated resources: Governance, collaboration, and evolution.

Institutional Mission and Context

The University of Cincinnati is a public comprehensive system of learning and research. The excellent faculty have distinguished themselves world wide for their creative pedagogy and research, especially in problem solving and the application of their of their discoveries. The University system is designed to serve a diverse student body with a broad range of interests and goals. It is a place of opportunity.

In support of this mission, the University strives to provide the highest quality learning environment, world renowned scholarship, innovation, and community service, and to serve as a place where freedom of intellectual interchange flourishes.

The College of Education at the University of Cincinnati is a professional college committed to serving schools, agencies and communities, by

• preparing students for using best practices
• creating and disseminating knowledge to further professional practice,
• linking pedagogy and research to learning,
• preparing students to work within diverse communities,
• serving as a model of and resource for diversity,
• developing a community of life-long learners, and
• developing and assuming leadership in professional communities at the local, national, and international levels.

The mission of Cincinnati Public Schools is simple: to educate all students to meet or exceed the district's defined academic standards. The district has 47,000 students in 77 schools.

Cincinnati Professional Practice Schools have the tri-fold purpose of supporting student success, providing induction to beginning teachers and professional development for experienced teachers, and promoting inquiry into the improvement of practice. Our PPS also strive to attain the Holmes Partnership's professional development school principles:

1. Teaching and learning for understanding.
2. Creating a learning community.
3. Teaching and learning for understanding for everybody's children.
4. Continuing learning by teachers, teacher educators, and administrators.
5. Thoughtful long term inquiry into teaching and learning.

Additionally, our partnerships have been participating in the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education's pilot for the Professional Development Standards.

Key Partnership Representatives

University of Cincinnati:
Lawrence Johnson, Interim Dean College of Education
Arlene Harris Mitchell, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, College of Education

Cincinnati Federation of Teachers:
Tom Mooney, President
Denise Hewitt, Professional Issues Representative

Cincinnati Public Schools:
Steven Adamowski, Superintendent
Kathleen Ware, Associate Superintendent

For more information about these exemplary practices, contact:

Dr. Arlene Harris Mitchell, Assoc. Dean for Academic Affairs
University of Cincinnati
College of Education
P.O. Box 210002
Cincinnati, OH 45221-0002
Phone: (513)-556-2327
Fax: (513)-556-2483

[Return to Exemplary Practices]