The Program in New Haven
Annual Report 2002 Contents
Contents of section:
- The Seminars and Curriculum Units
- Survival Stories
- Exploring the Middle East: Hands-On Approaches
- War and Peace in the Twentieth Century and Beyond
- The Craft of Writing
- Food, Environmental Quality and Health
- Biology and History of Ethnic Violence and Sexual Oppression
- The Process of Determining the Seminar Topics
- The Fellows’ Application and Admissions Process
- The Fellows Who Were Accepted
- Activities for Fellows
- Rewards for Fellows
- Relating Seminar Topics to Curriculum Units
- Results for Participants
- Teams of Fellows
- Benefits for Students
- Participants’ Conclusions Overall
- Electronic Resources and Assistance
- Institute Centers for Curricular and Professional Development
- Preparation for the Program in 2003
- Local Advisory Groups
- Local Program Documentation and Evaluation
- 25th Anniversary Celebration
|
The narratives invited seminar participants to consider the relationship of telling stories to the survival of great hardship. |
|
|
The curriculum units in this volume grew out of a seminar that focused on American survival narratives, both fictional and non-fictional. The narratives read together, representing stories of survival from the seventeenth century through the twentieth century, invited seminar participants to consider the relationship of telling stories to the survival of great hardship. |
|
|
The readings were divided into three sections. The first section compared narratives from English settlers held captive by Native American tribes during King Philip’s War with an autobiographical account by Olaudah Equiano, an African held as a slave in England and the West Indies. The second section examined American slavery and its literary legacy, both in slave narratives and in the writing of Harriet Beecher Stowe, Richard Wright and Ishmael Reed. The third section gathered together twentieth-century fiction that responds to war and survival—be it World War I, the Nazi concentration camps in World War II, or the Vietnam War. This final section included work by Ernest Hemingway, Art Spiegelman, Cynthia Ozick, and the poet Simon Ortiz. Against the backdrop of these readings, the members of this seminar explored many other kinds of survival in their own research and writing. The first four units in the published volume focus on particular historical moments of difficulty and the life stories of individuals who survived those times. Dina Secchiaroli builds her unit around readings about the Holocaust that blur the line between fiction and non-fiction. In choosing such readings she allows students to exercise their critical faculties and to explore how both truth-telling and imagination can become part of the effort to survive. Virginia Seely also uses different genres to bring students to a personal and humane understanding of history and survival—in this case, the history of slavery and the survival of young people caught within that “peculiar institution.” Marlene Kennedy’s unit, engaging the history of the Great Depression and Pearl Harbor, relies on fiction (novels and films) to teach children how imagination can not only help young people to survive difficult times but also increase understanding of history. In a unit written for very young students, Jean Sutherland uses a variety of materials, including film, diaries, and biography, to show how young people have survived their culture’s discrimination. Her focus on Anne Frank, Ryan White, and Ruby Bridges takes fourth-graders to different places and different moments in history to observe how three exceptional children drew on the resources of family, friends and education in order to make a meaningful life in the face of prejudice. Because students can easily identify with the young narrators and protagonists of the literature these units include, the curricula promise not only to teach reading, writing, and history, but also to encourage students to use their imagination, living into the historical predicaments in which each story is set. (image available in print form) The seminar on “Survival Stories.” (Clockwise from bottom left: seminar leader Amy Hungerford, Fellows Jean E. Sutherland, Geraldine M. Martin, Sandra K. Friday, Yolanda U. Trapp, Virginia Seely, Kevin P. Inge, Marlene H. Kennedy, and Amber Stolz.) |
|
|
The next three units in the volume take up the idea of cultural survival. Waltrina Kirkland-Mullins frames the story of the slave trade with a hands-on exploration of Ghanaian culture prior to slavery and its survival in the lives of slaves and their free descendants in the Americas. Yolanda Trapp focuses on how a person’s native language can survive as part of that person’s life and self-worth when she or he moves to a new place with a new language. Using bilingual books—most in Spanish and English—she shows how appreciation and celebration of linguistic diversity can coexist with students’ need to learn the language of their new home. Sandra Friday in her unit shows how new cultural practices—especially in visual art, music and poetry—blossom when individuals and groups are challenged with prejudice, poverty or other kinds of adversity. Her materials include poetry, Jacob Lawrence’s paintings, and rap by the African American philosopher, Cornel West. These materials show how art in its various forms communicates both public and personal history. |
Three units in the volume take up the idea of cultural survival. |
|
The last three units in the volume look at survival with an eye towards the contemporary application of survival lessons taken from literature, film and music. Kevin Inge uses a variety of readings—historical, autobiographical, and fictional—in asking his students to think and write about what helped characters in the stories to endure troubles in their lives. Amber Stolz aims also to give students survival resources they can use in their own lives, appealing to their sense of identity as teenagers by assigning readings, films, songs and creative projects that take up problems most teenagers encounter. The unit allows students to read and write about family difficulties, the issues of peer pressure and sex, the challenges of school, and the question of race. Finally, Geraldine Martin takes survival lessons to the very youngest students using the stories of Faith Ringgold. Through creative puppetry, art, and writing activities, Martin asks children to think about how family, friends, and the escape provided by imagination can help a person to weather difficult times and to accomplish seemingly impossible things. Almost every unit in the seminar volume includes at least one activity in which students are invited to make the leap from academic work to personal expression. The Fellows discovered that survival stories have remained a staple of American writing since those narratives of captivity written by settlers and slaves in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The survival story provides a ready form for transforming private pain into culturally recognizable meaning. Curriculum units, and their recommended uses, included: “The Holocaust: Survival Stories,” by Dina K. Secchiaroli (English Literature, History, and Photography, grades 7-12); “Looking at Human Struggle through the Language Arts Curriculum: The Faces of Slavery,” by Virginia A. Seely (Language Arts, Reading, and Social Studies, grades 5-12); “Jewels of Endurance,” by Marlene H. Kennedy (Language Arts and Social Studies, grade 6); “Surviving the Struggle: Ruby Bridges, Ryan White, and Anne Frank,” by Jean E. Sutherland (Reading, Language Arts, Social Studies, Science, and Social Development, grades 3-8); “Middle Passage: A Journey of Endurance,” by Waltrina Kirkland-Mullins (Language Arts, Social Studies, and Social Development, grades 1-5); “Our Children are Learning to Survive,” by Yolanda U. Trapp (Language Arts, Social Studies, and Science, grades K-4); “His Story, Her Story, Our Story: Narrating History through Art,” by Sandra K. Friday (English and World Literature, grades 9-12); “Child Survival Stories: Hope to Cope,” by Kevin P. Inge (History, Language Arts, and Science, grades 5-7); “Survivor: Not Just a TV Show,” by Amber Stolz (English and Character Education, grades 7-12); and “Willie and Friends: Overcomers in the Land—Stories by Faith Ringgold,” by Geraldine Martin (Reading and Language Arts, grade 1). |
|
The seminar in “The Craft of Writing” was, in effect, a writing workshop. The participants read other writers and discussed their strategies. The Fellows wrote short pieces of various kinds and received one another’s appreciative and critical comments. And the group tried to spend more than the usual amount of time in discussing the process of writing curriculum units. |
The seminar was, in effect, a writing workshop. |
|
The seminar began its reading with Charles C. Mann’s challenging essay, “1491,” in The Atlantic Monthly, a brief essay by Pat Schneider in Heron Dance, and some poems by Roque Dalton and Jimmy Santiago Baca. The participants ended by selecting essays of interest from a current issue of The New Yorker—and spending most of their time talking about Louis Menand’s profile of Maya Lin, “The Reluctant Memorialist.” Between the beginning and the end, several lengthier texts provided a range of different modes of writing. Each, in some respect, was about the process of writing and how writing may express and clarify our experience. The Fellows read Anne Lamott’s Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life, Ken Wilber’s No Boundary: Eastern and Western Approaches to Personal Growth, and Mary Oliver’s book-length poem, The Leaf and the Cloud. The seminar covered read portions of A Cynthia Ozick Reader, edited by Elaine M. Kauvar, and Vicki Hearne’s Adam’s Task: Calling Animals by Name. And, for a different approach to the techniques of narrative and description, the Fellows looked at some chapters from Michael Chabon’s novel The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay. The seminar’s short pieces of writing included some stylistic exercises, in which the Fellows emulated strategies used by Lamott, Wilber, and Ozick; some vigorous responses to the work of those and other writers; and a fairly wide range of prose sketches, poems, and chapters from novels-in-progress. The participants also spent a good deal of time offering suggestions to one another after reading the first drafts of the curriculum units.Those curriculum units bring certain principles of writing—and of teaching and learning—to bear upon an array of school settings. Each unit in its own way shares the seminar’s concern to elicit authentic writing that comes from the live experience of the students. According to the seminar leader, the spirit of John Dewey hovered over the group’s collective efforts. Robert P. Echter’s unit emphasizes the importance of friendly and familial relationships to the learning of writing, especially for students in grades one to four who are eligible for special education service. Shirley Goldberg brings together a range of specific strategies that she has tested with bilingual students who are learning to write English, some of whom may not be literate in their first language. (image available in print form) The seminar on “The Craft of Writing” (Clockwise from left: Fellows Robert Echter, Andrea Bailey, Joseph Raffone, Christine Picón-Van Duzer, Sean Griffin, Leigh Highbridge, Shirley Ann Goldberg; and seminar leader Thomas R. Whitaker.) |
Each unit shares the seminar’s concern to elicit authentic writing that comes from the live experience of the students. |
|
The next three curriculum units, by members of a team from Vincent E. Mauro Elementary School, aim to help students to become successful in writing through classes in Social Development, Social Studies, and Physical Education. Andrea Bailey seeks through detailed exercises in writing to engage, clarify, and modify the emotions of her third-grade students. Her unit is designed to work with the prevention program, Project Charlie. Christine Picón Van Duzer’s unit is, like Shirley Goldberg’s unit, intended for bilingual students in third grade. But it uses autobiographical narratives by young people and family stories, such as Carmen Lomas Garza’s Family Pictures/Cuadros de familia, to provide material that will elicit writing from the students. Joseph J. Raffone proposes to lead his fifth-grade students in Physical Education through a sequence of writing that will include journals, acrostic poems, short story compositions, and finally an interview modeled on those seen on ESPN’s Sportscenter. The next three curriculum units direct their attention to the upper grades. Sean Griffin’s unit is intended for an eighth-grade English class in an arts magnet school. He will lead students through responses to a range of visual art toward an engagement both visual and literary with the work of James Thurber and Edgar Allan Poe—and compositions about their work. Judith Goodrich’s unit is intended for an eighth-grade class in American history. It makes use of an array of analytical and expository strategies, along with mapping and electronic resources, as it aims to elicit vigorous writing from students about history. Finally, Leigh Highbridge’s unit also addresses the craft of writing. This sequence for ninth-grade theater students begins with exercises in writing that are usually found in a vocational preparation situation, and it culminates in a production to be written, designed, and performed by the class. Curriculum units, and their uses, include: “Learning Writing in the Context of ‘Inclusion’,” by Robert P. Echter (Writing, grades 1-4); “The First Six Weeks: A Writing Guide for Third Grade Bilingual Class,” by Shirley Goldberg (Language Arts and ESL, grades 2-3); “The Inner Voice: Writing as a Tool to Control Anger in the Classroom,” by Andrea Bailey (Writing and Social Development, grade 3); “The Craft of Writing through Narrative History,” by Christine Picón Van Duzer (Language Arts, ESL, and Social Studies, grades 3-6); “Integrating the Craft of Writing into Physical Education,” by Joseph J. Raffone (Language Arts and Physical Education, grade 5); “Writers as Artists, Artists as Writers: Response to Literature and Visual Arts,” by Sean Griffin (English, Language Arts, and Visual Arts, grade 8); “Improving Writing Skills in an American History Classroom,” by Judith Goodrich (Social Studies and American History, grades 6-8); “A Theater Workshop to Improve Character Development and Collaboration Skills,” by Leigh Highbridge (Acting, grade 9, and Technical Theatre Production, grades 9-10). |
|
Fellows came from all of the eight New Haven high schools, all of the six middle schools, two of the six K-8 schools, and one of the four transitional schools. Of the 22 elementary schools, half had teachers participating. The Institute first admitted elementary school teachers in 1990; this year 21 (34 percent) of all Fellows were elementary school teachers. Twenty-two (36 percent) were middle or K-8 school teachers, and 17 (27 percent) were high school teachers. Three schools had four or more Fellows; nine schools had three or more. The participants included teachers from all stages of their careers. Perhaps reflecting the effort to recruit new teachers, 44 percent of Fellows were age 40 or younger (as compared with 30 percent in 2001). Overall, about 16 percent of the Fellows were 41-50 years old; 44 percent were younger, and 41 percent were older. Consistent with the Institute’s effort to involve beginning teachers, as Chart 2 shows, more than one third of the Fellows (35 percent) had four or fewer years of total experience in teaching. This was almost twice the proportion of Fellows at that stage of their careers in 2001, when 19 percent had four or fewer years of teaching experience. In 2002 about one fifth (19 percent) of the Fellows had 20 or more years of total experience in teaching. Yet nearly one half (47 percent) of the Fellows had four or fewer years of experience teaching in the New Haven school system. Indicative of the need for the professional development that the Institute provides, three fifths (61 percent) of all Fellows have been in their present teaching position four or fewer years; more than three quarters (76 percent) have taught in their present position for nine years or less. Thus, even though half of the Fellows have twelve or more years of total teaching experience, an even larger proportion (61 percent) have four or fewer years of experience in their present position. These figures help to explain why many teachers say they need to develop their knowledge in subjects that they have been recently reassigned to teach, or curricular materials for students of a different age or background from those they have taught before. (image available in print form) The seminar on “War and Peace in the Twentieth Century and Beyond.” (Left to right: Fellows John B. Buell, Joyce Bryant, and Pedro Mendia-Landa.) Moreover, as in past years—and as is the case in the school system generally—many of the 2002 Fellows did not major in college or graduate school in the subjects they currently teach. As Chart 3 shows, in no field did all Fellows teaching a subject have a graduate or undergraduate degree in that subject. In three fields—art, general science, and social studies—no Fellows had a graduate or undergraduate degree in a field they taught. Of the Fellows teaching in the field of English, only 38 percent had an undergraduate or graduate degree. Of those teaching mathematics, only one third had so much as an undergraduate degree. |
Three fifths of all Fellows have been in their present teaching position four or fewer years. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Chart 4 shows the subjects Fellows taught in the 2001-2002 year of their Institute participation. Overall, more than three fifths (63 percent) of Fellows in the humanities and four fifths (82 percent) of Fellows in the sciences had not majored either in college or in graduate school in one or more of the subjects they taught in that year. Understandably, therefore, when the 2002 Fellows were asked about the incentives that attracted them to participate in the Institute, they responded (as Chart 5 shows, reading left to right from the most to the least important) that the most important incentives were the opportunities to exercise intellectual independence (84 percent), to develop materials to motivate their students (82 percent), to work with university faculty members (82 percent), to increase their mastery of the subjects they teach (80 percent), and to develop curricula to fit their needs (73 percent). Indeed, incentives that might be imagined to be important for teachers with access to Yale University—credit in a degree program and access to Yale athletic facilities—were much less important for Fellows in the Teachers Institute. As past Institute studies have shown, Fellows are in most respects highly representative of all New Haven teachers. So, for example, this year’s Fellows continue to reflect the gender and ethnicity of all New Haven teachers, though there are great disparities overall between the ethnic and racial characteristics of New Haven teachers and those of their students. (See Table 1 below.) Similarly, the Yale faculty members who have led Institute seminars generally reflect the wider faculty at Yale. Ethnicity and Gender of Participants |
Fellows are in most respects highly representative of all New Haven teachers. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
At the first organizational meeting of each seminar, held on March 5, 2002, the seminar leader distributed an annotated bibliography on the seminar subject and presented the syllabus of readings that he or she proposed that the seminar would consider. The Fellows described the individual curriculum units that they planned to develop. This afforded the members of each seminar an overview of the work they were undertaking together and the projects they would pursue individually. The bibliographies both introduced the seminar subject and guided Fellows as they began research on their curriculum units. According to one Fellow, “The selection of readings we covered was varied and interesting (mostly!). I enjoyed being given a reading list and then being able to discuss it. Our seminar had an outline but was flexible enough to incorporate anything that came up.” Other Fellows wrote:
(image available in print form) The seminar on “Survival Stories.” (Left to right: Fellows Marlene H. Kennedy and Amber Stolz.) The seminar leaders also commented on what they perceived to be the Fellows’ responses to the weekly readings. One said: “The Fellows were interested, did their reading (which I kept fairly short), and with a couple of exceptions they contributed freely to discussions.” He continued, “Leading the seminar was an entirely positive experience.” Another seminar leader wrote:
Before the second seminar meeting all Fellows met individually with their seminar leader to discuss their projects. The Institute requires that Fellows schedule at least two such conferences as part of the unit writing process; many Fellows, however, meet more frequently with their seminar leader. At the end of the program, almost all Fellows (93 percent) said that they had ample opportunity to discuss their choice of readings with the seminar leader. During the period that preceded the regular weekly meetings, Fellows continued their reading, both preparing for the upcoming seminar discussions and working toward a brief prospectus of what their final units would contain. At the second seminar meeting, on April 9, Fellows submitted this prospectus, presented their revised unit topics, and began to discuss the common readings. The regular weekly seminar meetings began on May 7; thereafter Fellows continued to develop their units in stages, with a first draft submitted on May 28. The weekly meetings of the seminars continued through July 16, with Fellows submitting the second draft of their units on July 2 and their completed units by July 31. |
"We were assigned texts to be in charge of and would come to class with a short presentation on how to teach this in our classes." —Institute Fellow "Most seemed quite engaged. This caused me to adjust my teaching style—less lecturing and more discussion." —Seminar Leader |
|
For several years, Fellows have been asked to submit the prospectus, together with a revised topic of the unit and a list of appropriate readings, at the time of the second seminar meeting. This allows them a full six weeks to write a first draft. The due date for the second draft is late enough to allow Fellows ample time to address the comments they received on the first draft from other Fellows and from the seminar leader. Some seminar leaders have urged that the revised topic, preliminary reading-list, and first draft be submitted somewhat later, and some have informally instituted yet another draft between the first and second drafts. Every year, too, some Fellows are concerned that the writing of the unit begins before they have entered well into the seminar topic, or that too much work must be done at the end of the school year, when they are heavily committed to their teaching. Nevertheless, a majority of the Fellows have been satisfied with this schedule. In 2002 one said, “Timetables are hard to establish when you work in such an overwhelming circumstance which is inner-city teaching. Yet, the seminars start [meeting every week] when our year is just about to end, our busiest time of the year. This is a weakness but a blessing disguise; the Institute activity allows us to focus on what we want to do improve our teaching for the following year.” Overall 69 percent of the Fellows thought the unit writing deadlines occurred at the right time in relation to the school calendar. The Institute attaches great importance to the process through which Fellows develop their curriculum units, and many Fellows commented upon the benefits derived from following this process. One said: “The writing process was overwhelming at times, but the collaboration in the seminars put me at ease. We were able to share our curriculums with our colleagues to learn what they were writing about and to receive feedback.” Another, who said that the seminar leader “nurtured us through the process” and that “it was wonderful,” wrote: Information presented to us prior to the unit creation and during the writing of the unit was very detailed. I especially enjoyed the depth with which our professor corrected our unit drafts. I found the seminar to be very rewarding because I had an opportunity to meet with a diverse group of fellow educators who contributed much to the lesson assignments and the book discussions. I also enjoyed it when all of us were given a chance to present our units to the group. Another Fellow wrote: |
The Institute attaches great importance to the process through which Fellows develop their curriculum units. "I especially enjoyed the depth with which our professor corrected our unit drafts." —Institute Fellow |
|
At the conclusion of the seminars, most Fellows indicated that the program schedule (84 percent) and the guidelines for writing a unit (89 percent) had been useful to them to a great or moderate extent. This year 59 percent of the Fellows said they tried out the subject matter and 68 percent said they tried out the strategies of their units in their classroom. Of those who did, most Fellows (85 percent) said that this influenced what they included in the final units. During the first two months of the program, which serve as a reading period, all Fellows also met together on Tuesday afternoons for a series of talks. These talks are designed to expose all Fellows to some of the work done in seminars other than their own, and in some cases to subjects and leaders of possible future seminars. Ordinarily, therefore, some current or prospective seminar leaders are included in this series. At the same time, some other faculty members are invited to speak on topics the school Representatives believe will be of particular interest to many Fellows, based on the interests expressed during the months of planning and canvassing the preceding fall. In response to the teachers’ expressed interests, and because many Fellows had considered applying to more than one of this year’s seminars, the current seminar leaders gave all five of the talks in 2002.
This year the talks were especially popular among Fellows. The few criticisms primarily related to the use of precious time, and whether that time might have been used more effectively in different ways within the Institute. One Fellow said that the talks “should come later in the schedule allowing Fellows to meet with and get information from the seminar for which they are writing the curriculum unit.” A second said that the talks “took time away from working with the professor and researching topics.” Still, most Fellows saw in the talks the purposes for which they were organized. Fully 100 percent of Fellows said that to a great or moderate extent the talks provided them intellectual stimulation, while most said they provided a sense of collegiality and common purpose among Fellows (86 percent). Four fifths (80 percent) said the talks were successful to a great or moderate extent in providing an overview of Fellows’ work in the seminars. A slightly larger proportion (86 percent) said that the Institute scheduled the right number of talks. One Fellow “felt the talks were a positive experience both for the content and the fact that they bring all of the Fellows together in a positive atmosphere.” Another characterized the talks as “worthwhile, interesting, and well-timed.” A third individual said they “were so interesting and mind-expanding and non-threatening for us teacher types.” Yet another Fellow observed: “Many of the professors were so engaging in their talks, that I wished I could be joining in their seminars as well.” Many Fellows reported that the talks prompted them, to a great or moderate extent, to read about their topics (70 percent, compared with 51 percent in 2001), discuss the topics with their students (51 percent), and discuss the talks with other teachers (82 percent). In all three respects, these figures represented an increase over the prior year. As in other recent years, the Institute scheduled a session on curriculum unit writing, well before the regular meetings of the seminars began. Before starting on their curriculum units, the Fellows all need to understand the central role that the process of writing plays in Institute seminars. As part of their admissions folder, all Fellows had received Institute guidelines and mechanical specifications for preparing curriculum units, which outline the Institute writing process and the five steps for Fellows’ formulating, reformulating, and enlarging their individual units. On March 19, the teachers serving as seminar Coordinators comprised a panel in leading a session on curriculum unit development. (image available in print form) 2002 Workshop on Curriculum Unit Development. (Left to right: Seminar Coordinators Luis A. Recalde, Jean E. Sutherland, Carolyn N. Kinder, Angelo J. Pompano, and John B. Buell.) The Coordinators spoke from their own experiences in researching and writing new curricula as Institute Fellows. Representing among them the elementary, middle and high school levels, the Coordinators spoke to all the Fellows on these topics: “Setting the Stage”; “Checking and Using the Index, Guides, and Reference Lists”; “Addressing Your Audience and Narrowing Your Topic”; “Following the Institute Process for Unit Development”; and “Aligning Your Unit with School Plans and District Goals.” Then the Fellows were divided into seminar groups, where each Coordinator led a discussion of purposes and practices in writing Institute curriculum units. This afforded an opportunity for the first-time Fellows to learn about the guidelines and other aspects of curriculum unit writing from experienced Fellows. It also encouraged experienced Fellows to share that experience and allowed all to discuss how the completed volume of units might display a range of teaching strategies and contain a standard form of annotation. By leading these discussions, the Coordinators also identified themselves as being knowledgeable about the process of writing curriculum units, so that other Fellows might seek their advice. |
This year the talks were especially popular among Fellows. "The talks were a positive experience both for the content and the fact that they bring all of the Fellows together in a positive atmosphere." —Institute Fellow The Fellows all need to understand the central role that the process of writing plays in Institute seminars. |
|
At the Coordinators’ weekly meetings with the Director and Associate Director, which were held on the day after seminar meetings, they discussed the progress of each seminar and gained an overview of the program. In addition, the Coordinators met with the seminar leaders immediately before the program began to provide them with information about the teachers who had been accepted and to begin to define their role in assisting with the conduct of the seminars. Both seminar leaders and Fellows acknowledged in their evaluations the essential role of the Coordinators. Ninety-five percent of Fellows agreed that the Coordinators provided teacher leadership without diminishing the collegial relationship within the seminar. Fellows found the Coordinators to be helpful either a lot (79 percent) or a little (21 percent) in providing information about unit writing deadlines; helpful either a lot (67 percent) or a little (30 percent) in providing information about guidelines for unit writing; helpful either a lot (60 percent) or a little (30 percent) in providing information about the use of University facilities; and helpful either a lot (62 percent) or a little (29 percent) in facilitating discussion of Fellows’ work in progress. Few Fellows found the Coordinators unhelpful in any respect. One Fellow said: “The seminar Coordinator was there when I needed her during the final writing [of the curriculum unit], playing an important and appreciated role of support and colleague.” (image available in print form) Seminar Coordinators meeting. (Left to right: Seminar Coordinators Jean E. Sutherland, Carolyn N. Kinder, Abie L. Benítez, Angelo J. Pompano, Luis A. Recalde; Director James R. Vivian; and Seminar Coordinator John B. Buell.) To maintain current information on the program and to address any problems that arose, the Institute Director and Associate Director met monthly with the seminar leaders as a group. This also afforded the seminar leaders, three of whom were conducting an Institute seminar for the first time, an opportunity to talk with one another about their approaches to the seminar and experiences in it. |
Both seminar leaders and Fellows acknowledged in their evaluations the essential role of the Coordinators. |
|
The seminars have always been regarded as the core collaborative experience of the Institute, and each year the majority of Fellows’ comments about the seminars have been strongly positive. Again this year their comments were often very enthusiastic indeed. One said: “Each person took their work seriously and seemed to have a real investment in producing a unit designed for their students.” This same Fellow believed the seminar leader “was skilled at involving everyone without pressuring anyone to participate.” Another participant noted, “The seminar seemed to fly by and we all seemed sorry to see it end. It was a great experience and I hope my unit will convey some of what I learned to my students.” A third “was very happy with the comments, help, criticism, and ideas I received from this seminar. My writing improved and I learned how to look at writing in a new way.” A fourth Fellow said, “This was a great seminar, probably one of the top five courses I have ever taken.” And a fifth added, “I looked forward to attending each of the seminar sessions because the topics were so interesting and educational. I have been a member of the Institute for seven years and feel this seminar was the most interesting and engaging.” Others said:
(image available in print form) The seminar on “War and Peace in the Twentieth Century and Beyond.” (Left to right: Fellows Pedro Mendia-Landa and Burton R. Saxon.)
The Yale faculty members who led seminars described their seminar in both specific and general terms. One seminar leader said, “I don’t know of any professional development for teachers—except for the kinds of things offered by NEH seminars and Bread Loaf—that is superior to its double focus on content in the humanities and sciences and application to the classroom.” Another remarked that “Every session ran overtime because the teachers had more to say than there was time. One first-year teacher,” according to this seminar leader, “said that she loved the seminar and reported how she was not waiting for a completed unit, but was using the readings in her classes this very year.” |
"All of the Fellows in the seminar were wonderful to work with and each unselfishly contributed to the discussion from the point of view of their own area of expertise." —Institute Fellow "Every session ran overtime because the teachers had more to say than there was time." —Institute Fellow |
|
Fellows themselves particularly relished a chance to talk and work with other teachers across the artificial boundaries that often separate grade levels, schools, and disciplines. One Fellow wrote: “I found the seminar to be very rewarding because I had an opportunity to meet with a diverse group of fellow educators who contributed much to the lesson assignments and the book discussions.” Another wrote: “The group of Fellows was particularly well-balanced providing for interesting discussion both in regards to the assigned reading and the Fellows’ units. There were three high school teachers, three from middle schools, and four representing elementary grades.” This participant observed that “Fellows also varied in their number of years of experience,” and that “Racially and ethnically the group was also mixed.” She concluded: “This mixture of teachers blended together extremely well. Everyone contributed and seemed to respect and even seek out the opinions of others.” Several teachers commented on the inspiration they found in working together. As one described:
Another Fellow wrote: “The ‘bonding’ that occurred in the seminar, however subtle, had the effect of letting us know that our biggest problems and challenges in the classroom are universal rather than specific to us.” This Fellow said, “I think the Institute offers the emotional support so many of us need to do our work. This, in sum, is the biggest thing that I will carry over to the next year, especially when things get tough.” A third said, “The group of teachers that partook in the seminar were people I could trust to be honest and receptive in their feedback.” This Fellow continued: “What is sorely lacking at some of our schools—that is the element of support and encouragement for work heartfelt and well done—was provided in the seminar group. Thank God and my colleagues for that.” (image available in print form) The seminar on “The Craft of Writing.” (Left to right: Fellows Christine Picón-Van Duzer, Sean Griffin, and Leigh Highbridge.) Ever since the Institute’s inception, its participants and staff have been asked whether the co-professionalism among Yale faculty members and New Haven school teachers, for which the program is widely known, is authentic. The collegiality on which the Institute is founded is perhaps best illustrated by the mutual respect between Fellows and seminar leaders that the seminar experience engenders. One seminar leader, for example, said that this year’s seminar “was especially satisfying due to the energy and vigor of seminar discussions.” He asserted that “The Institute is playing a vital role in curriculum development within New Haven, attracting many exceptional teachers who have grown into important leadership roles within their own disciplines.” Another seminar leader voiced similar respect for the teachers: “It has been good for me to understand the quality and commitment of most of the Fellows, and some of the challenges they face in doing a good job.” This seminar leader “came away with an understanding of how good they could be.” Not least, “I enjoyed it, and thought I was doing something worthwhile.” In turn, Fellows expressed admiration for their Yale colleagues and for the collegiality that they helped to foster. One said, “My experience in the Institute this year was extremely positive. There were a number of reasons for this. First, the seminar leader was very good. He was very effective in leading discussion and raising important questions.” This participant also noted “the quality of the other Fellows in the seminar. They were all extremely well informed and provided a variety of useful perspectives on the topics under discussion. One Fellow who was perhaps not as well versed in the subject area raised such interesting questions that her contributions were equally appreciated. I felt I made connections with teachers at other schools which will prove invaluable in years to come.” (image available in print form) The seminar on “The Craft of Writing.” (Left to right: Fellow Shirley Ann Goldberg and seminar leader Thomas R. Whitaker.) |
The group of teachers that partook in the seminar were people I could trust to be honest and receptive in their feedback." —Institute Fellow The collegiality on which the Institute is founded is perhaps best illustrated by the mutual respect between Fellows and seminar leaders that the seminar experience engenders. |
|
Such praise was common among Fellows. One said, “The seminar leader provided expert and useful information on this topic as well as specific information to assist each of us in our individual projects. He showed great interest in each of our topics and provided many useful suggestions.” Another Fellow wrote that a seminar leader “provided everyone with excellent ideas to include in our units. He was also very aware of the audience we were trying to reach: teachers and students. This was indeed a great experience!” A third participant said: “The professors were very well prepared, presented information in a digestible manner, and made themselves very accessible to the Fellows.” A fourth wrote, “Our professor was excellent. She was serious when she had to be but had a great sense of humor and an easy ability to laugh.” And a fifth said, “The quality of teaching, especially [my seminar leader] and also in each of the lectures, was excellent.” Other Fellows wrote:
|
"My seminar leader provided everyone with excellent ideas to include in our units. He was also very aware of the audience we were trying to reach: teachers and students." —Institute Fellow |
|
As in past years, Fellows in 2002 spoke of the results of their Institute participation especially in terms of intellectual growth and renewal. Just as the opportunity to increase mastery of the subject one teaches was an important incentive for most Fellows (80 percent) to take part in the Institute, almost all (93 percent) said that they had gained knowledge of their subject and confidence to teach it by participating in their seminar. Only one Fellow disagreed with the statement that the seminar helped with intellectual and professional growth. Many Fellows described the Institute experience as having increased their professional confidence and morale, while nourishing their curiosity. They spoke of this confidence both generally and in terms of greater mastery of a particular subject. One observed, “My curriculum is continually strengthened every time I take a seminar and write a unit. My content knowledge is solidified and this affects my class in every way. I am a better teacher because of the opportunities the Institute has afforded me.” More specifically, a second Fellow “will be much more able to teach the foreign policy section of Advanced Placement United States history during the coming years.” A third Fellow explained that the Institute “has allowed me to do readings that otherwise I would not have had a chance to do. I feel more confident to cover a topic, which is now in the news.” After the experience, he said, “I’m ready for next year!” Other Fellows wrote:
Fellows spoke, too, of the access to Yale facilities they had gained from participation. From the Institute’s inception, all Fellows have been full members of the University community, listed in the directory of faculty and staff, and granted use of facilities and services across the campus. For most Fellows (90 percent) access to Yale’s academic facilities such as the library was an incentive for their participation, and 70 percent reported that membership in the Yale community had been greatly or moderately useful to them. According to one Fellow: “The Institute did a great job in providing access to materials that would be helpful to the Institute Fellows. Also, providing the use of Yale’s first class facilities is a huge bonus.” Another characterized “the use of Yale facilities” as “a major benefit in conducting our research and developing interest in related issues.” And a third said: “Continued access to the Yale libraries and academic resources is also important to developing good units. Attending class ‘on campus’ was exciting and made the experience feel more professional. Please continue these aspects of the program.” |
Almost all said that they had gained knowledge of their subject and confidence to teach it by participating in their seminar. "How can we convey to students that education is important, if we are not living proof?" —Institute Fellow "Attending class ‘on campus’ was exciting and made the experience feel more professional." —Institute Fellow |
|
Fellows see the results of the Institute as going beyond their own classrooms, and beyond the teachers who have themselves personally participated in the seminars. Almost all Fellows said that they plan to encourage or assist other teachers in using the unit they prepared; more than half said they planned to do so with three or more other teachers. As a group, the Fellows planned to encourage or assist a total of 141 other teachers. (image available in print form) Reception for Representatives and Contacts in Sterling Memorial Library. (Left to right: Gail G. Hall and Raymond W. Brooks.) Fellows this year provided various accounts of the more extended influence the Institute has had, and will have, for themselves and their schools. One said, “I am new to the school where I’m currently teaching and will not only implement this unit but also let my team know of my unit and add it if possible to the second grade curriculum.” Another noted that he had “shared” the unit he had developed last year “with my colleagues who teach U.S. History II and they have made partial use of it. I will make further efforts in that area next year.” A third said, “The way my unit is constructed, teachers are forced to cooperate. English and art teachers must work together on this unit, making it a truly collaborative effort.” A fourth said, “I always try to write a cross-curriculum unit which brings together teachers of several disciplines. This results in an atmosphere of cooperation which is good for the school in general.” And a fifth recalled that her principal “commented that YNHTI Fellows have strong leadership skills, are good collaborators and are highly effective in carrying out tasks.” Another Fellow, who noted that in the past she had seen her “colleagues (even if they are not YNHTI Fellows) make use of the Institute teacher resources,” further observed: “My curriculum unit will serve not only as an exciting social studies and language arts tool, but also as a social development resource. I have already shared aspects of my unit with several colleagues. Hopefully, they will consider implementing the unit in their classroom (they have already committed to using several of my bibliographic resources).” Other Fellows wrote:
Each year we are attentive to the responses of both first-time and veteran participants because we want a high proportion of New Haven teachers to become Fellows and we also want the Institute to become a regular part of Fellows’ professional lives. Both groups cite their own rewards. One newcomer said:
|
"Half of the students in my school will be exposed to my curriculum." —Institute Fellow |
|
Others wrote:
One new Fellow pointed to the appeal of the Institute in comparison with more conventional staff development programming for teachers:
Among the teachers who were participating in the Institute for the first time were the twelve individuals in the BEST program who were in their first year of teaching in Connecticut. |
"The experience has been worthwhile because it has been engaging, professionally stimulating, and practical." —Institute Fellow |
|
As discussed above in the section of this report on the Fellows’ Application and Admissions Process, the Beginning Educator Support and Training (BEST) program is a State of Connecticut requirement for new teachers. In 2002 the Institute undertook a pilot effort to involve and support first-year teachers. At the conclusion of the program, one of them cited “preparing teachers for the BEST program” as among the Institute’s “strengths.” This individual said that “The training offered by the Institute helps to develop outstanding teachers, which in turns benefits the students.” On May 16 New Haven Superintendent of Schools Reginald Mayo hosted a reception to recognize and encourage the new teachers participating as Fellows. He and other district administrators, including the two Associate Superintendents, spoke with the new teachers and with other Fellows about their experiences in the Institute and in their schools. The event was an opportunity for the Superintendent and his colleagues to congratulate the Fellows for participating in the Institute during their challenging first year of teaching, and to urge them to remain in teaching in New Haven. (image available in print form) Reception for new teachers participating as Fellows: (Left to right: Fellows Christine Picón-Van Duzer, Andrea N. Bailey; Superintendent of New Haven Public Schools Reginald Mayo; Associate Superintendent Verdell M. Roberts; Fellow Virginia Seely; Associate Director Josiah H. Brown.) Several of the 2002 Fellows who were first-year teachers were among the most enthusiastic participants in the Institute. One said, “I have explored in depth an area of history that I was not familiar with. I now feel I can teach it with confidence. It will greatly enhance my BEST year and what I can accomplish for that.” A second “would look forward to participating” in the Institute, he said, “for many years to come” and “found this experience very rewarding and enjoyable.” Another wrote:
Another first-year teacher said: “My teaching will be affected by the research and unit preparation as I intend to use this unit for the BEST portfolio I will be preparing this year. I had an opportunity to get feedback from a professor who is skilled in research.” She added, “It is because I am embarking on this next step in the certification process that I considered and became interested in attending the Institute.” The Institute surveyed the new teachers among the 2002 Fellows to learn how best to involve them in its work. The results of the pilot were encouraging, especially the fact that four of these Fellows proceeded to become Representatives for their schools in the fall. We will track the outcomes of their BEST portfolios and, in particular, the ways in which seminar participation and unit development may have assisted these teachers. We will use this information in planning future recruitment and support efforts for new teachers. We will consider how the teaching of Institute curriculum units should be scheduled in relation to the portfolio requirement, and how to ensure mentoring of new teachers within the seminars in a way that more consistently complements the mentoring structure that the district has established. The coordinator of the pilot initiative in 2002, Dina K. Secchiaroli, was a Fellow for the third consecutive year in 2002, and she expects also to coordinate the Institute’s follow-up to the pilot in 2003. She was one of three Fellows who volunteered to undergo training from the New Haven Public Schools to become BEST mentors for the district. In this role, they advise and support new teachers both in the classroom and in the creation of their portfolios. Involving more BEST mentors in the Institute promises to help integrate the Institute and the district’s own professional development for new teachers. (image available in print form) Representatives and BEST mentors Sandra K. Friday (left) and Dina K. Secchiaroli (right). For returning Fellows, the rewards of participation do not diminish over time, because the experience becomes cumulative, rather than repetitive or redundant. In fact, many teachers report that the rewards increase as one has more experience as a Fellow. Many consider the nature of the Institute as a learning community to be a district benefit, too. One fifth-year Fellow wrote that “The Institute continues to serve as a source of experiential learning for many instructors throughout the New Haven area and me. This year, each seminar topic was enticing, and weekly talks were informative. My seminar,” she said, “was fabulously stimulating.” Another longtime Fellow said: “This year’s Institute ranks very high among those in which I have participated.” Others observed:
|
New Haven Superintendent of Schools Reginald Mayo hosted a reception to recognize and encourage the new teachers participating as Fellows. "As a first-year teacher the seminar prepared me for my BEST portfolio next year. It’s great working in an environment where teachers are motivated to better themselves and their students." —Institute Fellow |
|
Every year since 1990, when they became a regular part of the Institute, elementary school teachers have spoken of the advantages of the Institute for them specifically. This year one elementary school Fellow said, “This year’s Institute has proven to be both productive and stimulating for my teaching profession in the elementary classroom. Once again I am excited about having a fresh and new curriculum unit to present to my first-grade students.” Another Fellow, while arguing that “more of the seminars should be geared toward subjects which will be useful in teaching elementary school students,” said: “I created an excellent unit which includes many disciplines and cuts across grade levels.” He recalled, “My participation in the Institute in the past resulted in units which excited my students and drew out their creativity.” “The seminars,” he concluded, “lend themselves very well to the curriculum standards of the City of New Haven.” Seminar leaders, too, speak of what they gain from participation. They not only appreciate their growing involvement in public education and the University’s home community, they also find that there are often benefits accruing to their own scholarship and teaching. Presenting their experience is especially important because the Institute is often asked to explain the incentives and rewards for Yale faculty members who participate. One seminar leader this year said: “The creation of this year’s seminar coincided with my writing a new book. The seminar’s focus,” he continued, “caused me to rethink and reorganize” one section of the book. It also led him, he said, to consider the structure of an additional book. He has “incorporated readings and several lectures designed for this year’s YNHTI seminar” into a course “taught to Yale undergraduates,” and into a graduate seminar. He believes that “Without question, the YNHTI experience will improve these courses.” Another seminar leader said:
|
"My participation in the Institute in the past resulted in units which excited my students and drew out their creativity." —Institute Fellow |
|
For the past nine years the Institute has admitted teams of at least three teachers from the same school to a seminar with the expectation that the team members would work as a team. They would coordinate their curriculum units and work together during the school year, planning cross-grade and cross-department instruction and culminating school-wide activities, such as assembly programs, science fairs, or some kind of publication. Each team member, however, must write a unit that could be taught independently. This program, highly successful in several schools, has encouraged teachers who were previously reluctant to participate in seminars on an individual basis to apply to a seminar as part of a school team. Two teams of Fellows emerged during the Institute applications and admissions process in 2002. One team, from East Rock Global Studies Magnet School, enrolled in the seminar on “Food, Environmental Quality, and Health” and focused their units upon environmental science and students’ preparation of science-fair projects. One Fellow, a staff developer at the school, created a manual for other teachers across the district to use in working with students toward the science fair. The other two team members developed units on the aquatic environment and food-borne illnesses, respectively. The school’s own science fair in February 2003, along with the citywide science fair in March 2003, will represent the culminating activities for the East Rock team. A second team, from Vincent Mauro Elementary School, joined the seminar on “The Craft of Writing.” One teacher developed a unit for third-grade students on anger management through written expression; she designed her unit to complement an existing prevention program by adding a series of writing lessons. A second teacher created ways to use physical education to nurture writing skills among elementary school students by drawing upon their interest in sports. The third member of the team developed a unit on narrative writing for third-grade bilingual students. Her unit employs biography, autobiography, and literature to give students models and inspiration for their own narratives. |
|
The ultimate purpose of the Institute is to strengthen teaching in New Haven’s public schools and in this way to improve student learning throughout the schools. Contrary to what some would expect of a partnership involving Yale University, the Teachers Institute intends to serve students at all achievement and performance levels. Fellows often, in fact, write their units for students at more than one level. While most Fellows (89 percent) reported that their new curriculum units were designed for their “average” students, two thirds (68 percent) reported that they were designed for their “advanced” students and almost as many (64 percent) also reported that they were designed for their “least advanced” students. These excerpts from the plans of several Fellows illustrate the wide range of unit use in the schools. One said:
(image available in print form) Fellow Pedro Mendia-Landa and his students at Columbus Family Academy. The same Fellow said, “I used this unit on my students, and not one of them expressed any dislike in the two novels they were required to read, and every child read each book from beginning to end. This was extremely rewarding, considering that in my first year of teaching if I had introduced a novel into class, I could have counted on one fifth of the class completing the book.”
(image available in print form) Fellow Abie L. Benítez and her students at Columbus Family Academy.
A number of Fellows commented on the significance of the Institute for their students with disabilities. One said:
To attempt to gauge the impact of this year’s units in New Haven classrooms, we asked Fellows about the number of students to whom they planned to teach their new unit, and on how many days. Thirty-five of the forty-four Fellows who completed the Institute planned to teach their unit to 20 or more students; one third of that group said that they would teach their unit to 50 or more students. The total number of students to be taught a unit by this year’s Fellows is more than 2500. Chart 6 indicates the lengths of time the Fellows planned to teach their units. For almost all Fellows, the unit is a significant part of their teaching plans. Fellows continue to be optimistic about the responses they anticipate receiving from their students to the material they had studied and developed in the Institute. Almost all (87 percent) of the Fellows responding agreed that, as a result of Institute participation, they have a higher expectation of their students’ ability to learn about the seminar subject. We have already quoted some Fellows who spoke about how their own enthusiasm for a subject would motivate students, and how they planned to involve students more actively in classroom learning. Another said, “I anticipate a very positive response from my students in regard to my curriculum material.” He added, “Students are going to experience more structured use of technology because of my unit. More-over, they will look at more contemporary issues than in years past. Lastly, students will have more precise research projects to complete.” Another Fellow said, “I believe that this unit will reap benefits in terms of the language arts and social studies curriculums. Above and beyond being fun, the unit is educational. It will be an indication, to these students, that learning can be fun.” We also asked Fellows who had participated in the Institute in prior years to report on student responses they had actually observed when teaching units they had previously developed in the Institute. Their retrospective comments in many cases echoed their optimism using their new units. According to one Fellow, “Students become engaged learners, parents get involved and proudly talk about their child’s accomplishments.” She said, “Over the years, my involvement with the YNHTI has proven a rewarding experience.” Another Fellow wrote, “My participation in the past resulted in units which excited my students and drew out their creativity.” These units “allowed my students to find success and this made the students feel good about themselves.” A third said, “My students benefited from a rich unit that allowed them to learn and to develop skills that otherwise I would not have known how to approach.” In the words of a fourth Fellow: “I feel my students, curriculum and school have benefited immensely. Students stated that teachers who attend the Institute act as professionals. They have a better understanding of their subject and keep students highly engaged in their work.” And a fifth said, “The results of my prior participation for my students, my curriculum, and my school were lifesaving.” Other Fellows wrote:
|
"My curriculum unit and Institute participation will have a positive effect on my teaching . . . including providing the opportunity to reach all intellectual levels and abilities." —Institute Fellow "The teacher that I team with is also very eager to try this unit, so I think our enthusiasm will rub off on our students." —Institute Fellow "I’m inspired to teach my unit because it is something I created." —Institute Fellow "I have never spent so much time on the creation of a unit and my students will benefit." —Institute Fellow For almost all Fellows, the unit is a significant part of their teaching plans. "Students are going to experience more structured use of technology because of my unit." —Institute Fellow "The experience of teaching the unit has been the highlight of the following school year both for me and I believe for my students." —Institute Fellow "I have discovered that non-interested students in the beginning of a project get caught up in the successes of others and participate joyfully along with their peers." —Institute Fellow "There is a huge difference when I teach my own unit. Students see this difference." —Institute Fellow |
|
Yale faculty members advise and assist the Institute through the University Advisory Council and its Executive Committee, both appointed by the Yale President. (For members of these bodies, see Appendix.) The Advisory Council guides the general direction of the program and acts as a course-of-study committee so that the Institute can certify Fellows’ work to institutions where they may be pursuing advanced degrees. The Council also advises the Yale President on the Institute and, more generally, on matters concerning the University’s involvement with the schools locally and with public elementary and secondary education nationally. The University Advisory Council meets once each year; the Executive Committee ordinarily meets twice or more each semester. The co-chairs of the Council meet and communicate frequently with the Director between meetings. Members of the Executive Committee and the Steering Committee meet jointly from time to time to share information about their respective activities and to explore appropriate ways of working together. During 2002 the Executive Committee met in March, April, May, and October. At the March meeting the Executive Committee formally approved the Institute seminars for 2002. It also discussed plans for the Institute’s 25th Anniversary Celebration, the status of our national plans, the progress in hiring Institute staff, and preparations for the annual University Advisory Council meeting with President Richard C. Levin to be held on April 17. In its late April meeting it discussed further the suggestions that had been made by the University Advisory Council and began its work in advising the preparation of the next Request for Proposals for the creation of new Teachers Institutes in the Yale National Initiative. The May meeting concerned further preparation for the Yale National Initiative and issues pertaining to fund raising. The October meeting dealt mainly with plans for the 25th Anniversary Celebration. On April 17 the full University Advisory Council held its ninth annual meeting with President Levin. Roberto González Echevarría opened the meeting, announcing that he had become co-chair of the Council since its last meeting and setting forth its purpose: to hear brief reports from the Director and from the documentor for the National Demonstration Project and to ask the Council’s advice on a timely question about our national work, which would be posed by the other co-chair, Mary E. Miller. Director James R. Vivian then described the continued successful balancing during the past year of the demands of the Institute’s local and national commitments. He noted that in 1996 we had undertaken a project to establish Institute Centers to increase the visibility and use of Institute resources in certain schools and to involve teachers who had not been Fellows in using those resources. He said that we have now completed the work we had undertaken with support from the Jessie Ball duPont Fund for Centers in elementary, middle, and K-8 schools, and are in the final stages of our work supported by the Arthur Vining Davis Foundations for Centers in high schools. In summer 2001 our sixth Academy, which emphasized student literacy through study of architecture and law, was conducted through the Center at Cooperative Arts and Humanities Magnet High School. Eight mini-grants to teachers were awarded to stimulate the teaching of Institute-developed curriculum units in high schools. A new high school Center was established at Sound School, and computers in all the high school Centers were replaced with ones that are more powerful and faster. He also noted that the teachers on the Steering Committee have focused on making the Centers more systemic and self-sustaining. |
The Council advises the Yale President on the Institute and, more generally, on matters concerning the University’s involvement with the schools locally and with public elementary and secondary education nationally. Vivian described the continued successful balancing of the demands of the Institute’s local and national commitments. |
|
(image available in print form) University Advisory Council meeting, April 2002. (Clockwise from left: Bruce D. Alexander, Cynthia E. Russett, Frederick L. Holmes, Thomas R. Whitaker, Director James R. Vivian, Mary E. Miller, Jock M. Reynolds, Gary L. Haller, Associate Director Josiah H. Brown, Robert J. Wyman, Roberto González Echevarría, Richard C. Levin, Ian Shapiro, and Werner P. Wolf.) Turning to other accomplishments, Vivian said that we had published in the fall of 2001 the two Reference Lists correlating Institute units with District and State Standards that had been developed under earlier mini-grants to teachers. Lists have been distributed in sufficient quantity so that they can be deposited in all school libraries and Institute Centers, and so that every elementary, middle, and high school teacher might have a personal copy of the List most related to their own teaching. He said also that the curriculum units written in 2001 were distributed to all schools and to last year’s participants, and were then put on line at the Institute’s Web-site, the worldwide use of which has continued to grow. The Institute process of organizing seminars annually in response to teachers’ needs has served us well, he said, as Institute Representatives considered last fall how they might address topics arising out of the events on September 11. In March, 62 teachers from 24 schools were accepted as Fellows to take part in six Institute seminars. Beginning last fall, Vivian added, we have placed renewed emphasis on the role of the Institute in encouraging individuals to remain in the teaching profession and in New Haven. We met on several occasions with members of the school administration, first- and second-year teachers, and mentors in the State BEST Program, to devise ways in which the Institute might support beginning teachers. Twelve individuals in their first year of teaching were accepted as Fellows this year, and seminar Coordinators and other veteran teachers are working to show them how they may use their curriculum unit in preparing for the portfolio that they must submit to the State next year. Turning then to the Institute’s work nationally, Vivian stated that teams of New Haven colleagues visited each of the four new Teachers Institutes during the third and final year of the Implementation Phase of the National Demonstration Project. The Institute Directors met on March 19, 2001 in New York; and the Director of the Pittsburgh Teachers Institute represented them at a meeting in Chicago in May where teachers on the National Steering Committee and university faculty members on the National University Advisory Council met to plan the Third Annual Conference that we held here in October. At the Conference we released the ninth number of On Common Ground. The publication was then mailed to almost 13,000 educators, policy makers, funders, and others nationwide. Director Vivian then summarized for the University Advisory Council the history of the plan for continuing establishment of Teachers Institutes in other cities after the end of the National Demonstration Project. (That history has been recounted in detail in the Annual Report of 2001.) As a result of the advice received during the Council meeting last year that our own work nationally should be closely identified with the University, he said, we have now termed it the Yale National Initiative. A one-year extension of support from the Wallace-Reader’s Digest Funds and a two-year grant from the Jessie Ball duPont Fund are supporting the Preparation Phase of this Initiative. We have received proposals from Pittsburgh and Houston to support their research and planning. We expect also to work with individuals who participated in all four new Institutes as we consider what have been the most efficacious practices in establishing new Institutes and determine how we should modify the Request for Proposals for the establishment of new Institutes in the future. We will also be examining the results of the annual Fellows questionnaires administered at the four new Institutes, as well as a survey on the use of Institute-developed curriculum units in their school districts. Vivian then described the relocation of the Institute’s offices to the eleventh floor of 195 Church Street overlooking the New Haven Green and Yale campus, the archiving of many of the Institute’s records, the storing of its publications, and the creating of new databases to simplify locating and retrieving this material. He also noted that, following the Council’s advice last spring on the administrative structure of the Institute, a Search Committee had assisted him in creating and filling Institute positions. Ronald Gitelman has become Institute administrator with responsibility for managing our financial affairs and databases. Andrew Daly has become assistant director, with responsibility for coordinating the administrative affairs of the Institute in its work locally and nationally. And Josiah Brown, who has been a staff aide to U.S. Representative Rosa L. DeLauro and Chief of Staff to the President of New School University, has become Associate Director with responsibility for managing the daily affairs of the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute. Vivian concluded by announcing the 25th Anniversary Celebration on November 13, to honor the Honorary Chairman of this Council, Howard R. Lamar, who helped him to found the Institute in 1977 and who served as Chairman of this Council from 1984 to 1988. Thomas R. Whitaker, documentor for the National Demonstration Project, then summarized briefly the most important accomplishments of that Project as a whole and noted some of their implications. (Those accomplishments and their implications are set forth in the section of this Annual Report on the Yale National Initiative.) He offered selective statistics from the new Institutes to illustrate these accomplishments. He then explained the process (also set forth in the section on the Yale National Initiative) that led to the Request for Proposals for Research and Planning for the Preparation Phase of the National Initiative during 2002-2003, and he indicated the interest now expressed in that work by Pittsburgh and Houston. Mary E. Miller then set before the Council the main question for discussion: Having expanded the Institute’s work nationally, what should be the non-negotiable principles in our approach to establish Teachers Institutes at other locations? The Council considered this question as it might relate to the sixteen Basic Principles that had grounded the National Demonstration Project, and also to the possible emphases of a single funder or of multiple funders in the future, to interests that school districts may have in shaping their own programs, and to the options that may exist for expansion of the program in areas of rural poverty or in more affluent suburban districts. (image available in print form) University Advisory Council meeting, April 2002. (Left to right: Mary E. Miller, Jock M. Reynolds, and Gary L. Haller.) (image available in print form) University Advisory Council meeting, April 2002. (Left to right: Roberto González Echevarría, Richard C. Levin, Ian Shapiro, and Deborah G. Thomas.) After a wide-ranging consideration of the possible pressures and options that might lie before us, the Council reaffirmed the established direction of the Yale National Initiative. The main thrust of the discussion, to which President Levin contributed a number of supporting statements, was that, given limited resources and the possibility of multiple funders, we should stay firmly within our present goals and means. A major point of emphasis was therefore the need to craft “Articles of Understanding” that would be both more explicitly integrated and more specifically detailed than were the sixteen Basic Principles. It was suggested that there might be both a very general statement of aims and processes and also a list of necessary procedures. It was noted that the existing Institute document concerning Policies and Procedures might be a helpful point of departure. The Executive Committee took these suggestions as guidance for its further work on the Yale National Initiative. |
The Council reaffirmed the established direction of the Yale National Initiative. |
| 25th Anniversary Celebration
With a $10,000 grant from the New Haven Savings Bank Foundation as lead sponsor, the Teachers Institute celebrated its 25th anniversary with a dinner and program on November 13 at the Omni New Haven Hotel. The event drew a capacity crowd to the ballroom and attracted many media outlets that reported the event in print and on radio and television. The evening’s theme was “celebrating teachers”: it was an occasion to honor the more than 500 New Haven public school teachers and 100 Yale faculty members who have participated in the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute. A total of 114 teachers, faculty members, and their guests were among the more than 400 people in attendance. They were seated together, according to seminars in which they had participated together, and in this way the dinner was a reunion for Institute participants. Among the New Haven teachers were several who had taken part in the earliest years of the Institute. Superintendent of New Haven Public Schools Reginald Mayo, Associate Superintendent Verdell Roberts (who was herself an Institute Fellow in its first year), and a number of other New Haven Public School administrators also attended. (image available in print form) 25th Anniversary Celebration. (Left to right: Master of ceremonies and speaker Calvin Trillin, and President of the New Haven Savings Bank Peyton Patterson.) |
The event was an occasion to honor the more than 500 New Haven public school teachers and 100 Yale faculty members who have participated in the Institute. |
|
The anniversary celebration was under planning for almost two years. Howard R. Lamar, Sterling Professor Emeritus of American History, who worked with James R. Vivian in founding the Institute, who led its first seminar in New Haven history, and who assisted the Institute in various ways while he was Dean of Yale College and President of the University, had agreed that the Institute might honor him at the celebration. Calvin Trillin, the noted American humorist and author of many books, who had served as a trustee of the University at the time Howard Lamar was its President, agreed to speak at the celebration. In May 2002 the Institute mailed save-the-date cards to over 3,000 people across the United States. We hoped that many would attend and that others who could not attend would consider making contributions to the Howard R. Lamar Endowment Fund for the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute, which had been established during Mr. Lamar’s presidency by an anonymous Yale alumnus who wished Howard Lamar’s name always to be prominently associated with the Institute’s work. During the summer of 2002, Bill Cosby—the actor, humorist, Doctor of Education, and longtime supporter of education and efforts to improve schools—agreed to make a special appearance and to speak on teachers and the teaching profession. (image available in print form) Anniversary Celebration Committee. (Clockwise from top left: Robert J. Lyons, Raymond W. Brooks, Carolyn N. Kinder, Associate Director Josiah H. Brown, Verdell M. Roberts, Nancy N. Kops, Chairman Daniel W. Kops, and Jean E. Sutherland.) The Anniversary Celebration Committee was composed of two working groups. (See Appendix). One group of New Haven Public School teachers and administrators who had been Institute Fellows (including current members of the Steering Committee) helped with planning and encouraging attendance by others from the New Haven Public Schools. They made many valuable suggestions about ways the celebration might recognize teachers who have played a variety of roles in the Institute—as Fellows, seminar Coordinators, Center Coordinators, school Representatives, and Steering Committee members. Another group, headed by civic leader Daniel W. Kops, worked to sell tables to local companies and tickets to individuals. They also assisted with seating arrangements, so that, like the school teachers and administrators, other members of the New Haven community, where possible, might be seated with people they knew. The Directors of the Houston Teachers Institute and the Pittsburgh Teachers Institute expressed interest in bringing more than 30 of their teacher and faculty participants to the celebration. We therefore organized a Conference for them with New Haven colleagues for the next day, November 14. For a detailed account of that Conference, see the section on the “Yale National Initiative” in this Annual Report. After opening remarks by Peyton Patterson, President of New Haven Savings Bank, there were introductory statements by Superintendent of Schools Reginald Mayo and Yale University President Richard C. Levin. (image available in print form) 25th Anniversary Celebration. (Reginald Mayo.) Superintendent Mayo paid tribute to Director James R. Vivian in these words:
President Levin spoke of the founding of the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute:
(image available in print form) 25th Anniversary Celebration. (Richard C. Levin.) He added, concerning the participation of university faculty members in the Institute: I have to tell you that I have heard again and again from Yale faculty who participated in these seminars, that this is a two-way street, that they are energized by their interaction with the New Haven school teachers, with their enthusiasm for learning, with their enthusiasm for children. It is rejuvenating for everyone, and the benefits accrue on both sides of the partnership. And that, of course, is why it has sustained itself so well. . . . |
" It was a fabulous idea when it started. It is a fabulous idea twenty-five years later. It is an idea that in the last five years has taken hold in four other cities in America." —Richard C. Levin |
As Chairman of the Anniversary Committee, Daniel W. Kops spoke about Howard R. Lamar as a scholar of United States history and supporter of the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute. Mr. Lamar then spoke about the Institute and his role in it. He said:
That approach “worked magically for me,” he said, when he proposed a seminar called, subject to teacher approval, “Remarkable City: New Haven in the 19th Century.” He described this seminar, mentioning the new information about New Haven that had been brought out by the teachers’ research. He went on to describe a second seminar, analyzing common and differing values in Southern and New England society and history, which revealed that “the prospect of a better education, and not just the prospect of better jobs, led many Black Americans from the South to come North and to settle in New Haven—that there was a deep commitment to finding good education for their families.” In the end,” said Mr. Lamar, “the seminar was as inspiring and rewarding as anything I have ever experienced in the classroom.” (image available in print form) 25th Anniversary Celebration. (Howard R. Lamar.) Professor Lamar then said to the teachers in attendance: “It is your achievement that we are celebrating. . . . It is you who reversed the older town-gown lack of understanding to bring cooperation between city and the university.” He proceeded to recognize the late President A. Bartlett Giamatti and others who have lent support to the Institute’s programs, and the Yale faculty members who have led its seminars. "When I saw Bart Giamatti and the Mayor of New Haven announcing the Teachers Institute together, I felt a revolution had taken place," he said. "That revolution continues to take place as we see Mayor DeStefano, Superintendent Mayo, and President Levin work as a team." Finally he praised James Vivian for “his larger vision, his quiet determination, and his unflagging energy and unending attention to the workings of the Institute.” The address by Bill Cosby began with an entertaining account of his own experience as a young student. As he then urged Americans to give more vigorous support to the public schools, he placed a major emphasis upon the mastery of geometry and literature and other subjects. That is precisely where the Teachers Institute has always placed emphasis—on the academic rigor and content of teachers’ preparation and school courses, so that all students might have the opportunity for the high quality education our public schools must provide. As one teacher from Houston remarked afterward, “Bill Cosby inspired me to be the best teacher I can be.” (image available in print form) 25th Anniversary Celebration. (Bill Cosby.) This event was a community-wide celebration of the role the Institute has played, and will continue to play, in strengthening teaching and learning in the New Haven public school system. As Director Vivian remarked, |
"It is your achievement that we are celebrating. . . . It is you who reversed the older town-gown lack of understanding to bring cooperation between city and the university." —Howard R. Lamar "When I saw Bart Giamatti and the Mayor of New Haven announcing the Teachers Institute together, I felt a revolution had taken place. That revolution continues to take place as we see Mayor DeStefano, Superintendent Mayo, and President Levin work as a team." —Howard R. Lamar "Bill Cosby inspired me to be the best teacher I can be." —Houston Teacher |
Although the Institute has been serving New Haven for 25 years, the present emphasis on teacher quality nationwide makes its approach more timely than ever. This is a tribute to the leadership and inventiveness of New Haven teachers and the resourcefulness and dedication of their Yale faculty colleagues. The Institute’s primary commitment has always been to New Haven, and, as its influence spreads nationally, the Yale-New Haven partnership will continue to serve as the outstanding example of its approach. |