Toward teacher residency program implementation: navigating the complexities

Abstract

Purpose

Research in this field is becoming increasingly clear that a teacher residency program (TRP) has a strong potential for developing effective teachers in a teacher preparation context. There are specific features of a TRP that yield results in the development of teachers. However, there are often barriers to full implementation of a TRP that schools and university partnerships must consider and resolve. The purpose of this article is to disseminate the lessons we have learned and processes we have developed in navigating the barriers and complexities of shifting toward a TRP.

Design/methodology/approach

The university faculty members with a dual role as Professional Development School (PDS) liaisons examine, reflect on, and present their multiyear process of moving from an undergraduate traditional teacher preparation model to a teacher residency model.

Findings

In response to the barriers of funding, defining roles and responsibilities, and changes in leadership, we developed an undergraduate residency blueprint to navigate these challenges productively. One of the goals of this document is to provide clarity for all stakeholders as well as be a transparent solution for leadership transitions. The blueprint serves as a guide for the details of residency program design.

Originality/value

In movement toward a TRP, there are often barriers to full implementation that schools and university partnerships must consider and resolve. This article provides a model for partnerships seeking to navigate teacher residency work.

Citation

Mazzye, D.L. and Gujarati, J. (2024), "Toward teacher residency program implementation: navigating the complexities", PDS Partners: Bridging Research to Practice, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 34-49. https://doi.org/10.1108/PDSP-09-2023-0033

Introduction

Sweeping across the educational systems of the United States of America is a teacher shortage that is impacting the quality of education for many young learners. According to the National Center for Educational Statistics (2022), four percent of all public school teaching positions were left vacant. The average American school had two unfilled teaching positions. About 18% of schools had one teaching vacancy and 27% had multiple vacancies. Additionally, high-poverty schools had a greater percentage of unfilled positions (57%) than more affluent schools (41%) (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2022).

As highly effective teachers are leaving schools, and teaching positions are filled with under-qualified, sometimes uncertified personnel, student achievement is impacted (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2019). Traditional models of teacher preparation, where candidates have isolated field experiences and limited mentoring, are not equipping teachers to meet the increasingly complex needs of students in this educational climate. Since teacher quality has shown to be the greatest factor impacting student achievement (Gujarati, 2012; Rice, 2003), teacher attrition impacts more than just students’ academic achievements, and can have an emotional impact as well. This attrition can affect the overall development and stability of learning communities within schools.

Attrition creates a deficit in educational resources. With attrition comes the undertaking of finding, hiring, and inducting new teachers (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2019). However, the question is not just how do we recruit more teachers, but how do we retain them in the profession? Teacher residency programs (TRPs) provide a possible solution to issues of retention and teacher quality.

We are faculty who serve in a dual role as Professional Development School (PDS) liaisons and are in the process of moving a traditional model undergraduate childhood education program to a TRP. According to our university/district contract, a PDS liaison commits to working collaboratively with the superintendent, principal, and teachers in the school as a designated PDS, to document student performance, and to sustain progress toward meeting the mutually agreed upon PDS goals. Our work is centered on NAPDS Essential 2: Clinical Preparation. In this article, we describe and reflect on the movement toward a TRP with two of our most established PDS partnerships, in what we will refer to as Districts A and B. Both districts are located in small cities in rural communities. Our undergraduate childhood teacher education programs moved to a clinically enhanced model (Mazzye & Duffy, 2021; Parker, Groth, & Byers, 2019) in District A first, where our teacher candidates complete a three full day/week semester-long practicum prior to student teaching and remain with their same mentor teacher for both semesters. Shortly after, District B adopted this clinically enhanced model while teaching courses onsite. In District A, teacher candidates have recently been placed in all five elementary schools within the district for their practicum and student teaching experiences. In District B, teacher candidates are generally concentrated in one elementary school for both experiences. The purpose of this article is to disseminate the lessons we have learned and processes we have developed in navigating the barriers and complexities of shifting toward a TRP.

Teacher residency program defined

The National Center for Teacher Residencies (2023) provides a residency model definition:

Residency model blends a rigorous full-year classroom apprenticeship for pre-service teachers with academic coursework that is closely aligned with the classroom experience. Teacher residents learn how to teach by working for an entire year alongside a highly trained, supported mentor teacher in the school district where the teacher resident will eventually work. Teacher residency programs typically require that candidates commit to teach in the school for a minimum of three years (para 2).

This definition provides a framework for the residency model which encapsulates our work around TRPs. The residency model of preparation is often interpreted differently in various contexts offering some flexibility in the definition. The innovative nature of TRPs allows for a collaborative development of a third space (Mazzye, Duffy, & Etopio, 2022; Zeichner, 2010) between districts and universities which can be unique for individual contexts where teacher preparation occurs. A third space within the residency model offers a space for collaboration between district and university where the hierarchies of power and privilege collapse and an intentional linking of teaching theories and practices are aligned for the benefit of resident development. The essence of a TRP is reflective, responsive, and recursive as deep knowledge of the context and content are generated. In the third space of learning all stakeholders including district leaders, mentors, residents, and university faculty members have a voice in the development of the residency (Mazzye et al., 2022). The third space context of a TRP also fosters an environment of learning and support for residents and mentor teachers. Yet, there are key features of residency that should be adhered to in order to maintain the efficacy of the model, such as a one-year school experience beside a high-quality mentor teacher, a cohort model, coursework aligned with practical application, and shifts in university faculty roles. Applying the key features of quality TRPs has potential to result in the development of high-quality teachers and an increase in teacher retention (Mazzye, Duffy, & Lamb, 2023).

Benefits of a residency model from three perspectives

The current teacher shortage and academic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has motivated the schools to look toward a residency model of teacher preparation to enhance teacher retention and provide hiring and induction benefits (TNTP, 2022). According to several principals and administrators in one of our longest PDS partnerships, benefits of a residency model include teachers being trained in the most current practices and initiatives, such as implementing evidence-based practices based on the Science of Reading. The TRP also allows for shared decision-making between the schools and the university. Finally, it gives the district a potential pool of candidates from which to hire.

From the mentor teachers’ perspective in this same partnership, the benefits of teacher residency include teacher candidates building strong relationships with faculty, staff, and students over the course of the year, providing extra support in the classroom which can allow for smaller group sizes, and sharing the most current scientific-based research with mentor teachers and other faculty and staff in the buildings. The university also sees great benefits in the residency model with the immersive school experience, cohort model, funding for residents, in-depth mentoring, and greater consistency in quality and commitment of mentor teachers. Additionally, mentors can be invited to be guest speakers on areas of their expertise and candidates’ needs within the university courses, which allows candidates to see the mentors in university spaces. Although stakeholders involved are on board with a move toward residency, there are some barriers that need to be navigated for a residency model to be fully realized.

Barriers

One of the primary concerns is the complexity of funding required to navigate the additional roles of university faculty, mentor teachers, and residents. There is a greater investment of time for stakeholders than other more traditional models of teacher preparation, and ethics require that individuals are respectfully compensated for their work. Further, it is essential that funding is sustainable, rather than year-to-year grant applications, in order to move the work toward permanence (Bank Street College: Prepared to Teach, 2020).

With the designation of funds comes the delegation of leadership roles and responsibilities to move the residency work forward. The expansion of the university faculty role is notable and requires a greater intensity of school-based collaboration and leadership. It is essential that roles are defined within the partnership so that shared benefits are achieved for all stakeholders.

Another barrier to navigate is changes in leadership at both the university and district levels. Since we first started the conversations about a move toward residency two years ago, we now have a new department chairperson and dean in our School of Education at the university level, and several new principals and superintendents at the district level. Each change in leadership decelerates the momentum of our move forward with the necessity of inducting new participants in the decision-making process and securing their buy-in.

Blueprint to navigate barriers

In response to the barriers of funding, defining roles and responsibilities, and changes in leadership, we developed an undergraduate residency blueprint to navigate these challenges productively. The blueprint was developed following a review of the research on TRPs by one of the authors (Mazzye et al., 2022). In this review, effective features of TRPs were highlighted. This literature directly informed the design of the blueprint for the undergraduate childhood program to create a third space environment of teacher preparation. Additionally, our university department already has a master’s degree residency program in partnership with an urban district. Having this graduate program assisted in the identification of some of the needed roles and responsibilities within an undergraduate residency program. Further, the depth of our mature PDS partnerships that have existed for decades in the partnership schools allowed for practical knowledge of the contexts to inform the planning. With this background knowledge, two university faculty members with dual roles as PDS liaisons wrote the blueprint.

The blueprint for developing the residency has two main sections: a timeline for action items to be completed over the course of two years and a role, responsibility, and funding description. One of the goals of this document is to provide clarity for all stakeholders as well as be a transparent solution for leadership transitions. A second goal is to provide a “to do” list for action items that need to be accomplished prior to the residency pilot. The blueprint is serving as a guide to design the residency third space. It is designed with the intention that secondary, more specific documents are developed that provide attention to detail around policies, such as resident and mentor selection processes, attendance policies, mentoring procedures, research, etc. (see Appendix 1).

In order to achieve funding for the residency program in our context, we needed two district partners to participate in an agreement to be qualified for reimbursed state funding for the district (the funding is called a CoSer – Cooperative Services Agreement). In this context, the district funds the first year of compensating the residents and mentors, and then in subsequent years a significant portion is reimbursed through the state funding. These funds are designated to pay residents as teaching assistants within the districts and provide mentor teachers with a significant stipend to compensate for their participation in professional development and investment of a yearlong mentorship of a resident.

The PDS liaisons in both districts are preparing the leadership teams to have a deeper understanding of the residency model through participation in professional development around TRPs. Additionally, both districts presented their work at recent National Association for Professional Development Schools (NAPDS) Conferences to disseminate their learning around being mentors in a program moving toward teacher residency. To provide specifics for one of the districts designated for this residency pilot (District A), members of this PDS leadership team, which included administrators, principals, teachers, and university faculty, came together for a monthly book study to engage with A Case for Change in Teacher Preparation: Developing Community-Based Residency Programs (Gorlewski et al., 2021). Members of the PDS leadership team agreed upon this publication because it detailed successes and challenges that this university went through in reconceptualizing their teacher education program based on a teacher residency model, and we wanted to learn from their model to inform ours. We read two chapters for each meeting and filled out a book study discussion form prior to each meeting to be used as a springboard to our discussions. The form consisted of discussion points, lessons learned, a powerful passage/quote, and enduring questions. This work facilitated a co-constructed vision of what residency might look like within this PDS partnership.

Based on our takeaways from this book study and connected mentoring experiences, we created a district-specific blueprint (see Appendix 2 for a template) to be used as a springboard for us to envision what residency might look like in this partnership. This blueprint was an outgrowth of the university blueprint described earlier. In this district-specific blueprint, we noted our ideas for what we perceive as benefits of a residency model from the three perspectives described earlier: principals and administrators, teachers, and university faculty. We began to think about our selection criteria for school sites, mentor teachers, and teacher residents. Additionally, we developed some preliminary ideas for professional development for mentor teachers and teacher residents.

Lessons learned: recommendations for other contexts

After this multiyear endeavor, we are pleased to report that a written agreement is being formally developed to actualize this work toward an undergraduate teacher residency model. The complexities of this work are finally culminating with a plan for a residency pilot. Since the nature of the residency program is complex with recursive reflection and revision embedded, we are not so naive to think the work is complete, but rather anticipate future barriers and complexities waiting for us to navigate. This journey has provided us with crucial learning that has bolstered our ability and confidence to problem solve through the complexities of the residency model. Subsequently, we are more equipped to overcome barriers. Based on our experiences, for those considering developing a residency program, here are some lessons we have learned along the way that might assist you on your journey.

Funding

Currently, there is a national movement in teacher preparation to shift programs toward teacher residencies. This momentum fostered a catalyst for a plethora of grant funding at the federal and state levels (National Education Association and American Federation of Teachers, 2022). While there are clear advantages for seed money and upstart costs to shift a program toward this model, ideally there should be a vision toward sustainable funding. An option for sustainable funding is to reallocate Title 1 monies. As school districts obtain the advantage of invested residents for an entire year, there is the opportunity to shift funds for teaching assistant hiring and substitute teaching toward the residency model funding. For example, one principal shared with us that if she has a resident in a room, she does not need a teaching assistant, especially in times of teacher/teacher assistant shortage. The use of the residency model to support children in classrooms with deeply invested adults can be effective. Additional creative funding can examine substitute teaching monies. If residents are salaried for the year within a district, and only enrolled in coursework during the semesters, between semester-time frames could be utilized for substitute teaching roles. There are many creative ways to reallocate district funds to support residency implementation.

Defining roles and responsibilities

Within a partnership that traditionally held hierarchical roles, allocating roles and responsibilities is crucial to co-constructing a shared vision for a TRP among the university, district administrators and principals, mentor teachers and other constituents. The residency calls for the development of a collaborative third space for teacher preparation, which needs more clearly defined boundaries for roles. As the NAPDS Essential 8: Boundary-Spanning Roles articulates, the need for clearly defined roles in P-12 and the university contexts is critical to move our work forward. As we developed the blueprint, the initial phase included conversations with the district leaders to listen to their perspectives regarding roles and responsibilities. After the draft was crafted, we met with district leaders to incorporate their feedback and revision suggestions. Documenting these roles and responsibilities is essential to setting clear expectations and implementing the residency according to the plan. One of our district partner principals even stated that one of the benefits of a residency model is shared decision-making. Too often in education we work in silos but to make this move toward a residency program, we needed to be involved in collaborative decision-making. Defining and determining what is the university responsibility, district responsibility, and shared responsibilities are essential. Further, a structure for communication needed to be established for all constituents, including university faculty, residency coordinator, district administrator, district level contact person, mentor teachers, supervisors, etc. to maintain consistency throughout the program (see Appendix 1). We strongly recommend that regular meetings are held with clear agendas, where perspectives are shared and documents for procedures and policy are co-designed.

Changing leadership

During this process, we experienced the turbulence of the pandemic and multiple leadership resignations and retirements that resulted in hiring new leadership that needed to be educated on the benefits of a TRP. It is probable that over the time it takes to develop a residency that there will be leadership shifts in your context as well. We found that it was helpful to have a few tools to quickly provide history and context for new leadership.

One such tool was a “teacher residency model presentation” that one of the university faculty members developed to provide a definition of the teacher residency models, how they differed from the traditional models of preparation, and benefits of a residency model based on research. This was shared with department faculty members and district leaders on multiple occasions. Further, book studies and articles were regularly shared with stakeholders to continue learning about the residency model. One example of confusion that we navigated was around the essential element of a cohort model within a residency program. This was overlooked at the university level during a leadership transition. Meetings were required with stakeholders to provide explanations to reach an understanding of the cohort model. We have found that educating all residency team members is a recursive process and that basic and in-depth residency concepts need to be regularly communicated.

Another way we disseminated information about residency was through a showcase video. Due to yearly administrative shifts (e.g. new principals and new superintendents) in District A, members of our PDS leadership team decided to create a short video which detailed the origins of our PDS partnership and our move toward residency. The seven-minute video highlights some core features of a residency model from our perspective such as building strong relationships, co-teaching, and shared spaces. The impact of our partnership is shown through the images in the video and from hearing the voices of faculty, teacher candidates, and mentor teachers about why a residency model is so beneficial. We wanted to create this artifact so that anybody new to this PDS partnership could watch it and come away with a snapshot of the work we have done over time to determine how they could contribute to the existing historical work of the PDS partnership. We plan to add to the video each year.

Conclusions

From the lessons-learned that we have shared, we encourage those of you considering a residency model to build upon the blueprint that we created and apply it to your individual contexts. The development of a TRP can evolve from mature PDS partnerships. However, it requires a commitment to reflective, responsive, and recursive work to develop deep knowledge of the context and content to establish a third space of learning for all stakeholders (Zeichner, 2010). Rather than a siloed approach to teacher preparation, the education of students, preparation of teachers, and expansion of the knowledge base of mentors and university faculty benefit from bridging the perspectives of university and district stakeholders. The salient features of a residency (immersive resident learning, enhanced mentoring, and the development of third space for learning) should be incorporated in the development of the teacher residency program (Mazzye et al., 2022). Despite barriers and challenges, district and university stakeholders must persevere in their efforts to communicate, clarify, and collaborate to develop a program that effectively educates preservice teachers and P-12 students. For those who are in the midst of moving toward a teacher residency model and are navigating similar complexities, such as funding, defining roles and responsibilities, and changes in leadership, we recommend a collaborative development of a blueprint to frame your residency work. We welcome continued dialogue to move TRPs forward.

Table A1

Blueprint for an undergraduate teacher residency program

	Fall (one year before)	Spring	Summer	Fall (TR starts)	Spring	Summer
College responsibility	▪ Establish funding sources for: Instructors Supervisors Mentor Teachers ▪ Establish process for selecting teacher candidates to be teacher residents (TR) ▪ Determine course schedule ▪ Identify teacher residency coordinator; facilitate coordination/update policies and procedures in collaboration with student teaching coordinator (e.g. make decisions about roles and responsibilities and procedures around the residency experience)	▪ Interview and select TR. ▪ Identify course instructors	Instructors and supervisors complete TRP PD ▪ Program orientation ▪ Assessment systems/requirements for courses	Teach classes/TRs supervision ▪ LIT 314 (3 cr) ▪ EDU 430 A (Online, 1 cr) ▪ CED 394A (3 cr) CED-393 (2 cr) ▪ EDU 380 (3 cr)	Teach classes/TRs Supervision ▪ EDU 430 B (Online) (1 cr) ▪ CED 394B (1 cr) ▪ CED 420 (6 cr) ▪ Student teaching ▪ CED 421 (6 cr) Student teaching Graduation	Certification
Shared responsibility	▪ Create a “Residency Team” to include ▪ Appointing a “Teacher Residency Coordinator” from university faculty ▪ Appointing a district-level (one for each district) administrator who coordinates within the district ▪ Building level contact person ▪ Communicate funding source ▪ Sustainability plan	▪ Develop TR Handbook that is informed by and consistent with other formal guidance documents that include ▪ Job description for TR and MT (Clarify roles and responsibilities to TPP, district and assigned classroom) ▪ Substitute teaching protocol ▪ Timeline (length of residency) ▪ Attendance policy/sick leave ▪ Expectations for coursework (i.e. minimum grade requirements) and professional dispositions ▪ Determine transportation for TR. ▪ Create and submit Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) and other necessary forms to secure funding sources and satisfy legal requirements	▪ Campus and district leaders facilitate PD (e.g. the role of mentor) ▪ Pair mentor and TR ▪ Facilitate TR and MT completing paperwork for stipend ▪ Building an intervisitation schedule for TRs to visit other classrooms (and/or schools)	▪ MT and University supervisors collaborate to support candidates ▪ Classroom release for TR coursework one full day a week ▪ 3-fold evaluation: University faculty /Supervisor/Mentor teacher evaluations	▪ MT and University Supervisors collaborate to support candidates ▪ Classroom release for TR coursework one full day a week ▪ 3-fold evaluation: University Faculty /Supervisor/Mentor Teacher Evaluations	▪ Reflect and revise as needed
District responsibility	▪ Establish funding sources for ▪ Teacher residents ▪ Mentor teachers ▪ Building liaison ▪ Establish process for selecting mentor teachers ▪ Identify locations for the course to be held	▪ Select mentor teachers ▪ Identify classrooms for courses to be held	▪ Select mentor teachers ▪ Mentor teachers complete TRP PD ▪ Select location/classrooms for course instruction ▪ Provide access to technology, curriculum and necessary devices to perform their role successfully	▪ Mentor residents ▪ Immerse residents into school culture ▪ Collaborate with University faculty to support residents ▪ Pay resident stipend ▪ Pay mentor teacher stipend	▪ Continue responsibilities from the Fall	▪ Provide a context for career induction

Note(s): TR − Teacher residents

PD − Professional development

TRP − Teacher residency program

MT − Mentor teacher

Table A2

District specific details for a teacher residency program

Position/Role	Funding	Key duties within the education program	Goals as a part of the residency program	Additional notes
Teacher residency coordinator	University	▪ With department chair and student teaching coordinator, coordinates all courses being taught to ensure consistency across districts, especially the methods course; may or may not teach a course; frequently checks in with instructors/visits sites ▪ Amplify communication between supervisors, college faculty, mentor teachers, building leaders and candidates ▪ Coordinate documentation of placements/mentors with the Clinical Practices and Partnerships Office (CPPO) ▪ Make weekly visits to the schools where residents are placed; spend approximately six hours each week visiting schools to share information about residencies and collect information about how the mentors and residents are experiencing the residency program ▪ Assist in the selection of mentor teachers for future residents ▪ Per the department and college policies maintain records of the resident’s progress; approves prerequisite course requirements and answers program questions. ▪ Establish and facilitate TR team meetings regularly (at least three times each semester)	Articulate and support the goals and procedures of the teacher preparation residency model
District-level administrator	District	▪ Regularly meet with teacher residency coordinator ▪ Provide district support to residents including offering participation in Professional ▪ Development and access to technology IDs. introduction to district culture and expectations ▪ Meet with residency team as needed	Ensure alignment of perspectives between district and university
District-level contact	District ▪ CoSer	▪ Provide support for mentor teachers ▪ Facilitate building-level collaboration between administrators, mentors and residents ▪ Communicate with the teacher residency coordinator to ensure program success, problem solve and recursively develop future policies and program development ▪ Collaboratively plan PD with the residency coordinator ▪ Meet with other building-level contacts within the district to ensure program fidelity ▪ Meet with residency team as needed ▪ One meeting a week	Annotate and communicate challenges and successes within the TRP Communicate with district-level administrator and teacher residency coordinator to support recursive development of TRP
Mentor teacher	University (Student teaching mentor stipend) District Residency Mentor Stipend ▪ Coser	▪ Work as a team with the candidate to increase student learning ▪ Guide residents in assessing student learning, planning for instruction and teaching daily ▪ Participate in PD with the university ▪ Share knowledge, skills and dispositions that contribute to effective teaching ▪ Show your resident around the school (introductions to principal, nurse, secretary, counselors, custodian, etc.) ▪ Outline key school policies (COVID-19 policies, technology access, bathrooms, hallways, school routines and ID badges) ▪ Provide residents with a teacher workspace and place for their belongings ▪ Provide feedback and opportunities for growth for the resident ▪ Incorporate a residency-defined co-teaching model for instruction ▪ Set a routine for frequent feedback and communication ▪ Communicate questions, celebrations and concerns with university faculty ▪ Keep track of professional growth as a result of the residency ▪ Meet with residency team as needed	Daily, formative guidance focused on P-12 student learning	Building principal identifies effective, tenured, willing teachers to serve as mentor teachers; welcomes residents as part of the instructional team in the building; supports residency program and related professional learning
Teacher resident	District ▪ CoSer	▪ Follow district protocols for attendance and teacher hours ▪ Take initiative and become an active teacher in the classroom and throughout the building ▪ Demonstrate respect and responsiveness toward all people that you interact with ▪ Ask about and follow building logistics: parking, teacher hours, school routines, after-school experiences, COVID-19 regulations, etc.… ▪ Behave professionally (in dress, speech, conduct, online communication and writing) ▪ Demonstrate receptivity to feedback and incorporate feedback into future instruction ▪ Submit lesson plans to teachers 48 hours before teaching ▪ Provide mentors with information at least a week in advance about course assignments that require classroom time (e.g. lessons and assessments)	Successfully complete teacher preparation program to become a highly effective teacher
Student teaching supervisors	University	▪ Make 3–4 official visits per student teaching quarter to talk with, observe and assess resident teaching skills, knowledge and dispositions related to student teaching ▪ Provide support and guidance for mentor teachers and candidates and answer questions related to student teaching expectations ▪ Assess resident performance in the culminating course of the program (student teaching). Determine a satisfactory or unsatisfactory grade for student teaching, in accordance with established policy ▪ Assist in the selection of mentor teachers for future candidates ▪ Follow college policies for field placement supervision	“Summative assessment” Share expectations with residents, building leaders, mentor teachers and aligned faculty	The coordinator of student teaching supervisors oversees policy, procedures, communication and workshops directly related to student teaching. Troubleshoot problems with specific resident teachers
Methods professors during the residency	University	▪ In consultation with course lead/college faculty, develop course syllabi that align with approved course outlines and program assessments ▪ Teach the pedagogical knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge, skills and dispositions of the methods of teaching ▪ Supervise the practicum placements of the candidates; spend approximately six hours each week visiting to interact with mentor teachers, support candidates and share methods course expectations ▪ Determine a grade for the methods course and the linked field experience/practicum ▪ Assists in the selection of mentor teachers for future residents	“Formative assessment” Communicate course expectations to mentor teachers, supervisors and building leaders	The department chair oversees the scheduling of methods professors’ courses and supports communication between the Clinical Practice and Partnerships Office and methods professors
Faculty teaching co-requisite courses	University	▪ Teach courses in literacy, culturally relevant teaching and childhood methods, to complement the methods course content ▪ Contribute to the preparation of residents for the methods and student teaching semesters ▪ When teaching during the residency year, provide class activities that draw upon and inform the full-time school placement ▪ Assist in the selection of mentor teachers for future residents	Complementary instruction that prepares candidates before the residency or supports them during the residency	The department chair oversees the scheduling of faculty to teach co-requisite courses
Advisors	University	▪ Provides information about required courses in your program and how to meet prerequisite requirements	To have candidates take courses in the right sequence, complete cognate and concentration courses before TR begins

Note(s): TR – Teacher residents

PD – Professional development

TRP – Teacher residency program

MT – Mentor teacher

Source(s): Created by authors

Table A3

District A teacher residency template

Essential 2: Clinical Preparation

Essential 4: Reflection and Innovation A PDS makes a shared commitment to reflective practice, responsive innovation, and generative knowledge.

Essential 6: Articulated Agreements A PDS requires intentionally evolving written articulated agreement(s) that delineate the commitments, expectations, roles and responsibilities of all involved.

Essential 8: Boundary-Spanning Roles A PDS creates space for, advocates for and supports college/university and P–12 faculty to operate in well defined, boundary-spanning roles that transcend institutional settings.

Appendix 1 Blueprint for undergraduate teacher residency

This document is intended as a broad, overarching framework that could potentially be used with any district. An additional document that speaks to the context of the local district, this will need to be developed collaboratively with the district and university representatives. This second document will deal with partnership specifics, such as: funding, transportation, selection of mentors and candidates, induction, substitute teaching, etc. The second document will be based on the first but provide greater detail.

Roles and responsibilities

Residency teacher preparation programs include much more cross-faculty collaboration and many more opportunities for faculty to collaborate with mentor teachers. Please note: the work of all individuals mentioned in this table is much more complex and detailed than space allows. This summary is meant to be a starting point for conversations between and among the various people listed.

Appendix 2