District support of alternative permit teachers for increasing efficacy and retention

Abstract

With a rise of alternative permit (AltPermit) teachers coming to education, many have little to no preparation or self-efficacy for the demands needed to support all learners. Low teacher efficacy is associated with high rates of attrition. As a result, districts throughout the United States struggle to retain the teachers they recruit and hire for these hard-to-fill positions. Using a mixed-methods approach, teacher efficacy and retention of AltPermit P-12 new hires is examined in one of the largest districts in California. The district provided year-long supports to impact teacher efficacy and retention. Although survey results did not show a statistically significant impact on teacher efficacy, document analysis indicated positive retention trends and recruitment of more ethnically diverse teachers as compared to the district’s overall teacher population. Interviews illustrated positive perceptions of district supports as a means to increase teacher efficacy and job retention, particularly for special education teachers.

Keywords

alternative permit teachers district new teacher support emergency teaching credentials K–12 education new teachers teacher efficacy teacher retention

Objective

Declining teacher retention rates and budget cuts across US public schools has contributed to an ongoing national teacher shortage (Ingersoll and Smith, 2003; Leechman et al., 2017). Reports show a decrease of those entering the teaching profession (King, 2018; US Department of Education, 2015) and staying in the profession (Grundy, 2018). Enrolment into traditional teaching programs has dwindled to almost half (California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC), 2019; Darling-Hammond et al., 2018).

Under Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), districts recruit and retain teachers who meet state certification and licensure requirements (US Department of Education, 2018). ESSA Title II funding allows districts to develop plans to train and support teachers at its discretion (King, 2018). Many new teachers have been given an alternative permit (AltPermit) based on their state’s requirements (California CTC, 2019), without having classroom experience, other than their education, with minimal coursework towards credential (Adamson and Darling-Hammond, 2012; Carver-Thomas and Darling-Hammond, 2017). This lack of preparation and experience has contributed to teacher turnover at a costly expense to districts (Guha et al., 2016).

Due to this lack of preparation and experience and districts’ desire to retain quality teachers, the purpose of this study was to contribute to the limited body of knowledge of teachers hired with an AltPermit. This research analysed outcomes and perspectives of AltPermit hires, given district-supports in one large, urban district in California. Research shows that quality training and preparation is imperative to a teacher’s overall success (California CTC, 2019; Darling-Hammond et al., 2018) and retention (Guha et al., 2016). This district’s support provided AltPermit teachers in fulfilling CTC guidelines, university coursework and district expectations for increased teacher efficacy and long-term employment. Support included on-ramping orientation with district personnel and university partners, an assigned mentor for the duration of their permit, district-wide classroom management training, online credential progress monitoring (CPM) and monthly and voluntary professional development.

This mixed-methods study centres on the following research questions:

Is there a difference in perception of teacher efficacy of those newly hired into teaching positions on AltPermits before and after receiving district driven on-ramping supports?

What are the perceptions of the support provided by district driven on-ramping supports?

On teacher efficacy?

On pursuing a preliminary teaching credential?

Is there a difference in retention of those newly hired into teaching positions on AltPermit after participating in district-driven on-ramping supports?

Perspectives

Research shows that teacher quality is the number one most critical factor in student achievement (Darling-Hammond et al., 2018; Leechman et al., 2017). A teacher preparation program that is well-designed to provide ongoing experiential learning (Kolb, 1984; Kolb et al., 2001) can develop exceptional, successful, long-term teachers (Guha et al., 2016) with a stronger sense of self-efficacy, correlating to increased student learning and well-being (Klassen and Chiu, 2010; Rockoff et al., 2008). Although AltPermit teachers lack experience and formal training as compared to their fully credentialed counterparts, they are, none-the-less, expected to plan for and provide quality instruction in a positive learning environment (Marzanno et al., 2003; Sprick, 2009), meanwhile ensuring they meet credential completion requirements within a time-bound process. While state structures differ, all have established standards and program requirements to obtain a teaching credential, including subject matter competency exams (California CTC, 2019). California reports a 68.4% pass rate (Suckow, 2018), affecting districts who have hired AltPermit teachers. Accordingly, districts that hire these teachers must take methodical experiential measures to ensure they meet requirements by deadlines to build efficacy, ensure student success and remain in the profession.

Experiential learning theories

Experiential learning theory (Kolb, 1984) defines adult learning as ‘the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience…[and] results from the combination of grasping and transforming experience’ (p. 41) either through reflective observation or active experimentation. With multiple combinations of these modes of experience, experiential learning theory accounts for the various learning styles as well as the myriad of contexts for which learning can occur (Kolb, 1984; Kolb et al., 2001).

For the purpose of this study, experiential learning theory supports the investigation into AltPermit teachers’ perceptions of training and support on the job. Darling-Hammond (2010), a leading expert in teacher preparation and development, reiterates, ‘One thing that is clear from current studies of strong programs is that learning to practice in practice, with expert guidance, is essential to becoming a great teacher of students with a wide range of needs’ (p. 39). Several studies also report that increased teaching experience, particularly events in which utilized strategies lead to student success, correlated with an increased sense of self-efficacy in those teachers (e.g. Skaalvik and Skaalvik, 2007; Tschannen-Moran and Hoy, 2001, 2007).

Teacher efficacy

The construct of teacher efficacy framing this study is the self-perception a teacher holds regarding their level of ability to affect the success of their students (Tschannen-Moran and Hoy, 2001, 2007). Based on the foundational work in self-efficacy, the beliefs one has regarding their capacity to influence the outcomes of specific life or work situations – the perceived level of self-efficacy positively correlates to the cognitive, affective, motivational and self-selection process behaviours one displays (Bandura, 1977, 1982, 2000, 2012). Teacher efficacy has been correlated with other characteristics of effective teachers such as increased student achievement, job satisfaction, retention and increased supervisory ratings (e.g. Dembo and Gibson, 1985; Klassen and Chiu, 2010; Rockoff et al., 2008). Teacher efficacy, based on the use of the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES) short form (Tschannen-Moran and Hoy, 2001), will be one measure used in this study to determine next steps. Findings reflect the self-perception of capacity based on previous and current on-the-job learning of student engagement, instructional strategies and classroom management.

Methods and data sources

The mixed-methods survey, interview and archived data of the research district delved into teacher efficacy of a population of 142 AltPermit new teachers purposively selected (Johnson and Christensen, 2017) for a district on-ramping initiative as an intervention held in the Fall of 2018. The pre-post quantitative data collection utilized Tschannen-Moran and Hoy’s (2001) TSES Likert-style survey to capture an overall rating for teacher efficacy. The overall rating is composed of the following three constructs that were also analysed: efficacy in student engagement (engagement), instructional strategies (instruction) and classroom management (management). Respondents were asked at the close of the survey to volunteer for follow-up phone interviews to inform the quantitative survey and archived data review findings. Interviews produced perceptions on district supports and their impact on pursuing their preliminary credential and teacher efficacy by the end of the academic year. Archived data review of AltPermit hires and retention rates over 4 years were reviewed and analysed.

Survey instrument

The 20-item instrument consisted of 12 Likert-type questions directly from Tschannen-Moran and Hoy’s (2001) TSES short form and eight categorical demographic questions (see Appendix for reliability). The Likert-type questions were rated on a nine-point scale (1 = none at all, 3 = very little, 5 = some degree, 7 = quite a bit and 9 = a great deal) based on four respective perceptual questions to the degree the participant felt they could make an impact on each sub-construct (engagement, instruction and management). The collected demographics included (1) school assignment context (urban, suburban, rural), (2) grade level (elementary, middle, high school), (3) content area (self-contained/general subjects, math, English, social studies, sciences, electives/enrichment, physical education), (4) alternative teaching permit type (short-term staff permit (STSP), provisional intern permit (PIP), other), (5) gender and (6) ethnicity/race.

Data collection

The TSES pre-post survey was distributed electronically via Qualtrics. The first collection, managed by the university researcher, was voluntarily gathered in a window from August through September 2018 during face-to-face paid district on-ramping sessions provided to many AltPermit teachers hired for the 2018–2019 school year in the research district as it was voluntary. Demographic information, as per district Institutional Review Board, was not able to be collected from survey participants. The demographics of the population (N = 142) were provided in the human resources (HR) documents discussed in Archived Data. The post-survey was distributed via email only by the university researcher to all AltPermit teachers remaining with the district (N = 124) during a window from April through May 2018. Participation rate for the pre-survey was high (67.6%, N = 142, n = 96), while the post-survey rate declined significantly (17.7%, N = 124, n = 22), most likely due to the lack of face-to-face interaction as was the case with the pre-survey and the time of year during statewide assessments.

Data analysis

An independent t-test by pre- and post-test was used to analyse results for significant differences in overall mean teacher efficacy and by sub-construct (engagement, instruction and management). Validity limited due to a decrease of post-test response rate and subgroups by demographics were too small for individual statistical analyses.

Interview protocol

Seven, volunteer one-on-one semi-structured phone interviews were conducted by the university researcher to build confidentiality between employer and employee, thus eliciting more candid responses. The university researcher, not employed by the district, assured participants that all identifiable information from the interview transcripts would be removed prior to the district researcher’s analysis protocol. Nine of the 30 post-survey respondents indicated an interest in being interviewed. Seven agreed to engage in the interview process. Demographics shared in the results below.

The interview consisted of seven semi-structured open-response questions to capture the perceptions of the participants’ experience with district supports toward pursuing their preliminary credentials and perceptions of growth in teacher efficacy based on their classroom context as an AltPermit teacher. After building rapport with respondents by asking them to share their current teaching assignment and credential status, predetermined questions with follow-ups as needed were asked in a conversational style. The next set of questions were rooted in experiential learning (Kolb et al., 2001) and teacher efficacy (Tschannen-Moran and Hoy, 2001). The first three inquired into participant feelings on their ability, as new AltPermit teachers, to generally increase engagement, instruction and management in their classrooms. The next three questions focused on how their experiences with the district provided on-ramping supports assisted the participants’ abilities, if at all, to increase engagement, instruction and management in their classrooms. Each of those had a follow-up component asking participants to provide thoughts on what additional supports would be beneficial for increasing ability in those three areas for future new AltPermit teachers. The next questions asked how their experiences with the district provided on-ramping supports assisted the participants, if at all, in pursuing their teaching credential and what they felt was the most influential part of the on-ramping supports as a new AltPermit teacher and why.

As a closing question, participants were asked for thoughts on what they believed would be the most critical support districts could provide newly hired AltPermit teachers.

Response transcriptions

Interviews were recorded with verbal consent using the transcription application Rev on a smartphone and uploaded through the application for transcription services. Transcriptions were downloaded from the service website upon notification of completion within a 3-day window.

Qualitative analysis

The analysis was conducted by researchers to control for coding reliability (Gibbs, 2007). Deductive coding (Saldaña, 2015) was used based on the areas of teacher efficacy in engagement, instruction and management, along with perceptions on district support in the pursuit of the preliminary credential. From this, axial coding was used to analyse relationships and themes within the respective more extensive priori codes. Engagement and management were then merged as one code for analyses as responses indicated that participants did not distinguish these as separate constructs.

Archived data

District trend data calculations and demographics of AltPermit teachers dating back four academic years to 2015/2016 were provided. While the information included several data points outside the scope of the research, which may lead to further research, it afforded the context regarding the types of individuals hired for AltPermit positions. The researchers also used the data to delimit the first-year AltPermit hires by academic hire year and respective releases/retentions.

Data analysis

Numbers were analysed for observable trends in relative percent change by academic year between current year AltPermit teachers and numbers those retained at the end of the current year. Descriptives on the demographics of ethnicity (Hispanic, African American, Asian, White, Other), gender (F, M, Other), age (20–24, 25–34, 35–44, 45–54, 55+) and AltPermit type (PIP, STSP) were also analysed for contextual understanding.

Results and substantiated conclusions

Survey findings

In reference to Table 1, no significant difference (t(118) = −0.906, p = 0.181) was found in mean overall teacher efficacy by pre- (M = 7.20) and post-survey (M = 7.30). No significant difference (t(118) = 0.016, p = 0.493) was found in mean teacher efficacy in engagement by pre- (M = 7.29) and post-survey (M = 7.29). No significant difference (t(118) = −0.376, p = 0.354) was found in mean teacher efficacy in instruction by pre- (M = 7.14) and post-survey (M = 7.20). No significant difference (t(118) = −0.698, p = 0.243) was found in mean teacher efficacy in management by pre- (M = 7.17) and post-survey (M = 7.29).

Table 1.

Means, standard deviations and sample sizes for mean teacher efficacy overall and in engagement, behaviour, instruction by pre- and post-survey.

Teacher efficacy	Mean	Standard deviation	Sample size
Overall
Pre-survey	7.20	1.595	96
Post-survey	7.30	1.289	22
Engagement
Pre-survey	7.29	1.588	96
Post-survey	7.29	1.282	22
Behaviour
Pre-survey	7.27	1.548	96
Post-survey	7.29	1.312	22
Instruction
Pre-survey	7.14	1.649	96
Post-survey	7.20	1.249	22

Conclusion

Specific to research question one, there is no difference in perception of teacher efficacy of those newly hired into teaching positions on AltPermit before and after receiving district-driven on-ramping supports. Although researchers expected a significant impact, experiential learning in the context of the participants’ new jobs with multiple district supports only minimally increased observed mean participant perceptions of overall teacher efficacy (+0.10) using the TSES short form. The high ratings of teacher efficacy reported by the participants in the initial survey highlight the lack of experience and preparation of AltPermit teachers who had yet to deeply comprehend the complexities of the job and their role within it. The low-response rate of the post-test makes it difficult to draw valid conclusions. However, 18 (12.7%) AltPermit teachers who had been released from their positions by the time the post-test was opened were not captured in the post-test data. Knowing this, the post-test participants were those retained and would have had a stronger sense of efficacy as a whole. Likewise, those not released but struggling may not have desired not to participate, as they knew the content of the questions.

Interviews

Seven volunteers participated in one-on-one interviews with the university researcher to maintain employee confidentiality. All participants were female AltPermit teachers across a range of ethnicities (four Hispanic, one Asian, one African American, one White) and grade levels (five elementary, two secondary) with two in general and five in special educational settings. Demographics of age, school placement and type and content of AltPermit were not collected as protection of confidentiality for the employee (see Table 2).

Table 2.

Interview participants demographics.

Participant	Gender	Ethnicity/race	Educational setting
(1)	Female	Asian	Kindergarten, general education
(2)	Female	Hispanic	Third Grade, general education
(3)	Female	African American	Fifth/sixth Grade, special education
(4)	Female	Hispanic	Third/fourth Grade, special education
(5)	Female	White	Middle school, special education
(6)	Female	Hispanic	K/first/second, special education
(7)	Female	Hispanic	High school, special education

This participant pool, though each an AltPermit teacher with a range of grade-level experiences, had a specific female, special education lens. Additionally, the participants all were ones who had retained their teaching position during the academic year of the study and would be retained into the next school year. Although not generalizable, these interviewee volunteers and their responses provided a window into one of the most challenging educational contexts, teaching students with the greatest of needs. This information, thus, has value to consider for AltPermit teachers in various settings and the districts that serve them.

Upon the conclusion of interviews, several themes by priori codes emerged (see Table 3). Codes for engagement and management were merged as participant responses to these were synonymous, indicating participants perceived these together as one construct. As demonstrated in the interview responses, these AltPermit teachers did not grasp the nuances of both as distinct sub-constructs attributed to the overall lack of formal training and experience. One participant stated, for example, ‘Management? That is like the same thing as the engagement question. Isn’t it?’ Another stated, ‘I just think management is the same as engagement.it is all about staying on task for the kids. Well, I think anyway. I am sure I can…learn’.

Table 3.

Perceptions of district on-ramping support by code and themes.

Codes	Themes	Example statements
Engagement and management	District self-select professional development (PD) initially helpful	[PD] classes were very helpful being that it was my first year…for knowing how to manage my students and keeping them interested in learning… The [PD]classes were beneficial to me personally at first…to know my students and set up my classroom for positive reinforcement…
	District-wide classroom management training a strength	I had the [district training] for my classroom management, which I have been using pretty good…[It] did work for me because the students are familiar with it. Before I stepped foot in the classroom, I had a 2-day training…what is was and how to utilize it in my classroom…I have taken it whole-heartedly and use it everyday…the feedback from by direct admin is…I have the best classroom management at the school site.
	Assigned mentor teacher helpful and supportive when available	I have an amazing mentor on site…helping me in reaching all of our students and…their social emotional needs. …[my mentor] helps me out or if I have questions or just sometimes when I don’t know what to do [with student behaviours] and keeping them engaged…
Instruction	District self-selected PD on curriculum helpful	I got math training right away…because of that I am stronger in teaching math… …making sure…this is how you can write IEP goals and…how to do present levels with curriculum [for Special Education]…this helped me know what to do because I haven’t done any of this before.
Instruction	Mentors helpful	I went through the curriculum with my mentor and she showed me how to really get into the curriculum….put my own spin on it as long as I am still delivering the core content. I worked with my mentor individually and she checked in with me frequently…to make sure I was confident with what I was teaching…
Pursuing credential	District meetings on credential progress	At the beginning of the school year…it really took us through expectations that they had for us not only as a beginning teacher but to complete the program…
	CPM when supported by site admin, mentor or coach	…they were supportive and helpful…about what I needed to finish…to keep me on my toes for what I need to get done… …they put you on a plan that tells you this is what you are doing
	Networking with other AltPermit teachers helpful	and this is what you need to get done [towards the preliminary credential]. …the [CPM] multi-faceted…with a series of online questions .
	Flexible and communicative site admin/mentors help make less overwhelming	. . and I upload documents…to show I met requirements [towards preliminary credential]. My mentor checks in on me to make sure I am meeting my requirements on [CPM]…. Others at my site who had [AltPermits] were really helpful with what was important to know to finish on time. Just talking to other people in the same situation that I was in…that was really helpful for me [for pursuing my credential]. I don’t have to run [like others] to credential class [at the end of the work day]…my program is flexible because it is online which helps things not be so overwhelming and my site admin knows when I do have to leave…they tell me to do what I need to do to get my credential done. My direct feedback from my Principal and my mentor, that helps me feel good. You know, like not overwhelmed because I know I am on the right track for my credential and I know I can go to them if I need something or need to leave right after school.
Overall needs	Increase time and access to mentors/reduce feelings of being overwhelmed	We have a lot of support but…more time with mentors to come help you set up your classroom, your management, or to help you with difficult children… It would be good to have more time with [the mentor]…getting to actually see the instructional pieces to further that. …having the mentors more…to help new teachers with their budget and what to plan for…management, supplies, and curriculum things. I would like to have more opportunities to work this my mentor…There is so much to know that you don’t know when you never stepped foot in a classroom before.
	Need specialized training for teaching context	IEPs are totally new…I need more training on this for sure…[all Special Education] teachers do. IEPs are a killer…they take a lot of time
	Use and follow-up on district-initiated CPM	…more frequent check ins for the progress on [CPM]…that would help us stay on track better… Some people really had check ins with the [CPM] but I didn’t get that…maybe more district meetings to check in on the [CPM]…to stay focused…
	Clearly define expectations on attending self-selected PD for AltPermit hires	Some people did not attend trainings, and they should have to on an [AltPermit]…I mean so we are all held to the same standard… …I thought the PD was mandatory but others [with an AltPermit] said it wasn’t…in my Special Ed trainings the numbers went down…it was cancelled. But I needed the training…I needed so much help but people just were allowed to stop coming so I guess that should be clearer.
	Feel more efficacy when begin credential program	I didn’t know what I was doing [at first]…now that I am in my credential program…I feel so much more equipped. I hear that when we start the credential program, your student teaching, you get all the help that you need, like we don’t on an [AltPermit], like the lesson plans that you need to work on. That will really help.

Note: AltPermit: alternative permit; CPM: credential progress monitoring.

Six of the seven participants felt the district’s monthly voluntary professional development opportunities increased their efficacy in instruction and engagement/management, especially because they could self-select the training option based on need. All participants felt the district’s universal classroom management strategies training increased their efficacy for engaging and managing students because the students were already accustomed to these expectations and procedures. All also noted the importance of mentor support in engagement and management for developing efficacy. While two SpEd teachers had no access to their assigned mentor, they were regularly supported by site mentors. Instructional strategies, district self-selected PD and mentor support also surfaced as themes for increasing efficacy in this area.

In pursuit of their preliminary credential, participants felt the district supports of on-ramping, the CPM and the flexibility and communication of administrators and mentors towards their progress were integral to job retention. Networking among AltPermit teachers was another theme that surfaced for supporting timely credential progress and, ultimately, job retention.

Overall, the participants also noted several areas as essential supports for the district to continue or add to impact teacher efficacy and job retention. These included:

Increase of time and access to mentors,

Site support and regular district follow-up to reduce overwhelmedness,

Specialized training for trauma-informed practices and special education (i.e. understanding disabilities, Individualized Education Programs),

Use and follow-up on district-initiated CPM from site administration and HR and

Clearly defined expectations on attending self-selected PD for AltPermit hires.

Participants noted that outside of regular district supports, enrolling in a credential program as soon as possible would improve overall teacher efficacy and job retention. One noted, after just beginning her credential program earlier in the semester, ‘I really felt like I didn’t know what I was doing for a long time and now that I’m in the credential program…I feel so much more equipped’. Another participant mentioned, ‘I already know my [credentialing] timelines because I’ve asked…But I know people who…got the letter in April saying, ‘You’re not gonna be coming back because you haven’t met these requirements’’.

Conclusions

Although these interview participants were not a cross-cutting sample of the AltPermit teacher pool, their responses provided a window into one of the most challenging contexts in education. The majority of these female AltPermit teacher participants served students with special needs. Despite the lack of formal training and experience, taking extra professional development over the weekends as well as the added stressors of meeting criteria timelines, these AltPermit teachers retained their jobs. These are essential perspectives to consider for both districts and those in AltPermit pathways.

Overall perceptions of teacher efficacy and rates of job retention as a result of district supports were positive. Formally assigned mentorship to provide ongoing support was seen as critical to their overall success as an AltPermit teacher. Participants also placed a high value on district-wide training for increasing efficacy as new learning of strategies could be practiced in their classrooms, with positive results observed immediately. All participants stated the importance of enrolling in coursework early on; however, they mentioned feeling overwhelmed pursuing a preliminary teaching credential while working full-time as a teacher. Participant suggestions note ways to lower stress, increase efficacy in the classroom and maintain progress towards obtaining a preliminary credential within the 2-year timeline. Clearly, those choosing an alternative credential pathway must understand the challenges in front of them to succeed. Districts that choose to hire AltPermit teachers for hard-to-fill positions need to be committed with system resources to support their engagement, instruction and management needs for increasing teacher efficacy and credentialing timelines for retention.

Archived data

Trend data across four academic years (2015/2016 to 2018/2019) indicate over 80% retention of AltPermit hires within their first year (15/16 = 83.7%, 16/17 = 83.8%, 17/18 = 88.7%, 18/19 = 87.9%). A noticeable increase in overall retention from 2016/2017 to 2017/2018 (+4.9 percent change) remained relatively consistent in 2018/2019. In addition, there is an observed difference in alternating numbers of AltPermit new hires year to year (15/16 = 86, 16/17 = 142, 17/18 = 97, 18/19 = 132) (see Table 4).

Table 4.

Percent retained and percent change of alternatively permitted teacher hires and retention by academic year.

Academic year	AltPermit hires	AltPermit retained	Percent retained	Percent change
2018/2019	132	116	87.9	−0.8
2017/2018	97	86	88.7	+4.9
2016/2017	142	119	83.8	+0.1
2015/2016	86	72	83.7	—

Note: AltPermit: alternative permit.

Demographic data of AltPermit new hires included reporting on ethnicity, gender, age and AltPermit type. The overall ethnic breakdown of the population of AltPermit new hires (N = 142) was as follows: Hispanic (51, 35.9%), White (45, 31.7%), African American (22, 15.5%), Asian (19, 13.4%) and Other (4, 2.8%). The gender breakdown of the population included females (105, 73.9%), males (37, 26.1%) and no one identifying as Other. The number of AltPermit new hires by age range within the population was 15 (10.6%) from 20 to 24 years, 89 (62.7%) from 25 to 34 years, 28 (19.7%) from 35 to 44 years, 10 (7.0%) from 45 to 54 years and none from 55 or more years. The population consisted of 87 (61.3%) PIPs and 55 (38.7%) STSP AltPermit types.

Archived data on 2018/2019 district-wide demographics of students and teachers showed the following characteristics in the variables of ethnicity and gender. For students within the same school year, documents indicated 68.4% of students identified Hispanic, while 10.6% as Asian, 9.2% as White, 8.2% as Black or African American and 3.6% in Other categories. Student overall gender identification was documented as 51.1% male, 48.8% female and less than 1% Other. For reported teacher demographics in 2018/2019, 56.3% were White, 27.6% Hispanic, 9.8% Asian, 4.6% Black or African American and less than 1% in Other categories. Teacher gender identification from the same school year consisted of 72.7% female, 27.3% male and none in Other. See Table 5 for a presentation of side-by-side demographic findings for ethnicity and gender.

Table 5.

Side-by-side 2018/2019 percent ethnicity and gender by AltPermit teachers, overall teachers and students within the research district.

Demographics	AltPermit teachers (%)	Overall teachers (%)	Students (%)
Ethnicity
Hispanic	35.9	27.6	68.4
White	31.7	56.3	9.2
Black/African American	15.5	4.6	8.2
Asian	13.4	9.8	10.6
Other	2.8	<1	3.6
Gender
Female	73.9	72.7	48.8
Male	26.1	27.3	51.1
Other	—	—	<1

Note: AltPermit: alternative permit.

Conclusion

In response to research question three, there is no observed difference in retention of those newly hired into teaching positions on AltPermit after participating district-driven on-ramping supports beginning in the 2018/2019 academic year. Further research into factors associated with the close to 5% increase in retention of newly hired AltPermit teachers in 2017/2018 and exploration into the every other year increase of the number of first-year AltPermit teachers hired are warranted.

The analysis of the population context of the research study revealed interesting findings on the demographics coming to the teaching profession in an alternative route as well as in comparison to the current teaching force and student population. Those coming to the profession through AltPermits, in this study context, fell mostly in two age brackets (25–34 years, 35–44 years). That would indicate second careers, re-entry into the workforce after a break in service or a student who took longer than 4 years to complete a bachelor’s degree. Furthermore, the ethnicity of the AltPermit population was more diverse than the district teaching force, particularly in Hispanic, Black or African American and Asian teachers. Conversely, gender comparisons across the groups highlight the prevailing trend in education, with more than the majority of teachers coming to the profession identifying as female. Although a challenging route requiring commitments from both the teacher and the district, the AltPermit pathway seems to be a way of recruiting and retaining a more diverse teaching population.

Practical implications

This initial study was to determine the effects on retention rates and efficacy of first-year AltPermit teachers within a large urban school district in California. As with many districts in California, this district has been challenged in hiring fully credentialed teachers in hard-to-fill courses. Their lack of experience and the demand for adhering to time-bound state requirements have produced a quagmire of issues to train, support and retain them adequately. This district sought to improve the retention and efficacy of AltPermit teachers through numerous supports and in partnership with several universities that offer diverse learning/credentialing platforms.

Furthermore, this AltPermit pathway did recruit more ethnically diverse teachers to the district. More effort should be given to increase the recruitment and retention of Hispanic teachers aligned with student demographics, which is also true for recruiting and retaining male and SpEd teachers.

Given the day-to-day complexities of instruction, and policy and compliance needs that drive the work of teachers in special education, the findings indicate a particular need to support AltPermit teachers in this setting. Leadership should consider ways to leverage finances and human capital to provide consistent and skilled mentors to support these teachers in special education. Furthermore, all AltPermit teachers should have ongoing professional development and mentorship specific to successful classroom management implementation.

To ensure more dynamic recruitment, training and retention of AltPermits hires, districts must strive to plan for a broad support system. The plan must encompass specific and intensive professional development opportunities, quality ongoing mentorship, CPM with feedback, connection to site administration, HR and teacher development as a means to make AltPermit teachers feel a valuable part of the system.

Likewise, AltPermit teachers must recognize that this pathway is challenging at best. However, these new teachers should invest in professional developments, networking with colleagues and pursuing their credential within timelines. By increasing teacher efficacy, supplying more opportunities to practice in practice, and beginning credentialing coursework, the odds of retention are greatly increased for these AltPermit new hires.

Scholarly significance

The impact of these findings contributes to the research on what AltPermit teachers perceive as supports to cultivate efficacy and how recruitment of AltPermit teachers can diversify the current teaching forces. To further develop this body of knowledge, research into the perspectives of male and general education teachers, as well as those not retained in their positions, are critical to understand the broader narrative of the alternative pathway to teaching.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported, in part, by the Kremen School of Education and Human Development Dandoy Faculty Research Awards Committee and the Division of Research and Graduate Studies at California State University, Fresno.

ORCID iD

Nichole Walsh

Appendix

Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001) reported the following reliability:

Overall excellent (α = 0.90),

Engagement good (α = 0.81),

Instruction good (α = 0.86),

Management good (α = 0.86).

References

Adamson

Darling-Hammond

(2012) Funding disparities and the inequitable distribution of teachers: evaluating sources and solutions. Education Policy Analysis Archives 20: 37.

Bandura

(1977) Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review 80(2): 191–215.

Bandura

(1982) Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist 37(2): 122.

Bandura

(2000) Self-efficacy: The foundation of agency. Control of Human Behavior, Mental Processes, and Consciousness: Essays in Honor of the 60th Birthday of August Flammer. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, pp. 17–33.

Bandura

(2012) On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. Journal of Management 38(1): 9–44.

California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (2019) Teacher supply in California, 2017-18 A report to the legislature. In CTC: The CTC’s Teacher Credentialing Report. Commission on Teacher Credentialing, Sacramento, CA. Available at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED579161 (accessed on 27 March 2020).

Carver-Thomas

Darling-Hammond

(2017) Addressing California’s growing teacher shortage. Available at: https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/addressing-californias-growing-teacher-shortage-2017-update-report (accessed 27 March 2020).

Darling-Hammond

(2010) Evaluating teacher effectiveness: How teacher performance assessments can measure and improve teaching. Center for American Progress. Available at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED535859.

Darling-Hammond

Sutcher

Carver-Thomas

(2018) Teacher shortages in California: status, sources, and potential solutions, getting down to facts II. Available at: https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-files/GDTF_CATeacherShortage_BRIEF.pdf (accessed 27 March 2020).

10.

Dembo

Gibson

(1985) Teachers' sense of efficacy: An important factor in school improvement. The Elementary School Journal 86(2): 173–184.

11.

Gibbs

(2007) Thematic coding and categorizing. In: Gibbs

(ed.) Analyzing Qualitative Data, Thousand Oaks: Sage. pp. 38–56.

12.

Grundy

(2018) Where are our teachers going? In: U.S. Census Bureau (ed.). Available at: https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2018/05/teachers-leaving-workforce.html (accessed 27 March 2020).

13.

Guha

Hyler

Darling-Hammond

(2016) The teacher residency: an innovative model for preparing teachers. Available at: https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/teacher-residency (accessed 27 March 2020).

14.

Ingersoll

Smith

(2003) The wrong solution to the teacher shortage. Educational Leadership 60(8):30–33. Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/62eb/a3fb558446a652222515d542f1db53dd34a6.pdf (accessed 27 March 2020).

15.

Johnson

Christensen

(2017) Educational Research: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

16.

King

(2018) Colleges of education: a national report. American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. Available at: www.aacte.org (accessed 27 March 2020).

17.

Klassen

Chiu

(2010) Effects on teachers’ self-efficacy and job satisfaction: teacher gender, years of experience, and job stress. Journal of Educational Psychology 102(3):741.

18.

Kolb

(1984) Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

19.

Kolb

Boyatzis

Mainemelis

(2001) Experiential learning theory: previous research and new directions. In: Sternberg

Zhang

(eds.) Perspectives on Thinking, Learning, and Cognitive Styles. New York: Rutledge, Taylor and Francis, pp. 227–247.

20.

Leechman

Masterson

Figueroa

(2017) A punishing decade for school funding. Available at: http://ramona4tx.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/School-Funding-Policy-Report.pdf (accessed 24 March 2007).

21.

Marzanno

Marzano

Pickering

(2003) Classroom Management That Works, Alexandra: ASCD.

22.

Rockoff

Jacob

Kane

, et al. (2008) Can you recognize an effective teacher when you recruit one? NBER Working Paper No. 14485. The National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA. DOI: 10.1162/EDFP_a_00022.

23.

Saldaña

(2015) The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

24.

Skaalvik

(2007) Dimensions of teacher self-efficacy and relations with strain factors, perceived collective teacher efficacy, and teacher burnout. Journal of Educational Psychology 99(3): 611–625.

25.

Sprick

(2009) CHAMPS: A Proactive and Positive Approach to Classroom Management. Eugene: Pacific Northwest Publishing, INC.

26.

Suckow

(2018) Annual report card on California teacher preparation programs for the academic year 2016-2017 as required by Title II of the Higher Education Act, California Commission on Teacher Credentialing. Available at: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED592981.pdf (accessed 27 March 2020).

27.

Tschannen-Moran

Hoy

(2001) Teacher efficacy: capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education 17(7):783–805.

28.

Tschannen-Moran

Hoy

(2007) The differential antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education 23(6): 944–956.

29.

US Department of Education (2018) Every student succeeds act. Available at: https://www.ed.gov/essa (accessed 27 March 2020).

30.

US Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education (2015) Enrollment in teacher preparation programs: higher education act Title II reporting system, brief. Available at: https://title2.ed.gov/Public/44077_Title_II_Issue_Brief_Enrollment_V4a.pdf (accessed 27 March 2020).