spring-summer 2010 / Volume 15. Number 3

education

Northwest magazine

A School for the 

Whole Community

Addressing social-emotional needs 8 | Community partnerships 14 | Combining instruction and social services 24

The Strongest Link

S u p p o r t i n g H i g h ly E f f e c t i v e Te a c he r s

Innovation helps retain teachers 22

Relational teaching changes lives 28

Teacher collaboration pays off 32
2 educationnorthwest.org

On the cover

Tim Swanson, an instructional coach and elementary school 

teacher in Sweet Home, Oregon, has been one part of the district’s 

perfect storm of school improvement—“a motivated teacher eager 

to become a peer leader in a district ready to embrace change.” See 

the full story, “Rewriting the Future in Sweet Home,” on page 32.

Photo by Sarah Giffrow
Education Northwest magazine / spring-summer 2010 1

8

22

32

features

6 Shifting the Focus From Highly Qualified to Highly 

Effective Teaching: An Overview

We look at how federal policy is driving change in the teaching profession.

8 Keepers of the Flame

Instructional coaching and professional development help a Montana school 

district scale up a math program that gets students ready for algebra.

14 The Power of Observation

Principal “walk-throughs”—or informal classroom observations—play a role 

in making teaching objectives clear in an Alaska middle school.

18 Defining High-Quality Teaching

Four members of Education Northwest’s Board of Directors—representing 

different education roles and different states—reflect on the question of how 

to create better teachers.

22 Head of the CLASS

A small district on the Oregon coast goes from low achiever to superstar with 

the help of an innovative grant that focuses on career pathways, performance 

evaluations, targeted professional development, and new compensation models 

for teachers.

28 Me to You: A Passion for Teaching

After four decades in the classroom, an Eastern Washington English teacher’s 

passion for teaching—and learning—remains undiminished.

32 Rewriting the Future in Sweet Home

Giving teachers more time to collaborate and share best practices, especially 

in the area of writing, pays off for a rural Oregon district.

education 

Northwest magazine

	contents / SPRING-SUMMER 2010 the strongest link: supporting highly effective teachers Vol. 15 / No. 3

Web exclusives at educationnorthwest.org

14
2 educationnorthwest.org

departments

3 ceo’s Message

4 Editor’s Note

37 Research Brief

Looking For Evidence: What We Know About HighQuality, Highly Effective Teachers

39 Voices

The Ogden, Utah, School District Takes a Unique 

Approach To Improving Instruction

41 End Note

42 Education Northwest News

Summer Workshops in Math and Writing

IES Addresses Education Northwest Audience

Flashback

Conference Call

What the Research Says (or Doesn’t Say) 

Consolidation of School Districts

On the Web

Education Northwest Magazine is available online at 

educationnorthwest.org. Look for Web exclusives, 

marked with .

Education Northwest Magazine is published three times a year by 

Education Northwest. Past and current issues of the magazine are 

available at educationnorthwest.org.

ISSN 1546-5020

Chief Executive Officer

Dr. Carol F. Thomas

Deputy Executive Officer

Steve Fleischman

Administrative Director, Planning and Outreach

Dr. Steve Nelson

Managing Editor

Rhonda Barton

Issue Editor

Bracken Reed

Education Northwest News Writer

Kate Fitzgibbon

Staff Photographers

Michael Heavener, Sarah Giffrow

Design

Denise Crabtree

Data Analyst

Richard Greenough

Library Support

Linda Fitch

Webmaster

Jeff Jones

Circulation

Jean DeYoung

Statement of Purpose

Education Northwest Magazine aims to promote a regional dialogue 

and to elevate teaching and learning by giving readers the best information, ideas, and personal stories from practitioners, researchers, 

and other experts. 

Copyright © 2010, Education Northwest

Articles and information in this publication may be reproduced 

and distributed without permission for nonprofit educational and 

professional development purposes. Please acknowledge Education 

Northwest as the source.

education 

Northwest magazine
Education Northwest magazine / spring-summer 2010 3

education northwest 

Board of Directors

Jerry Colonna (Chair)

Superintendent, Beaverton School District (OR)

Dr. Joanne Erickson (Secretary-Treasurer)

Associate Professor, Montana State University

Dr. Barbara L. Adams

Researcher, Alaska Statewide Mentor Project 

Steve Bradshaw

Superintendent, Sitka School District (AK) 

Doreen Brown (Regional Parent Representative)

Supervisor, Indian Education, Anchorage School District 

(AK)

Susan Castillo

Oregon Superintendent of Public Instruction

Karanja Crews

Teacher, Portland Public Schools (OR)

Juan Carlos Cuadros

Elementary Assistant Principal, Springfield Public 

Schools (OR)

Randy Dorn

Washington Superintendent of Public Instruction

Dr. Patrick Haggarty (Private School Representative)

Superintendent, Chief Diocesan Administrator

Diocese of Helena, Missoula (MT)

Jeri Harris

Teacher, Seattle School District (WA)

Dr. Mary Alice Heuschel

Superintendent, Renton School District (WA)

Dr. Jannette R. Hill

Chair, Division of Education

Lewis-Clark State College (ID)

Wendy Horman

School Board Member, Bonneville Joint School District 

(ID)

Denise Juneau

Montana Superintendent of Public Instruction 

Jerry Keane 

Superintendent, Post Falls School District (ID)

Larry LeDoux

Alaska Commissioner of Education

Tom Luna

Idaho Superintendent of Public Instruction

Dr. Bruce Messinger

Superintendent, Helena Public Schools (MT)

Dr. Geoffrey Mills

Dean, Southern Oregon University 

Sean Murray (Regional Business Representative)

President, RealTime Performance (WA)

Dr. Perla Rodriguez (Regional Parent Representative)

Elementary Principal, Forest Grove School District (OR)

Mo Sanders

Principal, Soldotna Montessori Charter School (AK)

Corri Smith

Teacher, Great Falls School District (MT)

Frederick H. Striker

School Board Member, Battle Ground (WA)

Dr. Tom Stritikus

Associate Dean, College of Education 

University of Washington

Colleen Thompson

Teacher, Riverside Elementary School (ID)

Carol VanDerWege

Teacher, Kenai Peninsula Borough School District (AK)

Jeff Weldon (Regional Business Representative)

Attorney, Felt, Martin, Frazier & Weldon PC (MT)

ceo’s message

Dear Reader,

Here at Education Northwest, one of the 

four priorities that frame our work is 

supporting educators. This issue of our 

magazine explores what kinds of support teachers need to be highly effective 

in the classroom and to continue to be 

committed to the teaching profession.

Training and retaining effective 

teachers is a key concern in our region: 

New teachers and teachers in the early 

stages of their careers make up a significant portion of all educators in the 

Northwest’s public schools. For 2007–

2008, fully a quarter of Northwest teachers had five or fewer years of teaching 

experience.

Nationally, research shows that turnover among teachers is relatively high 

compared to turnover for workers in 

other professions. One study estimated 

that approximately a third of teachers 

quit teaching within their first three 

years and that 40–50 percent of teachers abandon the profession during their 

first five years.

The National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future estimates 

the cost of turnover among teachers at 

more than $7 billion a year. The exact 

cost of replacing teachers who abandon 

the profession early in their career isn’t 

known, but it is likely to be significant 

given the reported turnover rates among 

new and early-career teachers. And, of 

course, there is a high cost to our students who lose the benefit of having a 

stable, experienced corps of educators 

in their school. 

As part of our mission to create 

strong schools and communities, we 

provide a wide range of services for both 

new and veteran teachers. For example, 

we introduced video study groups at one 

rural elementary school that was trying 

to improve math instruction for English 

language learners (ELLs). Our math experts trained teachers to videotape their 

peers’ classroom lessons, focusing on 

how students responded to the instruction. The teachers then met to analyze 

the tapes and, with the help of an Education Northwest facilitator, discussed 

ways to change 

their practice to 

better meet their 

students’ needs. 

Our researchers 

produced a report 

on What Teachers 

Should Know About 

Instruction for English Language Learners for the Washington state Legislature. 

Based on an extensive literature review 

and consultations with nationally recognized experts, the report outlined 14 key 

principles that addressed foundational 

competencies for all classroom teachers, 

as well as how mainstream teachers and 

ELL specialists could work together to 

benefit ELL students.

The report led to new requirements 

for teacher preservice education in 

Washington.

And it suggested ways that the key 

principles could be incorporated into 

ongoing professional development for 

inservice teachers.

Each year we train thousands of 

teachers from throughout the region 

and the nation in the acclaimed 6+1 

Trait® Writing model. Our workshops 

and institutes give teachers a powerful way to recognize the characteristics 

of good writing and help their students 

apply them to their own writing.

Creating collaborative work environments, producing curricula in content 

areas such as mathematics, providing 

tools for equitable treatment of students, and developing instructional 

leaders: These are just a few of the ways 

we work to support educators. In doing so, we recognize that when the rubber meets the road, an effective teacher 

makes the world of difference in a 

student’s success. 

Regards, 

Carol Thomas

Chief Executive Office 
4 educationnorthwest.org

editor‘s note

The recent policy statement, “A Blueprint for 

Reform: The Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act,” outlines 

the five overarching goals of the Obama 

administration’s education reform agenda. “Great teachers and leaders in every 

school” is the second of those goals—surely a sign of its central 

place in the administration’s vision for public education. “Of 

all the work that occurs at every level of our education system,” 

the report states, “the interaction between teacher and student 

is the primary determinant of student success.”

 While that may seem like a straightforward observation, it 

can also be viewed as a major shift in federal policy. After a decade that has focused on standards, assessments, accountability, phonics-based reading instruction, school improvement 

plans, and teachers’ qualifications, the new administration is 

looking to put “the interaction between teacher and student” 

front and center. That intent is clear, for example, in the shift in 

federal emphasis—away from requiring teachers to be “highly 

qualified” and instead striving to make them “highly effective.” 

In this issue of Education Northwest Magazine we offer a 

small sampling of what some school districts are already doing to try to support highly effective teaching—and some snapshots of highly effective teachers in action. 

One controversial aspect of the Obama administration’s 

“blueprint” is the effort to tie teacher evaluations to student 

achievement. That’s a policy that’s already in place in Oregon’s 

Tillamook School District. “Head of the Class” (see page 22) 

looks at the effect a grant from the Oregon-based nonprofit, 

Chalkboard Project, has had on this rural district’s ability to 

hire, retain, evaluate, support, and compensate high-quality 

teachers. It might just be a glimpse of the future. 

Other stories here include observations from four Education Northwest board members about what high-quality instruction looks like; the role principals play in keeping an Alaska school district’s teachers focused on clear objectives; and 

the effort of districts in Montana and Oregon to improve math 

and writing instruction, respectively, by providing professional 

development and teacher collaboration time. We also offer a 

portrait of one English teacher in Eastern Washington state, 

who’s now in his fourth decade of being effective in the deepest 

sense—changing students’ lives. 

As this new era of federal policy gets underway it will be 

interesting to see how it plays out in actual districts, schools, 

and classrooms. For now, I’m reminded of the ancient Greek 

philosopher Heraclitus’s famous quote: The only constant is 

change. 

—Bracken Reed, Bracken.Reed@educationnorthwest.org

Dee Dixon
Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUMmER 2010 55

education Northwest magazine Features

spring-summer 2010 / Vol. 15. No. 3

Federal policy pushes for improvements in the teaching profession 6

 Principal walk-throughs provide leadership and guidance in an Alaska school 8 

An innovative grant transforms the teaching profession in an Oregon district 14

Four educators share their views on how to create and support better teachers 18

 Making time for collaboration and planning improves writing instruction 22

 Instructional coaches help a Montana district scale up its math program 28

Connecting with students keeps a veteran English teacher passionate about his job 32

The Strongest Link

S u p p o r t i n g H i g h ly E f f e c t i v e Te a c he r s
6 educationnorthwest.org

In his 1984 article “What Do We Know About Teacher Effectiveness?” the late educational psychologist and president of 

the American Educational Research Association, Nathaniel 

Gage, pointed out a central paradox of education research in 

America at that time: “For whatever reasons ... much thinking 

about education has found it possible to focus on almost every 

conceivable part of the enterprise except its central process: the 

teaching function.”

In the 26 years since Gage made that observation, the issue 

of teacher effectiveness has gradually moved out of the margins and into the center of the public education debate. In 1996 

William Sanders and June Rivers published Cumulative and 

Residual Effects of Teachers on Student Academic Achievement,

based on test results from the widely praised Tennessee ValueAdded Assessment System. The study’s central finding—that 

three straight years of having the most effective teachers gives 

students a 50-percentile point advantage over students who 

have three straight years of the least effective teachers—was a 

wake-up call for many. Teacher quality soon became a key issue 

in the equity debate: Were high-poverty, low-performing urban 

schools getting the least qualified, least effective teachers? And 

if so, what could be done about it?

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 attempted to address 

the problem by requiring Title I schools to hire “highly qualified teachers” (HQT). Those qualifications included a bachelor’s 

degree, state certification, and a demonstrated “competence in 

all the academic subjects in which the teacher teaches.”

However, as the decade wore on, several longitudinal studies 

showed little or no correlation between these qualifications and 

improved student achievement. For example, the U.S. Department of Education’s 2006–2007 report A Summary of Highly 

Qualified Teacher Data showed that 94 percent of all public 

school classes, nationally, were being taught by teachers who 

met the HQT requirements, but student achievement scores 

did not follow suit. This remained especially true in urban and 

rural areas with high poverty and large minority subgroups—

the very populations the requirements were meant to help. 

Many practitioners, policymakers, and researchers began 

to call for a shift in priorities. Instead of looking at teachers’ 

qualifications, they argued, we should look more at their actual teaching skills and at their measurable effect on student 

achievement. As early as 2002, only a year into NCLB, Eric 

Hirsch, at that time the executive director of the Alliance for 

Quality Teaching, told the National Governor’s Association 

(NGA) that “states should focus less on the act’s requirements 

and more on reaching a consensus on what a highly qualified 

teacher should know and be able to do at various stages of their 

career.” 

As the Bush presidency came to an end the emphasis on 

what teachers are “able to do” became more pronounced in the 

national conversation. And so did the related questions: How 

do we measure what teachers have actually been “able to do” 

in their classrooms? Shouldn’t one of those measures be tied 

to how much their students have learned? And how do we 

evaluate teachers based on this information? All of these issues 

Shifting the Focus From

 Highly Qualified to 

 Highly Effective Teaching

 An Overview

 by bracken reed
Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUmMER 2010 7

pointed toward a new emphasis on effectiveness—the results 

that teachers are actually able to get in their classrooms. 

 The Obama administration signaled its move in that direction almost immediately. Beginning with the guidelines for 

the $4 billion Race to the Top competitive grants—part of the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act—and continuing 

with the Fiscal Year 2011 budget request and the recent “Blueprint for Reform: The Reauthorization of the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act,” the administration has put teacher 

effectiveness at the center of its agenda. 

“Our challenge is to make sure every child in America is 

learning from an effective teacher—no matter what it takes,” 

U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said in a July 2009 

speech to the National Education Association. “Our teacher 

evaluation systems are deeply flawed, and the losers are not just 

children. When great teachers are unrecognized and unrewarded, when struggling teachers are unsupported, and when failing 

teachers are unaddressed the teaching profession is damaged.” 

Duncan’s remark highlights the most controversial aspect 

of the new paradigm: the push to give teacher evaluations real 

teeth by tying them to student achievement scores and by making it easier for schools and districts to fire persistently ineffective teachers. 

On its website, the Chalkboard Project, an education nonprofit based in Portland, Oregon, explains the implications this 

way: “What’s different about the new national focus on ‘teacher 

effectiveness’ is the interest in measuring outcomes—are students actually learning more because of their teacher?—more 

than inputs such as what degree a teacher has earned or how 

long a teacher has taught. That’s a radical change in emphasis.”

Although the controversy surrounding this “radical change” 

has gotten much of the attention, perhaps the most important aspect of the Obama administration’s plan for improving 

teacher quality and effectiveness is its effort to take a broad, systemic approach. In the 2002 interview with the NGA, Hirsch 

pointed to the lack of cohesiveness then prevailing in most 

states: “Due to a lack of data and a reactive approach, states 

have adopted piecemeal policies rather than a coherent strategy 

that looks systemically at quality issues, including preparation, 

licensure, recruitment, evaluation, dismissal, and professional 

development.”

In its economic stimulus guidelines and other policy statements the Obama administration has attempted to lay out a 

more comprehensive plan that addresses each of those areas. 

For now, that agenda has mostly been advanced through competitive grant programs. The $100 million Teacher Quality 

Partnership (TQP) grants, for example, include guidelines that 

promote better teacher training, including models that include 

yearlong “residency” programs. 

Initial reactions to the new federal policy have often focused 

on its cohesiveness. In a February 8, 2010, article that looked at 

the implications of the Race to the Top guidelines, Dennis Van 

Roekl, president of the National Education Association, said, 

“We can’t just piecemeal this—we have to look at the whole system. At the federal level, there is more attention paid to the 

whole thing than ever before.” 

Another Education Week article, published a few weeks later, 

looked at similar policy guidelines embedded in the Obama administration’s Fiscal Year 2011 budget request. In that article, 

Timothy Daly, the president of the New Teacher Project, a New 

York City–based teacher training group, came to a similar conclusion: “What’s striking is that the budget reflects a coherent 

vision for teacher quality. It doesn’t feel like a disjointed set of 

individual programs.”

It remains to be seen how this will play out in the actual reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 

but it does seem clear that teacher effectiveness will remain in 

the spotlight for some time to come. Private foundations are 

getting on board, with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation 

funding a $335 million study on teacher effectiveness. And, research on all aspects of teaching is likely to ramp up as well. 

The paradox that Gage described in 1984 may be changing 

at last. Teaching is finally front and center in the education 

“enterprise.” n
Keepers 

8 educationnorthwest.org
 9

 of the Flame

A Montana school 

district looks to improve 

classroom instruction 

by making a longterm commitment to 

an innovative math 

program.

Story by Bracken Reed

Photos by Jim Lubek

Instructional coaches (L to R) 

Mary Larsen, Melissa Romano, 

and Susan Cravens are part 

of the Helena School District’s 

long-term commitment to 

improving math instruction.
10 educationnorthwest.org

HELENA, Montana—Step inside Rob Freistadt’s Central Elementary School classroom during math hour and it might 

take you a few seconds to locate him. Although the six-foot-plus Freistadt is not 

hard to pick out among his combined 

class of fourth- and fifth-graders, he is 

frequently hovering somewhere on the 

edges, letting students have the floor at 

the front of the room. 

On this early morning in late March, 

for example, Freistadt reviews the previous day’s discussion about fractions, states 

the objective for the day, and then draws 

an “array” on the white board. (An array 

is a set of numbers or objects arranged in 

rows or columns, in this case a rectangle 

made up of square boxes.) “Yesterday 

we did halves, quarters, and eighths,” he 

reminds his students. “Now what?” 

Freistadt has been introducing his 

students to ways of using the arrays to 

understand fractions. The goal is to help 

students think about fractions as actual 

numbers and to begin to apply basic operations (addition, subtraction, division) 

to them. 

Freistadt reviews the problem he assigned the day before and soon asks for 

a student to volunteer to show his or her 

work. From that point on, the teacher is 

mostly on the sidelines, guiding the discussion but allowing the students to do 

most of the talking and all of the drawing on the white board. 

Addy, a shy but brave fourth-grader, 

is the first to volunteer. She goes to the 

front of the class and fills in boxes using 

different colored markers. Her example 

is somewhat unusual and contains a 

small mistake, but Freistadt simply asks 

her to explain what she has drawn. In 

the process of explaining she realizes 

her mistake, but fumbles for a solution. 

At this point, many teachers might take 

over, but Freistatdt ask the class to take 

over instead: “Can anybody tell us what 

Addy did here?” 

Over the next few minutes he guides 

the students to the slight alteration 

needed to correct Addy’s example. If 

you take out the students’ comments 

and questions—which actually make up 

the greater part of the discussion—you 

can see how Freistadt’s method not only 

helps students solve the problem, but 

also leads them to a deeper understanding of the concept: 

• Is there anything that you could do to 

make this easier to see? 

• Go ahead and label that, if you would.

• Does everybody agree with that? No? 

Why not?

• Somebody tell us what she did with 

the blue squares. What do the blue 

squares represent?

• I’m confused .... Who can help? 

Emma, what do you think about that?

• And how do you know that ... ?

• That’s interesting. So there’s a common number? 

• I see. Does that add up?

• All right? Are we OK with that? Does 

everybody agree? 

Although Freistadt often kick-starts 

discussion by saying “I’m confused,” he 

is clearly in control. His comments are 

perfectly timed. He keeps things moving 

when they are in danger of bogging down 

and subtly slows the discussion, when 

necessary, to check for understanding or 

to draw attention to an important point. 

As the 60-minute math period progresses, several students take turns 

showing how they have represented different fractions. A frequently heard comment is, “I’ve got a totally different way 

to do it.” And indeed, almost every student seems to have a unique way of using the arrays. Rather than judging each 

other’s versions or calling them “right” 

or “wrong,” students question each other—or Freistadt encourages them to—as 

the entire group tries to understand the 

reasoning behind the examples and to 

determine whether they are valid or not. 

Freistadt does step in more overtly on 

occasion, but always in a way that encourages discussion and helps students 

make their own mental connections. 

Looking at the students, you can almost 

see the wheels turning in their minds. 

Lighting the Fire

Freistadt’s approach to math instruction 

is influenced by cognitively guided instruction (CGI), a method developed in 

the 1980s by researchers at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. CGI is based 

on two major ideas. First, that nearly 

A key feature of cognitively guided math instruction is the opportunity for students to share 

their work with each other—both their answers and their method of arriving at them.
all elementary school students arrive at 

school with some intuitive math skills, 

such as a basic understanding of numbers or an instinct for problem solving. 

Second, that effective math instruction 

builds on what students already know 

by tapping into those intuitive skills and 

gradually connecting them to more formal concepts and operations. 

Proponents of this method argue that 

it gives students a deeper understanding 

of broad, underlying math concepts and 

the relationships between those concepts, 

as opposed to a more narrow focus on 

mathematical operations and procedures. 

“Whether or not a student has a good 

idea or an efficient way of doing something is not the point with this,” says 

Freistadt. “It’s great if they do, but what’s 

really important is that they’re talking 

amongst themselves and seeing a variety 

of ways to do something. That gives them 

the opportunity to start thinking more 

deeply about ‘What do I do to get there?’ 

and to demonstrate it and talk about it. It 

makes them active participants in their 

own learning, which is much more powerful than me standing up there being 

the purveyor of information.”

There’s a secondary benefit to this approach that is also getting a lot of attention nationally. The “deeper thinking” 

about underlying concepts and the relationships between those concepts gives 

students exactly the kind of higher order 

thinking skills they will need to succeed in algebra and other forms of advanced math. For example, underlying 

Freistadt’s use of arrays is the idea that 

a symbol or shape can be used to represent a number or quantity. In other 

words, these fourth- and fifth-graders 

are building a strong foundation for success in algebra, which most students in 

Helena will now take in the eighth grade. 

Elementary teachers in the Helena School District first discovered CGI

math principles in 2004 during a fourday summer institute called “Fostering 

Number Sense and Algebraic Reasoning,” conducted by Linda Griffin, director of the Mathematics Education Unit at 

Education Northwest. One principal and 

a small group of teachers attended that 

institute and began to rethink the connection between elementary math and 

algebra. It could have stopped there, but it 

didn’t. Over time, the Helena School District has embraced this approach to math 

as a strategy for improving classroom 

instruction in all of its K–8 schools.

“Helena is an example of what can 

happen when a small, core group of 

teachers gets exposed to something, actually implements it, and then helps light 

a fire in the district,” says Griffin. 

Rather than spreading like a prairie fire, however, this district scale-up 

has been more like lighting one candle 

off another—teacher to teacher, grade 

level to grade level, school to school. 

The district’s Literacy and Curriculum 

Administrator Teresa Burson and Title I

Administrator Pam Birkeland were both 

early supporters of the program, but limited funding and a natural caution about 

going “all in” with a program so new to 

the district resulted in a gradual implementation over a five-year period. That 

the fire never went out is a testament to 

both the district’s long-term commitment and to teachers’ drive to improve. 

Eventually, almost all K–2 teachers in the district attended one of the 

Education Northwest institutes, then all 

teachers in grades 3–5, then 6–8. This 

summer they hope to send all the remaining elementary teachers and middle school math teachers who could not 

make it to earlier institutes. 

“That’s essential,” says Griffin. “You 

have to have administrative support 

at all levels. That’s the sign of a change 

that’s actually going to take hold.”

Last summer, district administrators decided to invest even more heavily in the 

program. Using American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act (ARRA) dollars they 

hired two full-time K–8 math coaches, 

Sue Cravens and Melissa Romano, and 

also continued funding for ongoing professional development projects started 

in the 2008–2009 school year. 

Passing it On

During the past nine months Cravens 

and Romano have formed a tight bond. 

They joke about being able to finish 

each other’s sentences and about being “thrown to the wolves” as first-year 

coaches. Although they received coaches training, they admit it’s been challenging. Cravens had recently retired 

from elementary teaching before taking 

the job, while Romano had just finished 

her fifth year as a second-grade teacher 

in the district. Both were master teachers and among the earliest staff members in the district to embrace the CGI

approach to math. But neither was used 

to going from building to building, being in other teachers’ classrooms, modeling lessons, and trying to earn their 

colleagues’ trust. 

“A big part of our job is listening to 

teachers, building camaraderie, and developing those relationships so that they 

can be open with us,” says Cravens. “It’s 

been a learning experience, but it helps 

that we’re not in an evaluation role. This 

isn’t about us being forced on them; it’s 

about teachers who are striving to get 

better.”

Cravens and Romano often go into 

classrooms to model lessons as a team, 

which allows one of them to observe 

while the other teaches. “Especially in 

our first year as coaches, it’s great to have 

Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUmMER 2010 11

keepers of the flame

Rob Freistadt has taken advantage of 

professional development and coaching to 

dramatically improve his math instruction.
12 educationnorthwest.org

that feedback,” says Romano. “We can 

go back and talk about it: ‘What could I

have done differently? What didn’t I do? 

What should I follow up with the teacher on? What did you see?’ It allows us to 

brainstorm how we can do this better.”

Their biggest frustration, they both 

say, is that they haven’t been able to visit 

as many classrooms as they would have 

liked. The two recently attended a training session with Melinda Leong, a senior 

program advisor in Education Northwest’s Mathematics Education Unit, 

which focused on math coaching within 

a more sustained professional learning 

community-type format. “We’re heading 

in that direction,” says Cravens. “We’re 

hoping that teachers will sign up for that 

next year.”

The other major investment the district has made is to fund two professional 

development programs: a CGI Support 

Group and individual training sessions 

called learning academies. Mary Larsen, 

a former elementary teacher in the district, directs the support group and offers math science learning academies. 

Larsen was part of the first group from 

Helena to attend the Fostering Number 

Sense and Algebraic Reasoning training 

in 2004. Because of her background in 

science inquiry—a similar “constructivist” approach to science teaching—she 

was able to see its potential immediately, 

and she became one of its strongest proponents in the district. 

Larsen’s CGI Support Group meets 

monthly. Attendance is voluntary and 

the format is flexible. The meetings are 

an opportunity for teachers to ask questions, talk about their struggles and successes, and share ideas. They’re also a 

chance for Larsen to get direct feedback 

from teachers about what is working and 

what isn’t, which helps her design CGIfocused Learning Academy professional 

development sessions. 

The district’s learning academies are 

offered in many different subject areas, 

and all teachers who are in their first 

to fifth year are required to take at least 

one annually. In addition to inquiry science-based academies, Larsen offers six 

CGI-focused math academies, two hours 

each, spread throughout the school year. 

These math academies are based on a 

more extensive science academy Larsen 

has directed for the past two years, and 

she would like to see the math program 

go even farther in that direction. “With 

the science program we’re able to give 

teachers a stipend and offer them college 

credit,” says Larsen. “It’s more of a commitment on their part, and it’s a more extensive program. We do sessions for content knowledge, sessions for pedagogy, 

and then we have embedded professional 

development with coaches. There’s also 

an online learning community piece, in 

which a Montana State University professor poses questions to the teachers, 

which is funded by a Science and Inquiry 

Learning in the Classroom grant. All 

together, it’s pretty extensive.”

For now, the math academies are a 

much smaller program, but Larsen hopes 

the district can find the money to expand 

it. “This kind of ongoing, embedded professional development is truly the best 

way to improve instruction,” she says. “A 

single workshop or training session can 

be a good starting point, because you 

get new ideas, but without the ongoing 

support it’s not very effective. Working 

with individual teachers in the science 

program, I see how it’s paid off over time. 

This is the second year for some of the 

teachers and it’s brought them to another 

level. I get e-mails like, ‘I didn’t think I

could ever do this!’ So, I know it’s really 

getting down to the level of daily instruction. It’s changed the way they teach.”

A Long-Term Impact

Throughout the Helena School District 

there are signs that the CGI approach 

to math is also having a transformative 

effect on classroom instruction. On the 

same late-March day that Freistadt is 

using CGI strategies to teach fractions, 

for example, two of his colleagues across 

town are also using putting their training into action. At Broadwater Elementary, Marilyn Barta has the students in 

her third-grade class play math games 

at five different stations. While Barta 

moves from station to station, offering 

guidance and keeping students on task, 

the four students at each station are 

given a variety of ways to explain math 

Fifth-grade teacher Leslee Thennis 

(center) has embraced CGI math 

strategies as a way to prepare her 

students for algebra.
Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUMmER 2010 13

keepers of the flame

concepts and demonstrate skills to each 

other. At one table for example, the students play a game in which a student 

draws a card and puts it to her forehead, 

not knowing what math equation it contains. The other students in the group 

then try to guide her to the answer without giving it away or making it too obvious. As in Freistadt’s class, this approach 

puts the teacher in the role of facilitator, 

rather than purveyor of information, 

and makes students active participants 

in their own learning.

At Rossiter Elementary, a still-pristine-looking K–5 school in Helena’s 

rapidly growing north side, fifth-grade 

teacher Leslee Thennis is using yet another CGI-influenced strategy. In her 

classroom students have been given a 

word problem and asked to work in 

teams. The problem is related to the upcoming Easter holiday—it involves the 

purchase of an Easter ham—and Thennis has given it even more real-world 

relevance by posing the problem as if 

it were her own: Students are trying to 

help her figure out whether to buy a 

15-pound ham at $1.49 per pound, or 

whether to go for a deal that offers the 

ham at 98 cents per pound if she also 

purchases $30 of groceries. 

As the teams work intently on their 

answers, Thennis moves around the 

room, offering some guidance and feedback, but mostly staying on the sidelines. 

After about 20 minutes, it’s time for team 

presentations. Should Thennis buy the 

ham at $1.49 or go with the special offer? 

Each team makes its recommendation 

and uses a white board to demonstrate 

how it came to its conclusion. Again, 

Thennis stays off to the side, giving students the floor.

The variety of the students’ methods 

for solving the problem is striking. All 

six teams recommend that Thennis go 

for the special offer, but each one has 

taken a different route to that conclusion. One group starts its presentation 

with “we used the lattice way,” before 

drawing it out on the board. Thennis 

pokes around the edges of the students’ 

demonstration, saying things like “OK, 

I’m a little confused: Where are you getting those numbers?” or opening it up 

to the whole class with “Does everyone 

agree with that?” 

When another team, a pair of boys, 

uses a laborious method that requires 

drawing the number 15 and the price 

$1.49 out 15 times, going down the 

board from top to bottom (the handwriting getting smaller and smaller as 

they nearly run out of room), Thennis 

starts to interrupt them. “Is this the best 

way for you?” she asks. But when the two 

boys give her an immediate “yes” without even looking up, Thennis decides to 

let it play out. “OK, all right,” she says. 

It’s a moment that Cravens and Romano, who have been observing at the back 

of the classroom, bring up later when 

talking about the lesson. “That’s one of 

the challenges of this approach,” says 

Romano. “There are a lot of times when 

you’ve got to make judgment calls—

should I step in here or not? I’m not sure 

a lot of classes would have hung in there 

patiently with those two students, but 

these kids were, so she let it go.”

Cravens points out another nuance—

the fine art of asking questions. “It can 

be very challenging to ask the questions 

and not try to lead the students to the 

answer you’re looking for right away,” 

she says. “Most people want to jump in 

too soon, but Leslee does a great job with 

that. In this method you really have to 

hold back and let them figure it out for 

themselves as much as possible. But, we 

also agree—sometimes you lead them a 

little more strongly than other times.”

These are the kinds of concrete, practical strategies that Romano and Cravens can offer classroom teachers, and 

many in the district are embracing this 

opportunity for ongoing, embedded 

professional development. “We have 

teachers all along the path in using the 

CGI approach and teaching math concepts,” says Romano, “and we honor 

every teacher wherever they are on that 

path. We’re here to support and encourage them in any way we can.”

It remains to be seen how the district 

will continue to fund that journey, now 

that the ARRA money is spent. But one 

thing is clear: The fire has been lit and is 

not likely to go out. n

Third-grade teacher Marilyn Barta uses games and other fun strategies to introduce 

students to algebra-type reasoning at the elementary level.
14 educationnorthwest.org

Principal walk-throughs help 

Alaska schools focus on 

effective teaching tied to 

grade-level standards.

Story by Rhonda Barton

Photos by Matt Cassens

The Power of

Observa
Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUMmER 2010 15

PALMER, Alaska—The bell rings and John Gardner’s seventh-grade 

math class wastes no time getting down to business. Students 

bend over their desks, using data sets to create frequency tables 

and “stem and leaf plots”—a warm-up activity that’s projected 

onto the white board at the front of the room. Also clearly written 

on the board is the Alaska grade-level expectation (or GLE) that’s 

connected to the activity.

While Gardner paces up and down the aisles, occasionally 

stopping to answer a student’s question, Principal Gene Stone 

observes quietly in the background. Stone jots notes on his clipboard and checks off items on a list. When Stone arrived at Palmer 

Junior Middle School four years ago, the school—in the Mat-Su 

Valley just outside Anchorage—was not making adequate yearly 

progress. Only about two-thirds of the students, 10 percent of 

whom are Alaska Natives, scored proficient on the state mathematics assessment. That’s no longer the case. One reason may 

be the informal classroom observations and feedback that have 

helped teachers hone instruction throughout the building.

Using Principal Walk-Throughs

The practice of observing classrooms firsthand has gained traction 

as a tool in school improvement efforts nationwide. These unannounced, quick visits—whether they’re called learning walks, data 

walks, or walk-throughs—can help principals systematically gather 

data on instructional practices. The principal can then share with 

teachers areas to focus on, especially when targeting state standards. 

Photo by Palmer Junior Middle School; image © Elena Lishanskaya/iStockphoto

tion
16 educationnorthwest.org

Walk-throughs are not typically part of the formal teacher 

evaluation process. Instead, they provide a platform for principals and teachers to communicate about classroom instruction 

on an ongoing basis. And, they can help pinpoint what training 

and support teachers need to be more effective.

 Although studies on walk-throughs are limited and sometimes contradictory, Jane David, director of the Bay Area Research Group, says the research suggests walk-throughs are 

constructive “when districts make their purpose clear and carry them out in a climate of trust.” Writing in Educational Leadership, David notes, “[It’s] important to ensure that everyone 

understands how it connects to improvement efforts. This connection should be reflected in the specific data that observers 

collect, the thoughtfulness and quality of the protocols, and the 

way results are used.” 

 Alaska’s Department of Education & Early Development 

(EED) has become an enthusiastic proponent of principal 

walk-throughs, especially for ensuring that the “intended curriculum” (what should be taught) is the “implemented curriculum” (what actually is taught). Les Morse, EED’s deputy 

commissioner, says, “I think there was a time when good principals always wandered in and out of classrooms, but the walkthroughs give a framework for what to do when you walk in 

and out of that classroom and how you provide feedback that 

actually impacts instructional changes that improve student 

achievement.” Alaska plans to offer training in walk-throughs 

this summer at an institute for school leadership teams.

Reflecting Best Practices

At Palmer, developing the walk-through protocol was a collaborative effort. Stone convened a focus learning team of two 

dozen teachers and administrators that met regularly to comb 

the research for effective classroom practices. They chose the 

nine strategies from Classroom Instruction That Works by 

Marzano, Pickering, and Pollock to form the backbone of the 

walk-through checklist. When Stone or Assistant Principal 

Geoff Penrose visit a classroom, they look for evidence that the 

teacher has:

• Identified similarities and differences

• Discussed summarizing and note taking

• Reinforced effort and provided recognition

• Used homework and practice

• Shared nonlinguistic representations

• Used cooperative learning

• Set objectives and provided feedback

• Discussed generating and testing hypotheses

• Used cues, questions, and advance organizers

Beyond these strategies, Stone says he’s checking for “an environment where learning can take place.” That would include 

everything from the arrangement of the room to order and 

organization. “I start looking at what are some visual cues for 

students: Are classroom expectations visible so all students can 

see them? Is there a procedure in place for a bell assignment 

so that as soon as students come in they become productive? 

Beyond that, I start looking at transition time, what’s going to 

come next,” he reports. 

Focusing on Instruction

Veteran language arts teacher Debbie Niekamp was part of 

Palmer’s focus learning team and says the walk-through process that grew out of it has made her a stronger teacher. “The 

walk-throughs give us feedback as well as accountability. I have 

become a better teacher in the last three years than I have been 

in 20 years because [my instruction] is more focused and I

know what I’m doing and why I’m doing it,” she says. “I think 

I was doing some of those things before, but I hadn’t defined 

them.”

Palmer Junior Middle School Informal

Classroom Observations

Gene Stone, Principal; Geoff Penrose, Assistant Principal

Date: ___________________________

Teacher Observed: _______________________________

1. Clear objective: Yes/No

2. GLEs are visible: Yes/No

3. Relevant vocabulary is identified and shared with 

students: Yes/No/NA

4. Classroom is organized and conducive to learning: 

Yes/No/NA

5. Students engaged: All/Most/Some/Very few/NA

6. Students know how they will be assessed: 

Yes/No/Unclear/NA

7. Marzano Instructional Strategies used: 

 Identifying similarities and differences

Summarizing and note taking

 Reinforcing effort and providing recognition

 Homework and practice

 Nonlinguistic representations

 Cooperative learning

Setting objectives and providing feedback

 Generating and testing hypotheses

Questions, cues, and advance organizers

Comments: ________________________________________

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________
Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUMmER 2010 17

When Stone visits Niekamp’s eighth-grade class on an unseasonably warm October day, he observes a lesson tied to a 

GLE on the ability to evaluate writing in cooperative groups for 

the trait of voice. As in Gardner’s class, Niekamp displays the 

standard on the board, specifies a warm-up activity, and spells 

out the rest of the activities for the period. She asks a student in 

the front row to read the day’s objectives “nice and loud,” and 

then informs students that the state assessment will ask them 

to write samples using both informal and formal voice. “How 

would you do that?” she asks. “What kinds of voice have we already studied and how do we score for voice?” After setting the 

context, she breaks the class into groups with a leader, monitor, 

recorder, and spokesperson to discuss and report back on how 

they define and recognize an author’s voice.

Later that day Niekamp and Stone gather on opposite ends 

of a small conference table in the principal’s office. Stone asks 

Niekamp if she has any questions about the walk-through and 

if she had a chance to read a copy of the checklist that he left in 

her mailbox. In the amiable discussion that follows, they talk 

about the importance of having clear objectives and sharing 

them with students. 

Not all walk-throughs result in such a debriefing. Unless 

Stone or his assistant observe a cause for concern, they’ll provide feedback through the checklist report or a quick chat in 

the hallway or faculty lounge. With a staff of 42 teachers, Stone 

tries to write up two visits for each teacher during each semester. But, with walk-throughs as part of the daily routine, he or 

Geoff Penrose make a quick appearance in all teachers’ classrooms about once a week.

Gaining Trust

For staff members not accustomed to such scrutiny, a principal’s visit could set off alarms and provoke defensiveness. But, 

Stone says that gaining buy-in early on can mitigate that problem. “We started with our data and said we’ve got to do some 

things differently,” he recalls. “You have to create that buy-in 

with your group by having clear objectives and an agreement 

that that’s how we’re going to proceed from here.”

Science teacher Sarah Hughes, who’s relatively new to the 

school, confirms that being clear about the purpose of walkthroughs helps defuse a lot of anxiety. “They have to let everyone know this is a tool—not a formal, in-paper record as to 

the good things and bad things you’re doing, but something 

they can use to help you and help them,” she says. “Teachers 

are always scared when the principal walks in the room, and 

so are students, but when he’s in there regularly checking on 

things, it’s just business as usual and there are no scare tactics 

involved.”

Deputy Commissioner Morse compares the potential benefits of walk-throughs to those gained from drilling down with 

data. “Instead of just seeing whether the student is getting an 

A or a B or a C, we want to see if this teacher is teaching to the 

standards,” he says. “Is it evident to students what they’re learning and why they’re learning it? And, when there are issues that 

are challenging, can the principal help diagnose and get spot 

on, what is it? Where did things go wrong? Where do you need 

to change your instruction?”

By using walk-throughs to know what’s going on behind 

classroom doors, principals may be better able to determine 

what teachers’ strengths are and what supports can help them 

be even more effective in meeting all students’ needs. n

the power of observation

Principal Gene Stone meets with science teacher Sarah Hughes to discuss his observations in her classroom. During his walk-throughs, Stone 

uses a checklist that was developed by a team of teachers and administrators who looked at research on effective instructional strategies.
18 educationnorthwest.org

Defining High-Quality Teaching

More than schools, more than curriculum, teachers matter when 

it comes to boosting student achievement. But, just what is it 

about a teacher that can produce significant gains in learning and 

lift a child’s test scores above her peers, given comparable school 

and home environments? 

Perhaps surprisingly, a definitive answer to that question has 

eluded everyone from researchers to professors of education 

to administrators to teachers themselves. Recently, members 

of Education Northwest’s Board of Directors offered their 

perspectives on the subject of high-quality teaching at a meeting 

in Boise, Idaho, with John Q. Easton, who heads the Institute of 

Education Sciences—the research arm of the U.S. Department of 

Education. Their comments, recapped here, reflect different roles 

in education, as well as different parts of the Northwest region. 

By Rhonda Barton

© Cathy Reece/iStockphoto

Four education leaders share their views on how to improve the teaching profession.
Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUMmER 2010 19

A Legislative Mandate

Alan Burke, Deputy Superintendent, 

K–12 Education, Office of 

Superintendent of Public Instruction 

(OSPI), Washington

As part of a plan to apply for federal 

Race to the Top funding, the Washington state Legislature recently passed a 

comprehensive educational reform bill 

(SB6696) that calls for significant changes to evaluation requirements for principals and teachers. Governor Christine 

Gregoire signed the bill into law on 

March 29, 2010. 

The bill mandates eight separate criteria for principal and teacher evaluations 

and requires the use of a four-tier ranking 

system. Student growth based upon multiple measures is a component of both 

systems. Beginning in 2010–2011, six to 

eight pilot districts will be chosen to begin the development of the new system, 

with reports due back to the Legislature 

in 2011 and 2012. Beginning in the 2013–

2014 school year, all districts will be required to use a state-approved system.

As part of the development stage, pilot districts will be asked to review the 

recent research of evaluation models, 

including studies like Doug Lemov’s 

taxonomy of 49 teaching techniques 

and Deborah Ball’s Math Knowledge for 

Teaching at the University of Michigan. 

(More information on Lemov and Ball 

in “Building a Better Teacher” can be 

found at www.nytimes.com/2010/03/

07magazine/07Teachers-t.html.)

The purpose of the pilot/development 

phase of the evaluation system revision 

is to discover, to the best extent possible, 

what quality teaching is and what can 

be done to assure its implementation in 

classrooms across the state. To that end, 

we will use experiences from districts 

that are currently using multi-tier evaluation models, and those that are in various stages of implementation of systems 

that go beyond the traditional—and 

legislatively mandated—seven criteria, 

satisfactory/unsatisfactory requirement. 

Notably, the Washington Education 

Association had significant input into the 

initial crafting of the educational reform 

legislation, working collaboratively with 

the governor’s office, the State Board of 

Education and the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction on evaluation 

reform as well as topics such as changes in 

continuing contract time lines, binding 

conditions for persistently low-performing schools, the provisional adoption of 

the Common Core Standards, enhancing 

parental involvement in schools, and a 

renewed focus on reducing the achievement gap. Although each of the educational groups had somewhat differing 

views on these issues, all have come 

together and made a commitment to 

implement the reforms with fidelity. 

So, in four years we hope to make 

progress on answering what have been 

two vexing questions since the day 

that formal education began—namely, (1) what, really, 

determines good 

teaching, and, (2) 

how can the techniques of good 

teaching be taught 

and effectively used in classrooms?

Editor’s note: SB6696 calls for a fourlevel rating system for all certificated 

classroom teachers that includes “centering instruction on high expectations for 

student achievement; effective teaching 

practices; recognizing individual student 

learning needs and developing strategies 

to address those needs; providing clear 

and intentional focus on subject matter 
20 educationnorthwest.org

content and curriculum; fostering and 

managing a safe, positive learning environment; using multiple students’ data elements to modify instruction and improve 

student learning; communicating and collaborating with parents and school community; and exhibiting collaborative and 

collegial practices focused on improving 

instructional practice and student learning.” Pilot districts will help develop the 

evaluation system during the 2010–2011 

school year with statewide implementation slated for 2013.

Performance Assessments and 

Teacher Prep

Joanne Erickson, Associate Professor 

of Educational Leadership, Montana 

State University, Montana

In the process of redefining “highly 

effective teachers” higher education has 

moved from teacher candidate assessment that uses inputs (i.e., taking a series 

of classes and getting passing grades and/

or standardized tests) to performance 

assessment. Traditional assessment has 

been shown to have limited value in 

predicting teacher effectiveness in the 

classroom. Performance assessment is a 

better predictor of a teacher’s ability to 

support and improve student achievement. This type of assessment also better 

supports teacher preparation programs 

to improve the quality of the preparation 

program and the consistency with which 

teacher licensure decisions are made.

There is emerging research that informs teacher preparation programs 

about quality performance initiatives.  Research being conducted by 

Stanford University in partnership with 

the American Association of Colleges 

of Teacher Education (AACTE) and 

the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) has 

resulted in a performance assessment 

system that recommends that teacher 

preparation programs have embedded signature assignments, common 

portfolio assessment, and a teaching 

event (frequently called the Teacher 

Work Sample).  We at Montana State 

University are using the outcomes of 

this research to guide us in developing 

a more robust performance assessment 

system for our teacher candidates.  We 

have implemented signature assignments, the teaching event (Teacher Work 

Sample), and are working on a common 

portfolio.  This type of assessment is 

also required by our national accreditation associations.  We see evidence of 

our work in producing more effective 

teachers that can improve student learning.  (See a summary article at  www.

aacte.org/index.php?/Programs/

Teacher-Performance-AssessmentC o n s o r t i u m - T PAC / t e a c h e r -

performance-assessment-consortium.

html.)

It is critical that teacher preparation 

programs redefine themselves as being 

in partnership with schools and districts 

to improve student achievement and 

that we recognize this as our essential 

mission.  Perhaps the most critical part 

of teacher preparation is the clinical 

experience. Unfortunately, the traditional model of student teaching hasn’t 

changed and is not consistent with how 

schools have changed or with the realities schools face for accountability.  In 

fact, many schools and districts are reluctant to take preservice teachers in 

clinical experiences as it may disadvantage the school or district with accountability measures.

Based on research from St. Cloud 

State University developed with a 

Teacher Quality Enhancement Partnership Grant, we have changed our clinical experience to a co-teaching model, 

which is designed to be a mentoring experience as compared to the traditional 

student teaching model.  Data from St. 

Cloud suggest that this model does significantly improve student achievement. 

The partnership between the university 

and the school/district with this model 

is exciting and revolutionary.  With the 

co-teaching model, teacher candidates 

are actively engaged with kids on the 

very first day of their experience and 

the cooperating teacher and the teacher 

candidate work collaboratively throughout the experience.  The cooperating 

teacher doesn’t leave the classroom, taking away that expertise and support, but 

rather remains with the teacher candidate throughout. 

The co-teaching model has encouraged university faculty to bring classroom experiences into the teacher preparation program long before student 

teaching. This new model for our clinical 

experience has improved partnerships, 

improved our teacher preparation program, and resulted in teacher candidates 

that are effective in improving student 

achievement. (See a summary article at 

www.aacte.org.)

The Role of “Soft Skills”

Jerry Colonna, Superintendent, 

Beaverton School District, Oregon

The major point I tried to make during the discussion with Dr. Easton was to 

look at what Teach for America has found 

in 10 years of research with about 7,500 

teachers who they had placed in the most 

difficult inner-city schools with very high 

rates of English language learners and 

special education students. They found 

that many of the traditional measures 

used for teacher quality were not, in fact, 

...”[I]n four years we hope to 

make progress on answering 

what have been two vexing 

questions since the day that 

formal education began 

—namely, (1) what, really, 

determines good teaching, 

and, (2) how can the 

techniques of good teaching 

be taught and effectively used 

in classrooms?”

—Deputy Superintendent, K–12 

Education, Alan Burke, talking about 

recent Washington legislation that 

will result in a new statewide teacher 

evaluation system 
what made a difference for students. 

The first thing that 

made a difference 

was what they defined as “grit.” Grit is 

the ability or characteristic to have high 

expectations of these 

students and continue to believe that they [as teachers] can 

make a difference. That particular quality 

is something that typically isn’t emphasized in interviews when we are looking 

at prospective content-area teachers.

A second, really big factor in terms 

of teacher quality—and again what their 

extensive research indicated—is that the 

individual is happy with his or her own 

place in life. They’re happy about who 

they are as a person; they’re happy about 

how they see their life in the future; and 

they have a sense of well-being. Again, 

it’s another area that we don’t hire for, 

but it’s a huge quality that they saw in 

their successful teachers.

A third area is the ability to overcome 

obstacles and to specifically indicate in 

their own lives what obstacles they have 

overcome. That’s because a big part of 

these teachers’ work was helping students to be able to deal with their current 

life situation, set those outside barriers 

aside, and work in the school environment. The fourth area was goal orientation—to set a certain specific goal and be 

able to meet it. (See more on the Teach 

for America research in “What Makes 

a Great Teacher?,” www.theatlantic.

com/magazine/archive/2010/01/

what-makes-a-great-teacher/7841/.)

It may well be that traditional measures of professional development, content-area knowledge, master’s degrees, 

and a lot of other things matter when we 

look at the most difficult teaching situations in the United States. But, there’s 

a whole body of research that indicates 

it’s really the soft skills that are making 

the greatest difference. And this has also 

been found to be true in research that’s 

being done by David Conley at the University of Oregon. He has found that career- and college-ready students, those 

that seem to be successful coming out of 

high school and transitioning into college or careers, have many of these same 

skills that Teach for America has found 

in successful teachers teaching in our 

toughest schools in America.

That’s why teacher evaluation is so 

difficult. Oftentimes, when you find 

a teacher who is not doing well, it’s as 

much a concern about his or her personality characteristics as it is with content 

knowledge, classroom management, 

and some of these other things. I’m not 

saying those don’t matter, but I think 

the soft skills need to be reassessed. It’s 

pretty tough to turn personality characteristics around, so I’m a little pessimistic, in a way, about our ability to make a 

change. 

JPAS: An Innovative Teacher 

Evaluation System 

Wendy Horman, School Board 

Member, Bonneville Joint School 

District, Idaho

Teachers who engage students in 

learning—that’s quality teaching. One of 

the ways our district has used research 

and data to address teacher quality issues is through an innovative teacher 

evaluation system—the Jordan Performance Appraisal System (JPAS). We’ve 

been using it for four years. 

We began the process by passing a 

new board policy on teacher evaluations, 

and then the district started looking at 

different options. The union participated 

fully from day one, which is part of what 

made this successful in the end.

We did a lot of work internally in 

terms of a paradigm shift, [defining] the 

evaluation as an instrument to identify 

strengths and weaknesses and to help 

guide professional development. JPAS is 

based on the effective schools’ research 

of decades gone by. The system was designed by the Jordan School District in 

Utah, working with their union and the 

state department of education. It incorporates an observation system that measures skills and techniques for 49 specific behaviors and includes a portfolio and 

interview component for skills that can’t 

be observed in a classroom visit. (See 

http://departments.jordan district.org/

curriculum/jpas/.)

Our administrators become certified evaluators for JPAS, which includes 

passing a written test and scoring video 

samples. Because of this certification, 

teachers can be confident about the objectivity of their JPAS results, regardless 

of which administrator does the evaluation. This is great for the district because 

we know we have a consistent measure 

of what good teaching looks like inside 

each school and across the district. 

Each teacher receives a report of their 

JPAS scores, reflecting areas of strength 

and areas where 

they have opportunities for growth. 

The report includes 

links to research 

and resources for 

improvement in the 

particular areas that 

are identified for growth. So, a teacher 

gets that information on an individual 

level, and an administrator can compile 

the information for his or her building. 

If there’s a general area of weakness, perhaps it can be addressed at an inservice 

staff development day. We have done the 

same thing on a district level: We create 

and deliver professional development in 

accordance with what JPAS is telling us 

our teachers need most. It’s been really 

great to watch our JPAS scores change 

as a result of identifying weaknesses, delivering training, and being really proud 

that our teachers improve in those areas. 

Student achievement scores are also rising in our district. 

JPAS is a reliable and valid measure 

for teaching. It does not, however, incorporate student learning measures. We 

use that information in other ways in 

accordance with our Master Agreement. 

Nonetheless, JPAS has had a significant 

positive effect in guiding our teachers 

toward more effective instruction. n

Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUmMER 2010 21

defining high-quality teaching
22 educationnorthwest.org

Head of the

CLASS

A small Oregon district trains and 

retains effective teachers with the help 

of the Creative Leadership Achieves 

Student Success Project.

Story by Rhonda Barton

Photos by Dee Dixon

TILLAMOOK, Oregon—Acres of lush green pastures, a picturesque bay teeming 

with Dungeness crab, and a reputation for producing world-class cheese 

have made Tillamook an attractive tourist destination on the Oregon coast. 

But the small, financially strapped community still struggled with hanging onto newly minted teachers. About half the new teaching staff would 

depart each year, lured away by higher salaries and greater opportunities in 

the urban Willamette Valley. Achievement scores—with only 11 percent of 

students at or above the state average—reflected this persistent problem of 

teacher turnover.

Facing those challenges, Tillamook became one of three pilot sites for an 

ambitious and innovative initiative called the CLASS (Creative Leadership 

Achieves Student Success) Project. The program is part of the Chalkboard 

Project, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization whose mission is “to unite 

Oregonians to make our K–12 schools among the nation’s best.” Funded 

by a consortium of foundations, Chalkboard launched the CLASS Project in 2006 with four components that work together to increase teacher 

effectiveness:

• Expand career paths so experienced teachers can assume new leadership 

roles, such as mentoring and instructional coaching

• Develop effective performance evaluations with clear goals tied to 

student achievement

• Provide targeted and relevant professional development to give teachers 

resources and support to improve their practice

• Implement new compensation models to recognize new roles and 

responsibilities and reward teacher effectiveness
Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUMmER 2010 23
Today, three years into the project, 

Tillamook is seeing impressive results: 

Districtwide achievement has steadily 

improved to 60 percent of students at or 

above the state average; one Tillamook 

elementary school that was in improvement status has turned around and captured statewide honors for stellar scores; 

and both new and veteran teachers have 

embraced a culture of collaboration and 

high expectations. 

A new teacher retention program—

combined with the state of the national 

economy—enabled Tillamook to keep 

86 percent of its effective teachers last 

year compared to 75 percent in 

2007–2008. 

According to Superintendent Randy 

Schild, “It’s impossible to distinguish 

between the philosophies of CLASS and 

the district because they have become 

one and the same. We have become better at educating our students and supporting our teachers today than we ever 

have been.” Schild says that a year one 

planning grant of $30,000 mobilized the 

district. Implementation grants of up to 

$300,000 in years two and three, allowed 

them to focus on developing their own 

strategies within the CLASS framework 

and “to make sure they were going to 

take us in the direction we were planning 

to go anyway.”

A Champion School

There’s probably no better place to see 

the fruits of that focused effort than at 

East Elementary School. Almost 60 percent of the school’s 420 students qualify 

for free and reduced-price lunch and 

about one-third are minorities. In 2006, 

the school was designated by the state as 

Jenny Sheets’ fourth-graders are learning 

“all about matter.” As she instructs her class 

in how to create a journal where they’ll record facts about atoms, solids, liquids, and 

gas, she incorporates GLAD (Guided Language Acquisition Development) strategies that are aimed especially at helping 

ELL students succeed. GLAD training was 

just one of the teacher supports that have 

contributed to effective teaching and soaring student proficiency scores at East 

Elementary. 

Sheets is in her sixth year of teaching. 

She sees high-quality professional development as a key component in creating effective teachers. “The CLASS Project has 

allowed me to attend many trainings that 

otherwise we wouldn’t have funding for,” 

she says. “Also, I was involved in the mentor/mentee program where I was able to go 

around with my mentee and observe various teachers using a wide variety of strategies in reading and math. This was a great 

time to collaborate with my mentee to 

share experiences, questions, or ideas.” 

Training in writing is a primary focus this 

year for Sheets and her peers. The fourthgrade team at East has set a collective goal 

of teaching students to become better 

writers and improving test scores in writing. “This is an obstacle that we have been 

dealing with for many years,” she notes. 

“The CLASS Project has helped with this by 

allowing us to attend some trainings to 

learn new strategies to teach writing. We 

have also been able to create a fourthgrade writing folder with lessons, examples, and assessments.” 

The CLASS Project also provided funds 

for mini-grants that teams and individual 

teachers can use to create instructional 

units and other resources. Last year, Sheets 

and the fourth-grade team developed a series of units on health and measurement, 

which students rotated through during a 

week’s time. “Each teacher became a master on one topic and taught it to the whole 

fourth grade over the course of a week,” 

she says. “Then we all gave the same posttest to our students and the results were 

amazing.” 

 Sheets finds that mini-grants are great 

incentives to tackle intensive projects that 

are time consuming. And, she says, having 

money to buy supplies for those project 

solves one of the biggest problems teachers encounter. 

The Role of Professional Development

24 educationnorthwest.org

Jenny Sheets credits the ramped up 

professional development, including GLAD 

training, for helping East 

Elementary go from school 

improvement status to a 

designation as a 2010 

“Champion School” 

in Oregon.
Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUMmER 2010 25

in need of improvement. Since that time, 

East’s combined scores on the Oregon 

achievement tests have jumped to 92 

percent of students meeting or exceeding state standards in reading and math. 

Oregon Superintendent Susan Castillo recognized that accomplishment 

by naming East as a 2010 “Champion 

School”—one of only 10 in the state to 

receive that accolade.

Principal Greg English, who arrived 

in 2006, found staff “pretty much doing their own thing. There was a lot of 

isolation—people closed their doors and 

worked really hard at being good teachers, but everyone was an independent 

contractor,” he recalls. 

Forming a leadership team was the 

first step in bringing staff together and 

examining what was working, what 

needed to be tweaked, and what was 

missing. English and his staff recognized 

that the school was in improvement status because it wasn’t meeting the needs of 

English language learner (ELL) students 

who comprise 13 percent of the population. “We made some changes in the 

configuration of how we place those students in the classroom: Rather than have 

a lot of ELL students clumped together 

in a single classroom, we spread them 

equally, creating differentiated classrooms with all our different populations. 

We also provided virtually everybody on 

staff with two days of training on GLAD 

(Guided Language Acquisition Development),” English explains. “Then, we did 

five days of training with another 19 staff 

members, who’ve become fully certified 

in GLAD. We found that not only did 

our ELL students benefit, but all of our 

students benefitted.”

East, like the other four schools in 

the district, also radically changed its 

approach to how it supports, evaluates, 

and motivates teachers. A 90-minute 

late opening once a week was introduced 

to provide time for grade-level and content-area team meetings. Teachers can 

apply for mini-grants to work together 

to develop instructional units. 

All first- and second-year teachers are 

paired with more experienced mentors 

who guide them through the first two 

years in the classroom. New educational 

assistants (EAs) also are assigned mentors, though the mentor may have three 

EA mentees while the teacher model is a 

one-to-one approach. The CLASS grant 

helps cover the $900–$1,800 stipend to 

teacher mentors and pays for the time 

that the hourly EA mentors and mentees 

spend meeting. “That’s the nice thing 

about the CLASS Project grant,” says 

Tillamook’s CLASS Coordinator Linda 

Shuford. “The Chalkboard Project allows us to experiment. They give us lots 

of space to be innovative.” As far as she 

knows, no other district has launched an 

Rewarding and Retaining New Teachers

Fifth-grade teacher Lindsey Thompson has perfected the art of multi-tasking. During an 

independent mini-class session, Thompson reviews a recent math test with one student 

while smoothly fielding questions from others about science, spelling, and social studies 

projects. The ease with which she handles the competing needs of students belies the fact 

that this is just her fourth year in the classroom.

As a relative newcomer, she’s taking part in Tillamook School District’s new teacher incentive program. In their first three years, teachers can earn $80 for each “distinguished” 

rating and $40 for each “proficient” rating on the 22 skills the district measures during annual evaluations. The money is deposited into a fund that the teacher can access after beginning her fifth year with the district. The funds can only be used for certain expenses 

such as making home improvements or purchasing a house—things that encourage 

people to put down roots in the community. 

Thompson is from Tillamook, so it’s likely she would remain in the area even without the 

incentives. However, she acknowledges that it could make a difference for some of her 

peers. “People understand that Tillamook is a hard place to want to stay if you’re from some 

place bigger,” she says. “A lot of people come with the intention of eventually moving on.” 

Because the extra compensation is specifically tied to retention, she says, no one regards it 

as merit or performance pay. That’s one reason why the union has supported the program. 

Tillamook teachers also are enthusiastic about the district’s new evaluation system for 

both new and veteran teachers. It includes specific goals for enhancing professional practice and increasing student achievement. “People appreciate that it’s clearer and it’s easy to 

see where you should be and what you need to do [to increase performance] in each 

domain,” says Thompson. 

As a new teacher, Lindsey Thompson is one of the beneficiaries of an 

innovative compensation plan that’s tied to teacher retention. The plan 

rewards teachers for high evaluation ratings in their first three years with 

money deposited into a fund that can only be accessed in the fifth year of employment.
26 educationnorthwest.org

EA mentorship program.

Shuford herself is another example of a CLASS-supported 

innovation. Previously a fifth-grade 

teacher at East, she’s now responsible for 

overseeing the project. Career pathway 

opportunities mean that effective teachers can take on new roles—usually with 

extra pay attached—from coaching to 

serving as administrators to heading up 

data teams. “I feel like I’m part of being 

able to create opportunities for teachers 

who have worked so hard,” says Shuford. 

“I hope they can expand their horizons.”

A New Way To Evaluate 

Effectiveness

One of the biggest—and potentially 

most controversial—changes at East and 

throughout the district is the performance evaluation process. Influenced 

by the work of national evaluation guru 

Charlotte Danielson, the process focuses 

on four domains: planning and preparation, classroom environment, instruction, and professional responsibilities. 

Within those domains, teachers are 

judged on 22 skill sets, with ratings from 

unsatisfactory to basic, proficient, or 

distinguished. They are held accountable 

for specific performance goals, which 

they set themselves in collaboration with 

their administrators. Lindsey Thompson, a fifth-grade teacher, is working this 

year on the schoolwide goal of improving writing proficiency for at least 80 

percent of students. She also set a goal 

for herself: to incorporate more GLAD 

strategies such as using visuals into her 

classroom instruction. How well she 

meets those goals will be reflected in her 

evaluation scores.

Superintendent Schild believes that 

the new system “rewards good teaching, 

not just surviving.” It also recognizes that 

student success depends on a number of 

variables, not all of which are under a 

teacher’s control. As the CLASS Project 

literature notes, “Student learning gains 

included in performance evaluations 

are based on multiple measures, and are 

used to advance the quality of teaching 

and learning.” 

To support the goal of teacher retention, 

Tillamook built an innovative incentive 

program into its evaluation of new teachers. Evaluated annually in the first three 

years, new teachers can earn $80 for each 

“distinguished” rating and $40 for each 

“proficient” rating within the 22 skill 

measures. Stipends of $100 are awarded 

for community volunteer activities such 

as coaching a Y team or leading a Boy 

Scout troop. The money—which can add 

up to a hefty $6,000 over four years—is 

set aside in a district fund that the teacher 

can access only after beginning the fifth 

year of employment. “We feel that if they 

become embedded into our community, 

they’ll want to stay,” Shuford observes. 

Sustaining 

Improvements

The financial support and other resources provided by the CLASS Project have 

obviously been a critical part of Tillamook’s success story. But, Superintendent Schild claims that CLASS can’t take 

all the credit for how far the district has 

come. “CLASS is a huge piece, but it’s not 

the only thing,” he says. “There are 100 

things that have to do with consistency 

and focus.” That’s why Schild—who is a 

product himself of the Tillamook School 

District—is confident that the work can 

be sustained once the CLASS grant runs 

its course. 

The Importance of Mentors

In a small classroom carved out behind the 

auditorium stage at East Elementary, Title I

teacher Rachel Williamson works with seven students on sharpening their reading 

for understanding. This is Williamson’s 13th 

year in the Tillamook School District, but 

the memory of what it was like to be a beginning teacher is still fresh. “As a new 

teacher, I remember feeling overwhelmed 

by the task of creating a curriculum map 

for the year,” she says. “I wasn’t even sure 

what the curriculum was at the school or 

where to locate it, and I was so worried 

that I would skip teaching something that 

the students needed to know. When I asked 

my partner teacher, I was told to ‘just use 

the books.’ I remember feeling so lost and 

overwhelmed. I muddled through, but it 

would have been very helpful if an experienced teacher had been able to take the 

time to help me develop that skill faster 

and with fewer tears of frustration.”

The district’s new teacher mentorship 

program is working to assuage that feeling 

of being overwhelmed by the demands of 

the classroom. To be selected, a mentor has 

to have at least three years of experience 

teaching in the district, in addition to 

strong communication skills, positive peer 

relationships, a high performance rating, 

and approval of the principal. 

Lindsey Thompson has seen the value of 

the mentor program from both sides of the 

relationship. As a new teacher four years 

ago she was paired with Linda Shuford, 

who is currently the CLASS Project coordinator. “I struggled with getting my students’ attention,” she recalls. “I would ask 

for their attention and then as soon as they 

were quiet I would start my lesson. However, after being observed by my mentor 

(Linda), I learned that I needed to wait 

longer and have not only their voices off, 

but make sure all of their eyes were looking at me. Her advice is in the front of my 

brain everyday and has made me a much 

more effective teacher.”

Now Thompson mentors a teacher who 

has taught for a number of years but is new 

to the fifth grade. “We work together on 

knowing what she’s supposed to teach and 

different ways to do it, bouncing ideas off 

each other,” she says. “Having a mentoring 

program can make a huge difference.” 

Title I teacher Rachel Williamson says 

having a mentor can help new teachers 

feel less overwhelmed in the classroom. 

In Tillamook, all first- and second-year 

teachers are assigned mentors, as are new 

educational assistants.
Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUMmER 2010 27

What Does It Take To Become

a Member of the CLASS?

Tillamook, Sherwood, and Forest 

Grove comprise the first cohort of 

CLASS Project districts and are well 

on their way to implementing improvements. Another nine Oregon 

school districts are in the planning 

stage, and at least eight more have 

approached Chalkboard about joining the project. Chalkboard President Sue Hildick says that districts 

interested in having CLASS-type discussions need the support of their 

union, administration, and school 

board. Once those partners are on 

board, they should contact Chalkboard (www.chalkboardproject.org) 

about the possibility of receiving a 

design grant. “Design funds allow a 

district to assemble a design team—

heavily weighted toward teachers—

to come together and have critical 

conversations around the four key 

elements of career ladders, professional development, evaluation, and 

compensation,” she says.

“There are some things we’ll choose 

not to do, possibly, but a lot of what we’ve 

done has become part of who we are,” 

Schild says. “Our mentor program—we 

couldn’t stop it. It would leave such a hole, 

now that we see how important it is.”

Tillamook’s experience is being closely watched—along with the 11 other 

CLASS Project districts in Oregon. Together, they represent one in every six 

Oregon students and 18 percent of the 

state’s teachers. According to Sue Hildick, president of the Chalkboard Project, “CLASS is fast becoming a national 

model because of both the early results 

and the process. The early results are 

dramatic—student achievement indicators are increasing and teacher satisfaction levels are increasing.”

She continues, “Other districts should 

look at Tillamook’s results. They will be 

inspired: much stronger teacher retention rates; great student achievement 

outcomes; and a long-term commitment 

to excellence by all those involved in the 

learning community in Tillamook.”

The small town that’s struggled in the 

past with low student success and high 

teacher turnover now can brag about its 

educational system, as well as its cheese. n

(Left) CLASS Project Coordinator 

Linda Schuford and East Elementary 

Principal Greg English compare notes 

on new initiatives funded by the project. 

Superintendent Randy Schild (above) says 

that CLASS helped the district focus on 

specific areas to drive improvement. 

head of the class
28 educationnorthwest.org

Story and photos by Bracken Reed

Me to You

A Pass i o n f o r Tea chi n g

Second-grade teacher 

Jessica Baker takes 

part in instructional 

coaching, on-site 

mentoring, and a 

teachers’ assistance 

program as part of 

the Richland School 

District’s support for 

first-year teachers.
Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUMmER 2010 29

RICHLAND, Washington—There’s an anecdote about the teaching profession that Richland High School English teacher Jim 

Deatherage likes to tell. It may be apocryphal—“I don’t remember where I heard it,” he admits—but that doesn’t really matter. 

For him it serves a purpose. It helps him make an important 

point about his own approach to teaching. 

“Someone asked a chemistry teacher one time if he could 

teach to an empty room,” begins Deatherage. “And the chemistry teacher thought about it and said, ‘Yeah, sure. As long as 

I knew what the lesson was, I could teach to any empty room.’” 

Here, Deatherage pauses and gives me an intense, incredulous look. It’s a look that can make you feel pinned to the wall. 

“Can you believe that?” he asks. 

I nod to show I’m following his point, but waiting for the rest. 

“I could no sooner teach to an empty room ...” he begins, 

then gives way to disgust.

“For me, teaching is completely relational,” he continues. 

“It’s all about walking into that classroom and relating to that 

group of kids sitting there in front of you.”

“Like this,” he says, tapping his own chest and rapping me 

on the shoulder. “Me to you. Without that, you’re not teaching. 

You can have a curriculum, a lesson plan, whatever—without 

that, no way. ”

We Press On

Deatherage has been bringing that relational approach—and 

that intensity—into the classroom, day after day, for the past 41 

years. I know, because I experienced it first-hand as a student of 

his some 25 years ago. It had a profound effect on my life.

I also know because, coming back to my hometown to visit 

with him for the first time in more than a decade, I can tell immediately that his passion for teaching is undiminished. After 

only a few minutes in a room with him, talking about teaching, 

it can feel like someone has hooked you up to jumper cables. His 

gestures are emphatic, he jokes constantly—often in a teasing 

way—and yes, he swears a lot. He has a story, quote, anecdote, 

personal experience, song lyric, or line from a poem for almost 

every point he wants to make. And he has a lot of points to make: 

He cares about teaching the way a vintner cares about wine or 

a luthier cares about violins. It’s not just a job—it’s a way of life. 

Working as an education writer for much of the past decade, 

I have often found myself thinking: What would Deatherage 

think about this? So, when the chance came to write a story 

about teaching, I knew the time was right to go back to the 

source. In all my years as a student, K–16, I never had a teacher who worked harder, pushed me harder, cared more, taught 

with more passion, or spoke more of the unadorned truth to his 

students than Jim Deatherage. So I sent him an e-mail.

He was glad to hear from me after so long and happy to share 

his views about education and the teaching profession—uncensored and uninhibited, as always. But he was also reticent about 

being held up in the spotlight as some kind of expert. The “sage 

on the stage,” he disparagingly called it. 

“I don’t think it’s too difficult to know what works for most 

kids,” he told me via e-mail. “But after 41 years I’m still learning 

how to do it better. Maybe that’s one of the reasons I’ve stayed 

with it so long. Every day is a test of my work ethic, my insight, 

and my perseverance. As I like to say, we press on.” 

With that in mind, we agreed that I would come back to my 

alma mater, sit in on a few of his classes, shadow him in the 

afternoon as he mentored a first-year teacher, Jessica Baker, and 

also talk to one of his colleagues at the high school, TAP facilitator Mary Kaye Hergert. “She really knows her stuff,” he said 

of Hergert. “She can explain what we’re doing here a lot better 

than I can.”

Respecting Your Students’ Intelligence

I meet Deatherage in Richland High’s main office at 8 a.m. on 

a Friday morning in April. We take the elevator up—although 

an avid runner, he’s torn the meniscus in his right knee twice 

in the past 18 months—and walk down the south wing of the 

English building to room 1242, second-to-last door on the 

right, the same room he’s been teaching in for most of the last 

four decades. Outside the door a sign says, “Be Afraid, Be Very 

Afraid,” and next to it is a drawing of an old man holding a 

student-sized skeleton. Both are gifts from former students. 

Deatherage stands outside the door greeting his first-period 

students as they enter and acknowledging other students by 

name as they pass by. Later, Hergert explains to me that this 

is one of the “community commitments” the entire RHS staff 

has made. The school was having major problems with fighting. 

“Having teachers out in the hallways between classes sends the 

message that adults are in charge of the building,” says Hergert. 

“Kids want that. They want to know someone is in charge. They 

After four decades, an English teacher still 

thrives on the human connections that 

define his approach to teaching.
30 educationnorthwest.org

don’t want chaos any more than adults do.”

It’s a good policy, but I also know that for Deatherage it’s 

simply the way he does things. Policy or no policy, it’s relational. 

As the bell for first period rings, Deatherage walks in, closes 

the door behind him, and steps to the front of the class. 

“Good morning, ladies and gentleman,” he says. 

“Good morning, Mr. D.,” his students reply in near unison. 

The students are quiet and focused. All eyes are on him. On 

one wall I notice a poster titled “Ready for Class.” It contains 

seven numbered items: 1) seated at the bell, 2) cell phone off, 

3) homework ready, 4) outside reading book, 5) planner, 6) appropriate clothing, 7) great attitude, ready to learn. 

Back in my day, students would sometimes assume that 

Deatherage’s nontraditional, “cool” manner would mean loose 

discipline and an easy class. They were quickly set straight. 

Although he infuses his teaching with a great deal of humor, 

when it comes to classroom management and behavior issues 

Deatherage is all business—no exceptions, no “special rules for 

special fools,” as he likes to say. The expectations are clear and 

consistent for everyone. 

“I decided very early in my career that I just wasn’t going to 

deal with that crap,” he says. “Zero tolerance. I’ve got 25, 30 other kids in that room that are trying to learn. It’s too important.”

“Today’s schedule is on the board,” he tells his students this 

morning, pointing to the bell schedule he has written on the 

chalkboard. “As you know, we’ve got shortened class periods 

today, so let’s get right to it.” 

He introduces the day’s activity—the students can choose to 

read one of three articles in the local newspaper, the Tri-City 

Herald. He puts special emphasis on one: a syndicated column 

by Pulitzer Prize–winning Washington Post columnist Kathleen 

Parker. It’s titled “One Teacher, One Voice Can Make a Difference Forever.” 

Later, Deatherage assures me that this was pure serendipity—the article had run in the previous day’s paper. “Nice timing, huh?” he says, making reference to why I’m here. 

In class, he briefly describes all three articles, points out 

where they are in the paper, and says two things to his students that are striking to me: “I think you’ll find these worth 

your time” and “I want to know what you think about these. 

Remember: Your opinion counts.”

I nod to myself and think: That’s it. That’s part of it.

After class I ask him about those phrases. “It’s about respecting their intelligence,” he says. 

I ask him to expand on the point. 

“My thinking is that you never, ever go down to their level,” 

he says. “Instead, you try to bring them up to your level. You 

can’t do it all at once, but gradually you can. That’s what having 

high expectations is all about.”

I ask him about practical ways of doing that.

“A lot of it’s just the way you phrase things,” he says. “For 

example: When I, as an adult, point out articles in a newspaper 

that I think you’ll find interesting or worth your time—aren’t 

you more likely to respond to that? That’s one adult talking to 

another. It’s a lot different than me saying, ‘Here, read these.’ I’m 

showing you respect, and I’m also sending the message that I’m 

not going to waste your time.”

In fact, this is the single biggest impression I have of being 

in Deatherage’s classes: You absolutely knew he wasn’t going to 

waste your time. There was a sense of urgency to his teaching 

style—still is—that sets him apart. His manner and attitude and 

intensity send an unequivocal message to students: This is serious business. This is your education. THIS IS YOUR LIFE. 

You have every right to demand that I not waste your time with 

irrelevant, meaningless assignments. And I have every right to 

demand that you work hard, pay attention, and show respect to 

me and your fellow students. That’s our agreement with each 

other. If you can’t buy into that, there’s the door. 

As usual, Deatherage has a favorite line from a poem that 

sums this up. It’s from Richard Brautigan: “My teachers could 

easily have ridden with Jessie James for all the time they stole 

from me.” 

“I’m trying hard, every day, not to be that kind of outlaw—

stealing time,” he says.

You’re Never Done Learning

You might think a teacher in his fourth decade of teaching 

would be running on cruise control. Not so. When I ask both 

Deatherage and Hergert what has changed the most in the 

teaching profession over the course of their careers, they have 

similar answers. 

“There’s more of a professional network now,” says Hergert. 

“Gone are the days when teachers closed their doors and did 

their own thing and never talked to anyone. We know that 

doesn’t work. Whether it’s coaching, a teacher mentoring program, or a professional learning community, we’re trying to 

find every opportunity we can for teachers to collaborate and 

learn from each other and support each other. That’s a very different atmosphere than when I started my teaching career.”

For his part, Deatherage has embraced this new focus on 

professionalism and collaboration with his usual passion. “This 

is the first time in my entire teaching career that I’ve had the 

chance to meet on a regular basis with other teachers,” he says. 

“It’s awesome. I’m learning so much, every single week.”

 Deatherage takes part in three different professional learning communities, including two in one day. On Tuesdays he 

meets with Hergert, the curriculum director, the director of 

special education, and another teacher to review the progress 

of individual first-year teachers. They also study Collaborative 

Peer Coaching That Improves Instruction: The 2 + 2 Performance 

Appraisal Model by Dwight Allen and Alyce LeBlanc. 

“That’s about learning-focus conversations,” says Hergert. 

“It’s similar to lesson study in that it gets teachers into each 

other’s classrooms, observing and giving feedback. Its’ about 

breaking down the isolation that’s often there for teachers, but 

doing that in a way that’s very focused on student achievement.”

Wednesday mornings Deatherage meets with a “writing 

team”—a group of teachers whose current focus is to break 

down the state’s “overwhelming” state standards for writing 
Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUMmER 2010 31

into the most important things that students need to know and 

be able to do. “We call them ‘power standards,’” says Deatherage. “It’s essential skills. We get together as a group and say, ‘OK, 

what are the four or five skills here that are absolutely crucial?’ 

And then, when are we going to introduce them, when are we 

going to reinforce them, and when do we expect mastery?”

Deatherage’s view on the standards movement of the past 

decade is a surprise to me. I suspected he might see it as a straitjacket or a limit on his creativity as a teacher. When I put the 

question to Deatherage and Hergert, however, her response has 

him nodding in agreement.

“I think it’s the exact opposite of that,” she says. “I think standards are giving you the target you’re shooting for, and that really frees you up. Before we had standards each teacher had to 

spend a lot of time alone, trying to identify that target for any 

given lesson or unit. How did it build off previous lessons, how 

did it lead into what came next? And then there’s the issue of 

how it aligns with what other teachers are doing. Having all that 

clearly laid out in front of you allows you to focus on your real 

job: teaching kids. ”

On Wednesday evenings Deatherage and Hergert team up 

again for two hours of the Teachers’ Assistance Program (TAP). 

From 3–4 p.m. they meet with first-year secondary-level teachers, followed by an hour with first-year K–5 teachers. While 

this isn’t technically a PLC, Deatherage considers it one because 

these sessions also use a book, Harry and Rosemary Wong’s The 

First Days of School: How to Be An Effective Teacher, as a starting point. 

This is the second year of TAP, which is separate from—but 

complementary to—the district’s coaching program for new 

teachers. “We purposely keep TAP very flexible,” says Hergert. 

“We might cover classroom management strategies or standards or discipline issues—whatever they want to talk about. 

This goes back to that idea of a professional network—instead 

of this first-year teacher feeling like she’s all alone, now she has 

a first-year teacher from a school across town that she can share 

ideas with and commiserate with. And then they’ve got their 

coaches, as well.”

Making the Connection

One of those first year teachers is Jessica Baker, who teaches 

second grade at White Bluffs Elementary, a brand new K–5 

school on Richland’s booming west side. Deatherage serves as 

Baker’s coach, typically visiting her classroom a couple times a 

week in the afternoon. 

On the afternoon that Deatherage and I visit, her students 

are still out to recess. I ask Baker, who doesn’t look much older 

than Deatherage’s high school students, how the coaching program has helped her. “It’s been invaluable,” she says. “Everything from classroom management to organization to dealing 

with behavior issues—it’s helped me tremendously.” 

 Although Baker feels like her teacher training was very good, 

“There’s no substitute for the real thing,” she says. “That first day 

you step in front of a class by yourself can be really scary. Having someone come in every week helps you gain confidence a 

lot faster. You get that immediate feedback, like ‘Did you notice 

that you’re often teaching to only one side of the class?’ It’s very 

practical advice that you can put into action immediately.”

One key, says Deatherage, is that a coach is not in an evaluation role. “That’s not why I’m there,” he says. “I’m there to give 

constructive feedback. And I’m also not there to say, ‘No, do it 

like this.’ I’m observing and trying to share what I see and to 

make some recommendations based on past experience.”

As Baker’s students come back from recess, Deatherage and 

I take a place at the back of the class. The students come in 

rosy-cheeked and bursting with energy, but as Baker moves to 

the front of the class they quickly take their places. “Awesome, 

thanks for waiting quietly,” Baker tells them. “I appreciate that.”

The class moves quickly into a spelling lesson, using an overhead projector, and then into a reading activity that requires all 

the students to move to the floor at the front of the room. 

Deatherage leans over and tells me, with pride: “You wouldn’t 

believe these were the same kids as the beginning of the year. 

She’s really done an amazing job.”

“Focused. Right on task,” I say, making a bam-bam-bam 

chopping motion with my hand.

“Exactly,” he says. “They know the routine, they know 

the expectations. They’re right there with her. She’s got that 

connection.”

And I think back to our earlier conversation: It’s relational 

... like this ... me to you. 

And I think how these connections can start as simple acts 

of teaching and learning, but they can go much deeper. They 

can change lives. 

I know it’s true, because 25 years ago Jim Deatherage 

changed mine. n

me to you: a passion for teaching

Veteran teacher Jim Deatherage spends afternoons as an 

instructional coach for first-year teachers. Here he visits Jessica 

Baker’s second-grade classroom at White Bluffs Elementary. “Jessica 

loves her students and they love her,” says Deatherage. “That’s not 

the whole story of effective teaching, but it’s definitely part of it.”
32 educationnorthwest.org

Rewriting 

the Future 

in Sweet Home

In this Oregon district, 

a focus on writing is 

just the first chapter. 

Story by Suzie Boss

Photos by Sarah Giffrow

SWEET HOME, Oregon—Along Main Street, new flower beds and 

graceful street lamps send a signal about local pride in this 

small Willamette Valley community with the endearing name. 

Sweet Home, Oregon, may be struggling against mill closures 

and stubbornly high unemployment, but that’s no reason for 

despair. “You can see the town trying to reinvigorate itself,” says 

Dr. Larry Horton, superintendent since 2001. “When things get 

tight,” he adds, “people here seem to work together harder.” 

Sweet Home School District, the community’s largest employer, has a front-row seat on local challenges. Enrollment 

is down to 2,100, compared with 2,600 when Horton arrived 

nearly a decade ago. Free and reduced-price lunch rates are up 

to 65 percent, reflecting a rise in poverty. Homelessness is up, 

too. It’s not unusual for school buses to make the rounds of local 

campgrounds to pick up kids whose families are living in tents. 

Instead of wringing their hands, community members 

think creatively about solutions. To feed hungry kids over the 

weekend, volunteers send about two dozen students home on 

Fridays with backpacks full of food. On a bigger scale, Sweet 

Home Economic Development Group raises thousands of 

dollars to benefit local schools by hosting a summer country 

music festival called the Oregon Jamboree. The district food 

service department brings in additional revenue throughout 

the year by providing catering services, and school mechanics 

generate more income for the district by tuning up city buses. 

“We’re entrepreneurs,” Horton says. “We’re trying to maximize 
Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUMmER 2010 33

Principal Ryan Beck knows what he’s 

looking for when he visits classrooms 

at Hawthorne Elementary, and student 

engagement ranks high on the list.
34 educationnorthwest.org

everything we have here.” 

To improve student achievement in an era of lean budgets, 

the district is looking to maximize the one resource it has in 

every classroom: teachers. By giving teachers more time to collaborate and opportunities to share best practices, Horton predicts, “we’re going to see a better way of doing business for kids.”

Giving Their All—and Then Some

As soon as students head home for the day, 16 elementary 

teachers make their way to the brick administration building 

in the center of town. They get a warm welcome from Tim 

Swanson, a fellow teacher who spends half his time out of the 

classroom as an instructional coach. Although Swanson is 

technically in charge of organizing today’s professional learning event, he’s careful to keep the tone collegial—more like a 

club than a formal inservice. Above all, he knows the experience has to be valuable. “Teachers’ priority, and rightly so, is 

their students. They’re already giving 150 percent for their kids. 

If I’m asking them to give another 10 percent,” he says, “it’d better be worth it.” 

What’s lured participants today is an invitation to work with 

colleagues on writing instruction. The district has made writing a priority, especially at the elementary level where scores 

have been flat on statewide writing assessments. Swanson’s 

coaching services (in math as well as writing) are available to 

teachers at all five elementary schools. In addition to organizing professional development events, he’ll come into a classroom to observe and give feedback, model a lesson, or cover for 

a teacher so he or she can go observe another classroom. But 

participation is strictly voluntary. So Swanson uses a winning 

combination of humor, relationship building, persistence, and 

even marketing to get teachers on board. 

On this afternoon, Swanson quickly turns teachers loose on 

seven learning centers he has set up around the room. Each has 

a different activity that emphasizes word choice, one of the traits 

of effective writing. Teachers step right into the learner’s role, 

putting pen to paper. Just as readily, they turn to colleagues to 

debrief the experience. Group brainstorming naturally ensues 

as teachers think aloud about how they might adapt these activities for their classrooms and how their students would benefit. 

These productive conversations, as well as the healthy turnout, are encouraging signs. At a similar event Swanson organized in late 2008, only one teacher showed up. “But that was 

OK,” says the perennially upbeat Swanson. “The two of us had 

a great conversation about writing.” 

Finding His Road Map

Swanson knows firsthand that improving writing instruction 

takes both time and focus. After growing up in Grants Pass, 

Oregon, he started teaching a decade ago in Denver. When he 

moved to Sweet Home three years ago, his principal at Holley 

Elementary offered to send him to a 6+1 Trait® Writing workshop conducted by Education Northwest. The trait model, developed by teachers, offers a framework and common language 

for teaching and assessing the components of good writing. For 

Swanson, it turned out to be just the spark he needed.

At the first workshop Swanson attended, facilitator Peter 

Bellamy shared a richly illustrated book called Hoops by Robert 

Burleigh. When Bellamy demonstrated how to use the text to 

model descriptive writing, Swanson was sold. “It just spoke to 

me. I realized that my kids could write like that, too,” he recalls. 

Once Swanson tried using traits-based activities with his 

fourth- and fifth-graders, he saw a difference in their engagement—and in the results. Instead of taking a “shotgun approach” to writing, he was now able to help students focus on 

one component at a time, such as organization, voice, or word 

choice. “If you’re teaching one trait, you can see growth. It gives 

you a road map for how to produce quality writing,” he says. 

Buoyed by these positive experiences, Swanson was eager 

to keep learning himself. He jumped at the chance to become 

a district trainer for the 6+1 Trait Writing Model, and went 

to a summer institute in 2008. Throughout that school year, 

Swanson got strategic about connecting students’ writing with 

their own experiences. He noticed that, for many students, life 

hadn’t yet offered them interesting adventures to write about. 

So Swanson began taking them on field trips to expand their 

horizons. They didn’t have to go far. At nearby logging camps 

and forest parks, students had the chance to interview science 

experts and investigate different habitats. One day, a veterinarian dissected a steelhead right before their wide eyes. Back in 

the classroom, Swanson had students do quick writes about 

what they had seen in the field. 

“Everyone had something to share,” he noticed, and there 

was no longer a scarcity of rich detail. The quick writes about 

authentic experiences became raw material for producing 

thank-you letters, biome reports, poetry, and other products 

that emerged through the writing process. Using the traits, 

Swanson was able to give students timely, meaningful feedback 

for continually improving their writing. 

 “It turned into kind of a big deal,” Swanson reflects. “Writing is more than just the activity. It’s the whole experience of 

school—building background knowledge and being excited 

about learning.” He even challenged his young writers to start 

planning for college, unlike the 50 percent of local high school 

graduates who do not pursue higher education. “Beat the Bell 

Curve” became their motto, which they proudly shared on a 

flag and tee-shirts.

A Perfect Storm

Jan Littlebear, a former teacher from Alaska and now senior 

program advisor for Education Northwest, leads the 6+1 Trait 

institutes. As soon as she met Swanson, she took a liking to 

the talkative fellow sporting chrome Nike glasses and a short, 

spiked haircut. Their friendship and professional collaboration 

has deepened through follow-up meetings and frequent e-mail 

exchanges. 

“In every group I work with,” says Littlebear, “there’s one or 

two like Tim. He takes it to the Nth degree.” Watching Swanson grow into his new role as a teacher leader in his district, 
Littlebear took note of the “perfect storm” working to Sweet 

Home’s advantage. Here was a motivated teacher eager to 

become a peer leader in a district ready to embrace change. 

“Tim would not have had such success had he not been a 

solid teacher to start with. He’s not afraid to try new things, ask 

questions, or get rid of things that don’t work well. That takes 

confidence,” she says, “but he’s also a humble guy.” As a coach, 

Swanson is quick to spotlight teachers who have effective lessons to share, encouraging peer leadership and deflecting attention from himself. Kathi Collins, a fellow teacher at Holley 

Elementary, says her own confidence grew when Swanson invited her to present a lesson idea to her peers. “I like getting 

feedback,” she says, “and it’s energizing when people tell you, 

‘I’ll use that.’”

Littlebear says a teacher like Swanson exemplifies many of 

the qualities described by Malcolm Gladwell in Outliers. Similarly, in Teach Like a Champion, author Doug Lemov unpacks 

the myriad details that add up to effective teaching. Like the 

educators Lemov profiles, Swanson is no-nonsense about classroom management. Yet he manages to set a playful mood by 

using body language during a read-aloud and makes sure to 

pull every student into class discussions. When he’s modeling a 

lesson for a colleague, he watches how both students and teacher respond. “People who resist that kind of help,” Collins adds, 

“don’t know what they’re missing. This isn’t giving you more to 

do as a teacher; it’s about doing it better.” 

Effective teaching can happen in isolated classrooms without all the supporting factors in place, but it takes systemic 

thinking to foster high-quality instruction throughout a district. Swanson calls this “top-down, bottom-up” change, and 

encourages his district to provide teachers with a trio of supports: instructional coaching, high-quality professional development, and building-level leadership. When all the pieces are 

in place, adds Littlebear, it becomes a story “about ‘a’ teacher, 

‘a’ district, ‘a’ state, and everything working together to have an 

impact on lots and lots of kids.” 

New Leaders, Fresh Ideas

When Principal Ryan Beck walks into a classroom at Hawthorne Elementary, he knows what he hopes to see. “I’m looking for students who are participating, smiling, showing their 

work. I’m looking for creativity. I don’t want to see the teacher 

standing up front lecturing and students not paying attention. 

It should be fun, energetic, exciting. This may sound subjective,” Beck admits, “but I know good instruction when I see 

it and feel it. And I know that if we can get students engaged, 

wanting to be here, we can teach them.” 

Beck spent a decade in the classroom in Cottage Grove, 

Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUMmER 2010 35

rewriting the future in sweet home

In addition to writing, Tim Swanson offers instructional coaching in math—here students work with tables as part of a model lesson.
36 educationnorthwest.org

Oregon, before taking his first principalship in Sweet Home two 

years ago. He’s one of several new administrators in the district, 

a change in leadership that the superintendent embraces. “With 

change comes new ideas,” Horton says, “and that’s exciting.” Yet 

Beck is respectful of his “spectacular staff,” including many 

veteran teachers. One is in his 33rd year at the same school. 

“When I walk into his room and see all those class photos, it’s a 

good reminder of all the principals who have come before me. 

I’m not here to fix things,” Beck says, or impose his own agenda. 

Rather, the principal wants teachers to draw on each other’s 

wisdom as a wellspring of new ideas. Hawthorne’s primary 

teachers, for instance, meet twice monthly as a professional 

learning community (PLC). Beck took part in PLCs in his previous district and values this collaborative model for professional development. “It’s useful to have teachers sit down and 

talk about their kids, about what’s working and what isn’t. If 

you have frustrations or problems, you have your colleagues 

there to support you,” he says. The PLC approach reflects Beck’s 

philosophy that “teachers are the best resources for another 

teacher.” 

Beck’s experience has taught him that PLCs need to be 

teacher-driven. “Teachers set the agendas and run the meetings. There are times when they tell me to butt out. My job,” 

he says, “is to give them time.” With that structure in place, he 

says, “my staff has been willing to have the difficult conversations if we are not getting the results we desire. There’s no blame 

attached. The focus is on problem solving: What do we need to 

do? What resources or training do we need?”

Hawthorne’s primary teachers have used their shared time 

to talk in depth about instruction. Beck has heard them dig into 

tough questions, such as: “What should satisfactory writing 

look like at the end of first grade or second grade? What goes 

into producing great writers? How do we all get on the same 

page, but still allow room for teachers to be creative?” Working 

with Swanson, teachers have scored student writing samples 

together, using rubrics for assessment. In conversations about 

writing goals across grade levels, Beck says, “now we have 

everybody speaking the same language.”

Those conversations have revealed that “many teachers 

are not as confident about teaching writing as they are about 

teaching math or reading,” Beck notes. And although he sees 

“amazing things going on in writing,” he knows it takes time for 

teachers to feel comfortable enough to share examples or model 

lessons. It’s even harder for teachers to ask for help. “It takes a 

leap of faith to say, ‘I’m struggling,’” Beck acknowledges, “but 

chances are, someone else in the building is having the same 

challenge you are.” PLCs allow room for those conversations 

to happen. 

Superintendent Horton is similarly sold on the PLC model, 

which will be introduced at Sweet Home High School in the 

fall. PLCs have a solid research base, and they also echo Horton’s personal experience. For nine years at the start of his career, he team taught with a colleague. “We collaborated constantly. Many of our peers went into their classrooms, closed 

their doors, and we never saw them. What a loss! They only had 

their own practices, their own vision, to work with.” In Sweet 

Home, he’s excited about “opening the doors, allowing people 

in, inviting collaboration, encouraging teachers to have those 

discussions that will lead to better results for our students.” 

The Next Chapter

Wrapping up his first year of coaching, Swanson is already looking ahead. He has signed on for another round of training with 

Littlebear this summer and will become a trainer of trainers 

for the 6+1 Trait model. Within his district, he has strategically 

built a “brand” for his instructional coaching, complete with 

motto (“Beat the Bell Curve”), newsletter, and web resources. 

He’s excited to see teacher leaders like Kathi Collins emerging 

at individual schools, because that’s a sign that this campaign 

is taking root. “It can’t just be the Tim Swanson Show,” he says 

with a self-effacing chuckle. “It’s everybody’s show.” 

Meanwhile, he remains on the lookout for good ideas. This 

spring, he heard about a school in Corvallis, Oregon, that dramatically boosted its fourth-grade writing scores. Swanson was 

on the trail like a detective on a case. The staff of Hoover Elementary was happy to tell the curious visitor from Sweet Home 

about the details behind their success. Among their strategies 

were several that sounded familiar: adoption of PLCs, staff 

training in 6+1 Trait writing, and ongoing conversations about 

what good writing looks like. They also designated 2009–2010 

as the official Year of Writing. 

On the drive back from Corvallis, Swanson had plenty to 

ponder. Is Sweet Home ready for its own Year of Writing? Will 

teachers continue to “work together harder,” as the superintendent predicts? How can they keep growing this collegial 

conversation about good writing and effective teaching? Stay 

tuned. This story is certain to continue. n

Tim Swanson makes sure to draw all students into classroom 

discussions.
Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUMmER 2010 37

Looking for Evidence: What We Know About High-Quality, Highly Effective Teachers By Jennifer Stepanek

Research Brief

The field of education research includes many debates about methods, policies, and practices. The role that teachers play in student 

learning is a rare, unequivocal area of agreement. Although the 

evidence is limited, research has not uncovered any schoolbased factors that have a stronger impact on student success.

Unfortunately, the specifics of how teachers impact students 

are much more elusive. Many studies have attempted to identify the characteristics or qualifications of teachers that result in 

student achievement. Yet researchers have consistently found 

that the links between teacher characteristics and student outcomes are weak.

For example, a study of teachers of grades 3–7 in Texas found 

that teachers have powerful effects on reading and mathematics achievement. However, little of the variation in student outcomes could be explained by observable teacher characteristics 

such as level of education or years of experience (Rivkin, Hanushek, & Kain, 2005). Data from a study of class size in Tennessee elementary schools also demonstrated substantial differences among teachers in the ability to produce achievement 

gains in their students. The variations in teacher effectiveness 

were not related to either level of education or number of years 

teaching (Nye, Konstantopoulus, & Hedges, 2004). A large 

study using National Assessment of Education Progress data 

matched eighth-grade student achievement data in mathematics and science with information about teacher characteristics 

(Wenglinsky, 2002). Of the teacher qualifications examined, 

only majoring or minoring in the subject area was associated 

with improved student performance.

There may be a stronger link between teacher qualifications 

and student outcomes at the high school level. A longitudinal 

study of high school teacher credentials and student achievement in North Carolina looked at years of teaching experience, 

teacher scores on a licensure exam, licensure type and certification by subject, and level of education, and National Board 

Certification status (Clotfelter, Ladd, & Vigdor, 2007). The researchers found that the largest effects for teacher qualifications 

were years of experience and certification in the academic subject area. There was also a large effect for National Board Certification, which requires teachers to meet rigorous standards 

and submit direct evidence of teaching, including videos and 

student work.

In a research synthesis on the link between teacher quality 

and student outcomes, only two indicators of teacher quality were found to influence student achievement (Goe, 2007). 

Teachers who have degrees in mathematics and are certified to 

teach mathematics are related to higher student achievement 

in mathematics in both elementary and secondary levels. This 

relationship was not found for other subject areas. The number 

of years of teaching experience was also found to contribute to 

student achievement, but only in the first four or five years of 

teaching. 

Because the teacher qualifications tested in the studies failed 

to explain the differences between teacher effectiveness, they 

point to the need for additional research. They also highlight the 

missing piece in many of the teacher quality studies—instruction. Unfortunately, there is very little quantitative research 

that identifies strong and convincing links between classroom 

practices and student achievement (Goe, 2007; Wenglinsky, 

2002). More research is needed to develop methods for identifying effective teachers and for creating promising strategies for 

improving teacher effectiveness.

An important element in identifying and improving teacher 

effectiveness is teacher evaluation. However, recent evidence 

suggests that teacher evaluation in current practice is not likely 

to yield crucial information. A study of district teacher evaluation policies found that evaluations focused on new—rather 

than experienced—teachers were summative reports that did 

not contribute to professional development, and did not require 

trained evaluators (Brandt, Mathers, Oliva, Brown-Sims, & 

Hess, 2007). Another study of teacher evaluation in a dozen districts from four states looked at the outcomes of teacher evaluations. The researchers found that despite significant variations 

in the district contexts and in evaluation practices, the results of 

teacher evaluation were for the most part the same (Weisberg, 

Sexton, Mulhern, & Keeling, 2009). Namely, in every district 

less than one percent of teachers were rated as unsatisfactory. 

As a result, excellent teachers are not recognized, teachers who 

need to improve are not identified, and evaluations do not yield 

information about what effective teaching looks like in practice.

A recent report from the Center for American Progress suggests that the conditions are right for making substantive improvements in the evaluation of teachers (Donaldson, 2009). 

For example, increasing numbers of teachers are retiring, resulting in a larger proportion of new educators who are more 

likely to be receptive to new practices for evaluation. In addition, more is known about how students learn and effective 

instructional practices. 

Charlotte Danielson’s Enhancing Professional Practice: A 

Framework for Teaching (2007) is one such resource that is intended to inform teachers’ practices and to guide teacher evaluation. Her framework is organized around four domains: planning and preparation, classroom environment, instruction, 
38 educationnorthwest.org

and professional responsibilities. Several studies have used the 

framework to examine the relationship between teaching practices and student achievement. These studies found small to 

moderate positive relationships between the teaching practices 

identified with instruments based on Danielson’s framework 

and gains in student achievement (Borman & Kimball, 2005; 

Gallagher, 2004; Heneman, Milanowski, Kimball, & Odden, 

2006; Kimball, White, Milanowski, & Borman, 2004; Milanowski, 2004). 

Improving teacher evaluation is also a priority at the federal level, including guidance on the use of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds and in the recently released 

blueprint for the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (U.S. Department of Education, 2010). 

The policy documents emphasize the need for fair and reliable 

teacher evaluation systems that provide ongoing feedback to 

teachers about their performance based on objective measures 

of student achievement and multiple classroom observations. 

Evaluation systems should also give guidance for improving instructional practices and provide information that can be used 

to inform teacher professional development and advancement.

The challenge will be in finding the resources to support improved evaluation systems. Teacher evaluations that fulfill the 

more rigorous requirements and provide useful data will require significantly more time and attention than current practice. But given that teachers are the key to improving outcomes 

for students, tracking and supporting their work seems like a 

smart investment. n

References

Borman, G.D., & Kimball, S.M. (2005). Teacher quality and educational equality: Do teachers with higher standards-based 

evaluation ratings close student achievement gaps? Elementary School Journal, 106(1), 3–20.

Brandt, C., Mathers, C., Oliva, M., Brown-Sims, M., & Hess, 

J. (2007). Examining district guidance to schools on teacher 

evaluation policies in the Midwest region (Issues & Answers 

Report, REL 2007-030). Washington, DC: U.S. Department 

of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National 

Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, 

Regional Educational Laboratory Midwest. 

Clotfelter, C.T., Ladd, H.F., & Vigdor, J.L. (2007). Teacher credentials and student achievement in high school: A cross-subject analysis with fixed student effects (Working Paper 11). 

Washington, DC: National Center for the Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research.

Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for 

Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Donaldson, M.L. (2009). So long, Lake Wobegon? Using teacher 

evaluation to raise teacher quality. Washington, DC: Center 

for American Progress.

Gallagher, H.A. (2004). Vaughn Elementary’s innovative teacher evaluation system: Are teacher evaluation scores related 

to growth in student achievement? Peabody Journal of Education, 79(4), 79–107.

Goe, L. (2007). The link between teacher quality and student 

outcomes: A research synthesis. Washington, DC: National 

Comprehensive Center on Teacher Quality.

Heneman, H.G., III, Milanowski, A., Kimball, S.M., & Odden, 

A. (2006). Standards-based teacher evaluation as a foundation for knowledge- and skill-based pay (CPRE Policy Brief 

RB-45). Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research 

in Education.

Kimball, S.M., White, B., Milanowski, A.T., & Borman, G. 

(2004). Examining the relationship between teacher evaluation and student assessment results in Washoe County. 

Peabody Journal of Education, 79(4), 54–78.

Milanowski, A. (2004). The relationship between teacher performance evaluation scores and student achievement: Evidence from Cincinnati. Peabody Journal of Education, 79(4), 

33–53.

Nye, B., Konstantopoulus, S., & Hedges, L.V. (2004). How 

large are teacher effects? Educational Evaluation and Policy 

Archives, 26(3), 237–257.

Rivkin, S.G., Hanushek, E.A., & Kain, J.F. (2005). Teachers, 

schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 

417–453.

U.S. Department of Education. (2010). A blueprint for reform: 

The reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Washington, DC: Author.

Weisberg, D., Sexton, S., Mulhern, K., & Keeling, D. (2009). 

The widget effect: Our national failure to acknowledge and 

act on differences in teacher effectiveness. Brooklyn, NY: New 

Teacher Project.

Wenglinsky, H. (2002). How schools matter: The link between 

teacher classroom practices and student academic performance. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(12). Retrieved 

from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/viewFile/291/417

research brief
Education Northwest magazine / SPRING-SUMmER 2010 39

The Ogden, Utah, School District Takes a Unique Approach To Improving Instruction By Jacqueline Raphael

voices

Ogden School District, in the northern hub of Utah, is committed to moving out of “district 

improvement” status. Since 2008–2009, Assistant Superintendent Rich Moore has overseen 

a district improvement effort that penetrates deeply into the classroom, with a bull’s-eye 

focus on increasing student achievement through teacher effectiveness. Although it’s too 

soon for results on state tests, the district’s approach is promising, according to Nanci Schneider, senior program advisor at Education Northwest and an experienced school improvement coach. “Ogden is doing the right things for the right reasons. In all my years in school 

improvement, I’ve never come 

across such a rich system at 

the district level for assessing and supporting teachers 

while holding them accountable for change,” she said after a recent visit. A follow-up 

conversation with Schneider 

and Moore suggests that 

much can be learned from this 

district’s program. 

improvement approach using frequent 

monitoring and tiered interventions to 

provide more individualized levels of 

positive behavioral support and literacy 

instruction to students. Nothing is unusual about using RTI, says Schneider, 

but Ogden provides teachers with tiered 

support as well, monitoring their progress and providing them with customized support depending on their response to the district-level intervention. 

Ogden’s program starts with formal 

school appraisals conducted twice a 

year in each of the district’s 22 buildings. During the appraisal, a six-person 

team—including district personnel and 

staff members of the school being appraised—splits up to collect data across 

the school. These mini-teams focus 

squarely on teacher practices, conducting observations in every single classroom. These observations last only 10 

minutes, but “don’t be fooled,” says Schneider. “A surprising amount of very specific, important information is collected 

during those 10 minutes.” 

Each school is assessed against district 

goal areas as well as a self-selected school 

goal. This year, appraisal teams focused 

on student opportunities to respond and 

on-task behavior. Team members used 

individual tally sheets to count students 

responding verbally or physically to the 

teacher’s question or statement. Individual, whole-group, and small-group/

pair responses were all included. After 

10 minutes, team members totaled their 

markings and assigned a high, medium, 

or low score for the class. “The bar is set 

high,” says Schneider, with a high score 

equating to 30 or more student opportunities to respond. The on-task measure 

involves observing a different student 

every five seconds, noting whether he or 

she is engaged in instructional activity. 

At the end of the day, mini-teams compile results and provide overall ratings 

in each goal area for each school. These 

ratings are what Ogden calls “leading” 

indicators. The district is confident that 

improvements in these ratings will help 

close achievement gaps and increase student achievement overall. 

To ensure these results, every school 

gets an instructional coach responsible 

for improving the school’s appraisal 

ratings. These instructional coaches 

provide intensive support to individual 

teachers. The coaches are highly trained 

in instructional strategies, such as questioning and sheltered instruction, and in 

effective coaching practices, including 

learning walks and modeling lessons. 

They monitor teacher performance to 

determine professional development 

needs, and they discern whether each 

teacher is improving his or her proficiency in much the same way that school 

teams monitor the individual performance of students in RTI.

Ogden City, the sixth largest city in Utah, 

sits at the base of the Wasatch Mountain 

Range, 35 miles north of Salt Lake City. 

The school district serves 12,770 students, 73 percent of whom are eligible 

for free and reduced-price lunch and 

24 percent limited English proficient 

(LEP). Achievement gaps, particularly 

for LEP students, put the district into 

improvement status in 2010. As with 

all districts facing No Child Left Behind accountability, the state provided 

additional funds and support, with an 

expectation for improved results. But 

when Schneider and others from Education Northwest visited Ogden to provide 

consulting services, they learned the 

district hadn’t waited for the mandate: 

Two years prior, Ogden had already 

begun designing and implementing an 

intensive and innovative improvement 

effort. “Once we recognized some of our 

schools weren’t improving, we went to 

work,” says Moore.

Ogden’s learning support model 

is based on Response to Intervention, or RTI, an increasingly common 

Nanci Schneider Rich Moore
40 educationnorthwest.org

“Just like the students, teachers are 

supported in one of the three tiered levels, with the expectation that they will 

develop their practice to the highest 

level possible,” says Schneider. “If they’re 

struggling, the district provides more 

intensive coaching and support. But, 

unlike students, teachers in this system 

know if they’re ultimately unsuccessful, they may be facing some difficult 

choices.” 

“It’s true we expect peak performance 

from everyone,” says Moore, including 

teachers, principals, and coaches. “If 

not, there can be consequences. Nobody 

deserves a free ride,” he adds. Schneider 

notes that as many as 10 teachers have 

been moved, which is a remarkable 

number, suggesting Ogden is really serious about accountability. An additional 

coach works at tier-2 schools with more 

intensive needs, supporting the RTI

teams, and a leadership coach works 

with all of the principals. The coaches’ work is carefully monitored by the 

district. 

“We treat this system as our holy 

grail,” explains Moore. “We approach it 

very systemically. We’re confident that 

our leading indicators will produce 

positive results. More importantly, our 

building leaders are comfortable with 

this, even when we bare our souls to 

the world.” Indeed, tables put schools in 

rank order against each measure. “But 

it’s about improving our teaching to 

better serve students, not trying to nail 

someone against a wall,” Moore adds.

So far, Ogden has seen some promising changes in instruction, but accountability ratings for the state aren’t 

determined until next year. Perhaps 

more significantly, though, the system is 

producing some “teacher turnarounds.” 

Most teachers improve when given the 

professional development specific to 

their needs.

Indeed, improvement is the focus 

throughout the system. “We’re not pie 

in the sky,” says Moore. “We’re about 

growth, about continuous systems 

growth.” After all, Moore continues, Ogden’s “improvement” status is not what’s 

motivating the district. “What matters to 

my team is that we’re making or breaking the future of the students we serve. If 

we’re turning out kids who are not college or career ready, then it’s on us to do 

everything we can to change, in order to 

make them successful.” n

voices
Education Northwest magazine / spring-summer 2010 41

End note

Photo by Jim Lubek
42 educationnorthwest.org

Education Northwest Offers Consecutive Summer Workshops in Elementary Math and Writing

This July, elementary educators can receive 

high-quality professional development in 

both mathematics and writing by attending two of Education Northwest’s most 

highly acclaimed workshops back-toback. Fostering Number Sense and Algebraic Reasoning and 6+1 Trait® Writing Across Content Areas are scheduled 

for grade-level tracks K–2 and 3–5, July 

13–16 in Portland, Oregon. Attend both 

workshops over the four-day period (a 

$200 savings) or attend just one workshop for two days.

Two Grade-Level Tracks

July 13–14 July 15–16

Grades K–2 Math Writing

Grades 3–5 Writing Math

Fostering Number Sense and 

Algebraic Reasoning 

Education Northwest’s training in Fostering Number Sense and Algebraic Reasoning has received national attention 

for its effectiveness in boosting math 

achievement by tapping into elementary 

students’ intuitive number sense to build 

algebraic concepts. Workshop participants will learn effective instructional 

strategies by engaging in problem-solving activities, analyzing classroom video 

clips and examples of student work, and 

applying current research about how 

children learn mathematics. 

Math content experts and workshop 

facilitators Linda Griffin and Melinda 

Leong will introduce participants of the 

K–2 workshop to the learning progressions for the development of number 

sense, addition, and subtraction concepts. The grades 3–5 session focuses 

on learning progressions for the development of multiplication and division 

concepts. 

6+1 Trait® Writing Across Content 

Areas 

Used in classrooms worldwide, Education Northwest’s 6+1 Trait Writing 

Model of Instruction & Assessment provides a common language that students 

and teachers can use to communicate 

about the characteristics of good writing. In addition to learning researchbased strategies for teaching and assessing writing, workshop participants 

will explore ways to integrate the traits 

into writing-to-learn experiences across 

content areas. 

Following her popular line of Wee 

Can® guidebooks, K–2 workshop facilitator Carolyn McMahon will demonstrate a variety of activities that provide 

youngsters with a solid foundation for 

writing across the curriculum, throughout the school day, and through their 

school lives. Facilitating the grades 3–5 

workshop, Jan Littlebear—Education 

Northwest’s lead 6+1 Trait trainer—will 

guide participants in using the 6+1 Trait 

Model to improve and assess writing 

in all content areas—including math, 

science, and social studies.

Content Supports ARRA Guidelines

Linda Griffin and Jan Littlebear organized this event as a way to provide a 

convenient, one-stop opportunity for 

improving classroom practice in two 

critical areas. They add that participating 

in these courses can support districts’ 

efforts to meet educational guidelines 

related to the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act (ARRA). “Both the 

math and writing workshops are aligned 

with the ARRA priorities of improving 

teacher effectiveness and providing intensive support and effective interventions for the lowest performing schools,” 

says Littlebear. 

Location, Location, Location

The workshops will take place in the 

newly renovated offices of Education 

Northwest—in the heart of downtown 

Portland, Oregon. There are several 

hotels within walking distance, and the 

MAX light rail takes people from the airport to within a few blocks of our building. City events this time of year include 

the Portland Farmers Market, Yoshida’s 

Sand in the City, Portland Highland 

Games, and the 2010 International 

Beerfest.

Ways To Save

Participants can save on registration 

costs by registering for back-to-back 

workshops for their grade track or by 

registering as part of a team of three or 

more.

Get complete details and register at 

educationnorthwest.org/event/951/ or 

contact Mark.Workman@educationnorthwest.org; 800.547.6339, ext. 572. n

education northwest news
To order: educationnorthwest.org or call 800.547.6339, ext. 519 43

Head of IES Addresses Education Northwest Audience

Federally supported education research 

needs to be both relevant and useful, according to Dr. John Q. Easton, head of 

the Department of Education’s Institute 

of Education Sciences (IES). Easton 

spoke about the qualities and role of 

education research at a meeting of Education Northwest’s Board of Directors 

in Boise, Idaho, on March 24. As part of 

his visit, Easton appeared at a public forum attended by about 70 participants, 

including Idaho educators, researchers, 

and policymakers.

In his public remarks, Easton stressed 

the need for researchers to shift from 

being simply disseminators of information to facilitators. To do so, he said, will 

require close partnerships with schools 

and districts as well as a commitment 

from the research community. Easton 

commented that researchers cannot 

“drop the results [of a study] on schools 

or school districts and tell them, ‘This is 

something good for you.’” Instead, researchers must invite practitioners and 

policymakers to the table and give them 

a role in shaping studies that meet their 

needs.

Easton also addressed the topic of 

teacher effectiveness, which was the 

focus of a panel discussion in which 

five Education Northwest board members representing different stakeholder 

roles shared their views (see page 18 to 

read more about the panel discussion). 

Easton, who previously headed the Consortium on Chicago School Research at 

the University of Chicago, said research 

shows there’s a high degree of variability 

from year to year in teachers’ impact on 

student growth. He also cited evidence 

indicating that teacher pay scales and 

characteristics such as advanced degrees 

aren’t clearly linked to student gains. 

Board Chair Jerry Colonna, superintendent of the Beaverton (OR) School 

District, said the Board felt honored with 

the amount of time Easton was able to 

spend with them and appreciated hearing his perspective on the future of public education. “Dr. Easton’s presentations 

at the Board of Directors’ annual retreat 

gave great insight into the priorities, institutional culture, preferred research 

methodology, challenges, and initiatives that he has been working on in his 

first year as director of the Institute of 

Education Sciences,” said Colonna. “Dr. 

Easton emphasized that he wants to get 

more input from practitioners and that 

he is traveling around the country listening and learning about what the needs 

are in the field.” 

Easton was named to a six-year term 

as director of IES in May 2009. As the 

research arm of the U.S. Department 

of Education, IES encompasses the 

National Center for Education Statistics, the National Center for Education 

Evaluation and Regional Assistance, the 

National Center for Education Research, 

and the National Center for Special 

Education. n

Wee Can® Travel

Aligning 6+1 Trait® Strategies With Social 

Studies Standards for Elementary Students

Wee Can Travel shows K–4 teachers how to apply 

the 6+1 Trait® Writing model with beginning writers using acclaimed children’s literature. Each book 

featured in Wee Can Travel covers an important 

social studies theme and is combined with activities based on standards developed by the National 

Council for the Social Studies. 

The books featured in Wee Can Travel include:

• The Pledge of Allegiance 

• Johnny Appleseed

• The Legend of the Indian Paintbrush 

• Stone Soup

• Martin’s Big Words 

• Follow the Drinking Gourd 

Wee Can Travel includes 36 activities that 

continuously blend reading, writing, speaking, 

and creative artwork into an integrated approach 

to writing and social studies. Text is color coded to 

easily distinguish between the information that is 

specifically for the teacher and the instruction that 

is to be delivered by the teacher. 

Each literature title has the following 

components:

• Six trait activities, including focus trait, specific 

criteria, and trait writing vocabulary

• Three literacy centers per title

• Culminating activities for whole-class 

participation

• Short instructional scripts for each story 

 (2010)

Item #E007

$30.25

Aligning 6+1 Trait® Strategies With Social 

Studies Standards for Elementary Students

Travel

Coming 

▲soon
44 educationnorthwest.org

Flashback

Forums Bridge Research and Practice

REL Northwest, the regional educational laboratory operated 

by Education Northwest, has been hosting a string of forums 

designed to bridge research and practice throughout the Northwest. These “bridge events”—sponsored by the Institute of Education Sciences—provide regional educators and policymakers 

the opportunity to connect with noted national researchers. 

Resources from most of these recent events are available online 

at educationnorthwest.org/rel-northwest/. Upcoming forums 

can be found in the Events section of the same site.

The February 17 forum held in conjunction with the International Reading Association’s conference in Portland, Oregon, 

focused on effective classroom and intervention practices for 

improving adolescent literacy. A similar forum took place April 

13 in Boise, Idaho. 

On March 24, approximately 80 school leaders gathered 

in Helena, Montana, to discuss recommendations for turning 

around low-performing schools and to hear from Montana 

principals who led successful improvement efforts at their 

schools.

A three-part webinar series in March and April examined 

Response to Intervention (RTI)—a multi-tiered instructional 

process usually associated with helping struggling readers—as 

a way to help students who are falling behind in mathematics.

Participants in an April 22 forum in Missoula, Montana, 

looked at how to support language and literacy development 

in preschool classrooms through effective teacher-student interactions: emotional support, classroom organization, and 

instructional support.

First Writing Across Content Areas Institute Held

The new 6+1 Trait® Writing Across the Content Areas Institute 

had a successful inaugural turnout. More than 50 middle and 

high school educators from Oregon, Washington, Alaska, Montana, Michigan, and Oklahoma gathered in Portland March 

11–12 to learn how to use Education Northwest’s trademark 

writing instruction and assessment model to facilitate writing 

across content areas such as mathematics, science, and social 

studies. Teams learned how to use the traits to create a common 

language and set clear goals for writing, as well as how to improve their instruction and assessment of longer, more formal 

writing assignments. 

Assistance Offered on Meeting i3 Evaluation 

Requirements 

A free webinar on April 13 offered information on meeting Investing in Innovation (i3) evaluation requirements when applying for these competitive Recovery Act grants. Education 

Northwest’s evaluation experts described the evaluation criteria for different types of i3 grants; gave tips on what to look for 

in an independent evaluator; and fielded questions regarding 

how to write a strong evaluation plan. 

The webinar drew a national audience 

with 50 people—from Hawaii to New 

York—participating. An archive recording and the presentation’s PowerPoint 

slides are online at educationnorthwest.

org/event/1060/. n

education northwest news
Education Northwest magazine / spring-summer 2010 45

Conference Call

Visit Education Northwest’s online calendar of events at educationnorthwest.org 

to register and learn more about these 

upcoming workshops and institutes.

Fostering Number Sense and Algebraic 

Reasoning

June 8–10, Anchorage, AK 

(for grades K–2 and 3–5)

July 27–29, Renton, WA 

(for grades K–2, 3–5, and 6–8)

August 16–18, Billings, MT 

(for grades K–2 and 3–5)

Strong number sense is a foundation for 

success in mathematics. When number 

sense is grounded in algebraic reasoning, students gain access to the powerful 

unifying ideas of mathematics to deepen 

their understanding of numbers and operations. These professional development 

institutes build teachers’ pedagogical and 

content knowledge of these areas to optimize students’ learning of mathematics. Teachers will participate in problemsolving activities, analyze classroom 

video clips and examples of student work, 

and apply research about how children 

learn mathematics. For questions contact 

Cathy.Clark.Thomas@educationnorthwest.org; 800.547.6339, ext. 662.

6+1 TRAIT® WRITING training of 

trainerS

June 15–17, 2010, Cannon Beach, OR

This advanced institute will train literacy 

coaches, teacher leaders, administrators, 

and curriculum coordinators to conduct 

their own in-district, trait-based workshops. Participation in an introductory 

trait institute and classroom experience 

teaching the traits are prerequisites. The 

institute includes examination of the 

research supporting the 6+1 Trait Writing Model of Instruction & Assessment, 

lesson design and curriculum mapping, 

and how to incorporate adult learning 

strategies into professional development 

workshops. For questions contact Mark.

Workman@educationnorthwest.org; 

800.547.6339, ext. 572.

6+1 TRAIT® WRITING INTRODUCTORY

workshop

June 22–24, 2010, Portland, OR

This introduction to Education Northwest’s 6+1 Trait Writing Model of Instruction & Assessment addresses grades 

3–12 in one session and grades PK–2 in 

another. Learn to formatively evaluate 

student writing across seven dimensions 

of performance: ideas, organization, 

voice, word choice, sentence fluency, 

conventions, and presentation. Participants will also discover how to build a 

learning community that shares a common vocabulary and vision of quality 

writing performance. For questions contact Mark.Workman@educationnorthwest.org; 800.547.6339, ext. 572.

Dropout Prevention: A Forum for 

Montana High School Leaders

June 24, 2010, Helena, MT

This forum will provide the leadership 

teams of high schools facing improvement status an opportunity to compare 

their current practice to recommended 

research-based practices. Dr. Russell 

Rumberger, coauthor of the Institute 

of Education Sciences’ practice guide 

Dropout Prevention, will lead the forum. 

Dr. Mindee O’Cummings of the National High School Center will present the 

Early Warning System Tool—a system 

for calculating students’ risk of dropping out. A panel of Montana educators 

will highlight the successes and challenges they have experienced in providing rigorous and relevant instruction to 

engage students. For questions contact 

Meg.Waters@educationnorthwest.org; 

800.547.6339, ext. 635.

From Structure to Instruction: 

Sharing Best Practices and Lessons 

Learned From High School Redesign 

efforts

June 28–30, 2010, Las Vegas, NV

Attend this third annual institute with 

your school or district team to gain valuable information and concrete direction 

from the redesign efforts and accomplishments of skilled practitioners. Conference organizers suggest registering 

soon, as space is limited to 550 participants and the previous two years’ institutes sold out. Visit the event website for 

information about this year’s keynotes, 

50+ sessions, and preinstitute workshops 

on Sunday, June 27. From Structure to Instruction is hosted by Education Northwest’s Recreating Secondary Schools 

Program, which has helped more than 

1,200 high schools nationwide tackle 

the intensive work of restructuring. For 

questions, contact Suzanne.Hay@educationnorthwest.org; 800.547.6339, ext. 

634.

Summer Institute on Youth 

Mentoring 

July 26–30, 2010, Portland, OR

Portland State University (PSU) will 

host the 2010 Summer Institute on 

Youth Mentoring (SIYM), an annual 

event that brings together researchers 

and practitioners for a week of presentations and dialogue on youth mentoring. 

SIYM is open to participants who have 

applied and been accepted. As in past 

years, Education Northwest’s National 

Mentoring Center (NMC) will partner 

with PSU on the event, presenting the 

many ways NMC supports youth mentoring programs nationwide. For more 

information on the institute, visit www.

youthmentoring.ssw.pdx.edu. n
educationnorthwest.org

Education Northwest Magazine is available online. Look for Web exclusives. 

Nonprofit org.

U.S. Postage

PAID Portland, OrEGon

Permit no. 250

education northwest 

101 SW Main Street, Suite 500

Portland, OR 97204

educationnorthwest.org

For questions regarding 

Education Northwest Magazine

call 503.275.9518

For all other inquiries 

regarding Education Northwest 

call 503.275.9500

education

Northwest magazine