Skip to main content

The Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute

Yale New Haven Teacher Institute

The Program in New Haven

Annual Report 2003 Contents
Contents of section:
The Aims of the Yale National Initiative
Building upon the success of the four-year National Demonstration Project, the Yale National Initiative promotes the development of new Teachers Institutes that adopt the approach to professional development that has been followed for more than twenty-six years by the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute. Teachers Institutes focus on the academic preparation of school teachers and on their application in their own classrooms of what they study in the Institute. By linking institutions of higher education with school districts where the students are mainly from low-income communities, Institutes strengthen teaching and learning in public schools and also benefit the institutions whose faculty members serve as seminar leaders. Each Institute also helps to disseminate this approach, encouraging and assisting other institutions and school districts as they develop similar programs in their own communities.

A Teachers Institute places equal emphasis on teachers' increasing their knowledge of a subject and on their developing teaching strategies that will be effective with their students. At the core of its program is a series of seminars on subjects in the humanities and sciences. Topics are suggested by the teachers based on what they think could enrich their classroom instruction. In the seminars the university or college faculty members contribute their knowledge of a subject, while the school teachers contribute their expertise in elementary and secondary school pedagogy, their understanding of the students they teach, and their grasp of what works in the crucible of the classroom. Successful completion of a seminar requires that the teachers, with guidance from a faculty member, each write a curriculum unit to be used in their own classrooms and to be shared with others in the same school and other schools through both print and electronic publication.
Building upon the success of the four-year National Demonstration Project, the Yale National Initiative promotes the development of new Teachers Institutes.
Throughout the seminar process teachers are treated as colleagues. Unlike conventional university or professional development courses, Institute seminars involve at their very center an exchange of ideas among school teachers and university or college faculty members. The teachers admitted to seminars, however, are not a highly selective group, but rather a cross-section of those in the system, most of whom, like their urban counterparts across the country, did not major in one or more of the subjects they teach. The Institute approach assumes that urban public school teachers can engage in serious study of the field and can devise appropriate and effective curricula based on this study.
The National Demonstration Project
Supported by a major grant from the Wallace Foundation and a supplementary grant from the McCune Charitable Foundation, the National Demonstration Project showed that Teachers Institutes based on the principles grounding the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute can be established and sustained in other cities where the pattern and magnitude of needs and resources are different from those in New Haven. It did so in a variety of institutional contexts, with the participation of liberal arts colleges, private universities, and state universities, acting individually or in a consortium. Institutions that have long had departments or schools of education are now devoting a good deal of their energy to providing seminars for teachers in the liberal arts and sciences. By establishing Institutes from coast to coast, by setting in motion a National Steering Committee of school teachers and a National University Advisory Council (of university and college faculty members), and by holding a series of Annual Conferences, the National Demonstration Project laid the groundwork for a national network of such Teachers Institutes.

In 1997 the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute had designed the Demonstration Project, surveyed and visited likely sites, and selected fourteen sites to be invited to apply for Planning Grants. In 1998 it provided those sites with extensive information concerning the Institute's policies and procedures. On recommendation of a National Panel, it then awarded Planning Grants to five applicants. Their eight months of planning included a ten-day "July Intensive" in New Haven, during which Planning Directors and teams of university faculty members and school teachers participated in a varied program of activities that were designed to initiate them into the Institute process. Teachers took part in National Seminars (truncated versions of New Haven seminars) led by Yale faculty members, and also observed local seminars. University faculty members observed both types of seminars and, with the advice of Yale faculty members, wrote seminar proposals. Planning Directors also observed both types of seminars, attended workshops on Institute principles and procedures, and, with the advice of the Director of the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute, prepared proposals to establish Teachers Institutes.

The project showed that Teachers Institutes based on the principles grounding the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute can be established and sustained in other cities.
Then, again on recommendation of the National Panel, the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute awarded three-year Implementation Grants to four applicants: the Pittsburgh Teachers Institute (a partnership among Chatham College, Carnegie Mellon University, and the Pittsburgh Public Schools); the Houston Teachers Institute (a partnership between the University of Houston and the Houston Independent School District); the Albuquerque Teachers Institute (a partnership between the University of New Mexico and the Albuquerque Public Schools); and the UCI-Santa Ana Teachers Institute (a partnership between the University of California at Irvine and the Santa Ana Unified School District). These Institutes exemplified a wide range of institutional type, city size, and opportunities for funding.
From 1999 through 2001 the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute monitored the new Institutes and helped them to become established as members of a collaborative network. It did so through a multitude of efforts, including a second "July Intensive"; three Annual Conferences; annual meetings of the Directors, the National Steering Committee (of teachers), and the National University Advisory Council (of faculty members); and many site visits and consultations. During those three years the Pittsburgh Teachers Institute offered 17 seminars, led by 11 different faculty members, in which 145 Fellows wrote curriculum units. The Houston Teachers Institute offered 17 seminars, led by 15 different faculty members, in which 129 Fellows wrote curriculum units. The Albuquerque Teachers Institute offered 20 seminars, led by 18 different faculty members, in which 157 Fellows wrote curriculum units. And the UCI-Santa Ana Teachers Institute offered 23 seminars, led by 18 different faculty members, in which 146 Fellows completed 151 curriculum units. All of these curriculum units were circulated in printed copies and on Institute Web sites.
Within these Institutes the teachers have found a greater creative responsibility for their own curricula, and they have found an opportunity to exercise leadership and judgment in sustaining the program of seminars that provides a continuing professional development. The university faculty members have also recognized more fully their responsibility for teaching at all levels in their own communities. As this has occurred, both the school teachers and the university faculty members have discovered their true collegiality in the on-going process of learning and teaching. And they have realized both the opportunities and the responsibilities that follow from their membership in a larger community devoted to the educational welfare of the young people of this nation.
(image available in print form)

The national seminar on "Human-Environment Relations: International Perspectives from History, Science, Politics, and Ethics," held during the 1999 July Intensive. (Clockwise from left: William J. Pisciella, Houston; Thomas R. Mace, Albuquerque; Elizabeth A. Enloe, Santa Ana; Verna Arnold, Pittsburgh; seminar leader John P. Wargo, New Haven; and Jurrell L. Gilliam, Houston.)

Like the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute, each of the four new Teachers Institutes involved in the National Demonstration Project serves an urban school district that enrolls students most of whom are not only from low-income communities but also members of ethnic or racial minorities. In New Haven 54 percent of the students in the district are African American and 31 percent are Hispanic. In Pittsburgh, 56 percent of the students are African American. In the participating schools in Houston, 30 percent of the students are African American and 50 percent are Hispanic. In the participating schools in Santa Ana, more than 90 percent of the students are Hispanic, and more than 70 percent have limited English. As the Teachers Institutes enable teachers to improve their preparation in content fields, prepare curriculum units, and accept responsibility for much of their own professional development, they also help large numbers of minority students to achieve at higher levels by improving teaching and learning.
The Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute monitored the new Institutes and helped them to become established as members of a collaborative network. It did so through a multitude of efforts, including a second "July Intensive."
During the three years of the National Demonstration Project all four of the new Institutes met the very difficult funding challenge posed by the terms of the Implementation Grants they were offered. And in December 2001, all four Institutes declared their intention to apply for Research and Planning Grants in the Preparation Phase of the Yale National Initiative.

The National Demonstration Project made amply clear the importance of the principles upon which these Institutes are based. It showed that, given favorable circumstances, the new Teachers Institutes can sustain themselves after the initial Grant. It has provided the foundation for the expansion of some Teachers Institutes and the establishment of yet others in cities across the nation. And it showed that such Teachers Institutes can make a substantial contribution to the most important kind of school reform in this nation--the improvement of teaching itself.
The National Demonstration Project showed that such Teachers Institutes can make a substantial contribution to the improvement of teaching itself.
The Preparation Phase
The Preparation Phase of the Yale National Initiative (April 2002-June 2004) has led to yet further success in two of these new Institutes. The Pittsburgh Teachers Institute and the Houston Teachers Institute applied for and, on recommendation of a National Panel, received Research and Planning Grants. These grants, supported by an extension of unexpended funds from the Wallace Foundation and a grant from the Jessie Ball duPont Fund, have enabled them to conduct both qualitative and quantifiable research into the effectiveness of their programs and to plan for future systemic impact within their school districts.
Though the Albuquerque Teachers Institute was prevented by administrative problems in the Albuquerque Public Schools from applying for a Research and Planning Grant, it has continued under the aegis of the College of Arts & Sciences of the University of Mexico and is expanding into other school districts. And though the UCI-Santa Ana Teachers Institute was likewise prevented by the financial crisis in California from applying for such a Grant, and was temporarily suspended, the University and its faculty members continue to maintain strong relationships with teachers and administrators in Santa Ana and several other districts.
During the Preparation Phase of the Yale National Initiative, the Pittsburgh Teachers Institute and the Houston Teachers Institute have not only sustained but also expanded and deepened their programs. In 2002, the Pittsburgh Teachers Institute mounted seven seminars, two of which were developed in collaboration with the Pittsburgh Public Schools. In 2003, this Institute mounted eight seminars, three of which were developed in collaboration with the Pittsburgh Public Schools. In 2002 the Houston Teachers Institute also mounted seven seminars, one of which was funded by Project TEACH, a partnership between the Institute and the Houston Independent School District supported by the U.S. Department of Education. In 2003 this Institute mounted eight seminars, two of which were funded by Project TEACH.
During the Preparation Phase the Pittsburgh Teachers Institute and the Houston Teachers Institute have not only sustained but also expanded and deepened their programs.
During this Preparation Phase, the Yale National Initiative has continued to advise and support these Teachers Institutes. It hosted an Annual Teachers Institute Conference in November 2002, in which teams from the Pittsburgh Teachers Institute, the Houston Teachers Institute, and the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute participated. This Conference discussed, and enthusiastically endorsed, the principles and accomplishments of the Teachers Institutes. It also made suggestions with regard to the future work of the Yale National Initiative and indicated a readiness to participate in it. After the Conference, representatives from the Pittsburgh and Houston Teachers Institutes discussed their own on-going work in research and planning.

(image available in print form)

Teachers Institutes Conference in New Haven, November 2002. (Left to right: Michael Field, Houston; Patricia Y. Gordon, Pittsburgh; Jean E. Sutherland, New Haven; and Ben Vera, Houston.)

The Conference enthusiastically endorsed the principles and accomplishments of the Teachers Institutes.
During this Phase the Yale National Initiative has also developed a more integrated and somewhat expanded version of the Basic Principles underlying the National Demonstration Project--now included in a booklet on the Yale National Initiative as "Articles of Understanding" and "Necessary Procedures." These documents were also discussed by the Directors of the three Institutes in their meeting of July 2003. They now serve as a primary basis for proposals for the establishment of new Teachers Institutes under the Yale National Initiative. Also developed during the Preparation Phase are other elements of the framework that will be used for planning and implementing any new Institute, regardless of the nature of the funding that has been sought or obtained. That framework allows for a variety of possible funding--by a Federal or State program, by a national or local foundation, by a school district (through a variety of federal and other sources), or by a college or university--which might be provided directly to the new Institute or indirectly through the Yale National Initiative. The information provided in the booklet on the Yale National Initiative under "Proposals for Planning an Institute" and "Proposals for Implementing an Institute" specifies what such proposals should contain.
The Initiative has developed a more integrated and somewhat expanded version of the Basic Principles—now included in a booklet as "Articles of Understanding" and "Necessary Procedures."
Documentation, Evaluation, and Independent Studies
The Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute and the Yale National Initiative regard both internal and external evaluation of their principles, practices, and results to be of the utmost importance. For more than a quarter of a century the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute has arranged for, and learned from, both internal and external evaluations. The National Demonstration Project and the Preparation Phase of the Yale National Initiative have continued that process of multiple evaluation. The internal evaluations, based in part upon observations in site visits and conferences, the results of questionnaires, published curriculum units, and Annual Reports from participating Institutes, have been embodied in Annual Reports to the funding organizations. They have been supplemented by external evaluations of several kinds.

The Wallace Foundation commissioned an external evaluation of the National Demonstration Project conducted by Policy Studies Associates. As part of its research and planning, the Pittsburgh Teachers Institute commissioned an evaluation, using focus groups, carried out by Allyson Walker, of Cornerstone Evaluation Associates, and Janet Stocks, Director of Undergraduate Research at Carnegie Mellon University. As part of its research and planning, the Houston Teachers Institute commissioned a massive evaluation, using focus groups, interviews, surveys, and both quantitative and qualitative analysis, carried out by Jon Lorence and Joseph Kotarba of the Department of Sociology, University of Houston, and a further evaluation, based on interviews and observation of teaching, by Paul Cooke, Director of the Institute. The Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute also commissioned an evaluation of the entire National Demonstration Project, carried out by Rogers M. Smith of the Department of Political Science, University of Pennsylvania, and his research assistants, that was based primarily on analyses of Fellows' questionnaires and of the survey of the use of curriculum units by Fellows and non-Fellows.

For more than a quarter of a century the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute has arranged for, and learned from, both internal and external evaluations.
Though differing in their procedures and to some extent in their detailed results, these evaluations lend support to a number of important conclusions. At all four sites, there were positive results similar to those that had been obtained in New Haven over many years. Both Policy Studies Associates and Rogers M. Smith concluded that the National Demonstration Project had "succeeded in reaching its goal" of replication of the Yale-New Haven model within a relatively short period of time in four sites that are considerably larger than New Haven. Overall, new Institutes involved roughly 900 teachers and 60 college or university faculty members in 75 seminars over the course of the Project. Smith noted that these seminars produced results that were remarkably similar to each other and to experiences in New Haven, and markedly better than those reported by most existing forms of professional development. These results occurred despite significant demographic differences among the cities. The major variations, according to Smith, could be correlated with structural departures from National Demonstration Project guidelines and with certain administrative difficulties in the partnering districts and institutions of higher education.
As Smith pointed out, recent research indicates that the single most important factor in student performance is teacher quality. The consensus of researchers and teachers is that many existing forms of professional development are cursory, dreary exercises that leave teachers bored and resentful, not informed or inspired. The approach of the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute, however, significantly strengthens teachers in all five of the major dimensions of teacher quality: it helps to produce teachers who really know their subjects; who have good basic writing, mathematics and oral presentation skills; who expect their students to achieve; who are enthusiastic about teaching; and who can motivate all children to learn.

According to Smith's analysis, teachers in the new Institutes chose to participate out of desires to improve themselves in exactly these areas. At each site, teachers participated out of desires to obtain curriculum suited to their needs, to increase their mastery of their subjects, and especially to obtain materials to motivate their students. According to the research in Pittsburgh, moreover, teachers "find the Institute to be the best professional development they ever had" because its seminars increase their knowledge, emphasize content, not pedagogy, have direct applicability to their classrooms, encourage them to be creative, and are spread over sufficient time to allow them to master the content. The Pittsburgh teachers also reported that they were attracted to the Institute by the independence they enjoyed in suggesting seminar topics and then selecting those seminars in which they would participate without regard to the subject or grade levels at which they taught. According to the research in Houston, the Institute program "cultivates a significant increase in skill level for those many Fellows who were never really trained earlier in the design and implementation of a very workable, thought-out, substantively well-informed curriculum unit." Teachers therefore "take ownership of big corners of the fields of knowledge in which they labor and take that possession over to their students."
Smith found that the approach of the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute significantly strengthens teachers in all five of the major dimensions of teacher quality.
According to Smith, ninety-five percent of all participating teachers rated the Institute seminars "moderately" or "greatly" useful. Similar percentages said the seminars increased their knowledge, improved their skills and morale, and raised their expectation of students. Both teachers and principals who participated in the Pittsburgh study reported that the Institute experience boosts teachers' positive attitudes toward teaching and learning because: it excites teachers about learning and their excitement is transferred to their students; it enhances teachers' self-image and sense of direction; it augments teachers' sense of professionalism; it encourages collaboration among teachers; and it provides teachers with a network of resources. Smith also found that the Institutes served to foster teacher leadership, to develop supportive teacher networks, to heighten university faculty commitments to improving public education, and to foster more positive partnerships between school districts and institutions of higher education.
Ninety-five percent of all participating teachers rated the Institute seminars useful.
The Houston study concludes on the basis of interviews with Fellows, a survey, and observation of students "that students of HTI Fellows benefit from instruction informed by solid scholarly values, not simply bureaucratic curriculum requirements." It indicates also that "students benefit from the presence of teachers who can serve as role models of intellectualism, commitment, and excellence."
According to Smith, after teaching their curriculum units, two-thirds of all participants rated them superior to all other curriculum they had used. Roughly sixty percent of all participants rated student motivation and attention as higher during these units, producing substantially greater content mastery. The teachers and principals who participated in the Pittsburgh study also reported that the students learned new ways of thinking, questioned what they read and saw, made connections among various subjects, eagerly learned content set within a familiar context, and acquired and implemented research skills modeled by the teachers. These curriculum units, as Smith noted, emphasized teacher-led discussion, writing exercises, activities designed to strengthen speaking, listening, vocabulary, reasoning skills, and mathematics skills. The research in Houston indicated that "all categories of students benefit from teachers who have completed a Houston Teachers Institute seminar: skilled and unskilled; English speaking and ESL; Anglo and minority; and gifted, mainstreamed, or special education students."

All four studies do suggest that it would be fruitful to engage in yet further research concerning ways of assessing student learning in classes where Institute units have been taught. The Wallace Foundation, in supporting the National Demonstration Project, had explicitly excluded such research because of its firmly grounded belief that the most significant factor in producing increased student learning is teacher quality. And with regard to that factor, the more detailed studies in Pittsburgh and Houston confirm and extend the positive conclusions that have been reached by Policy Studies Associates and by Smith in their analyses of the National Demonstration Project.
"After teaching curriculum units, two-thirds of all participants rated them superior to all other curriculum they had used."
         --Rogers M. Smith
According to the report from Policy Studies Associates, there is "clear evidence of important accomplishments, reflected in the number of seminars provided in the institutes, the number of Fellows who participated in these seminars, and the number of curriculum units the Fellows produced." It stated further:
    Large majorities of Fellows were unequivocal in saying that their experience in the institutes, especially the preparation of a curriculum unit, gave them a real sense of accomplishment and re-kindled their excitement about learning. As one Fellow put it: "To be teachers, we must also be learners." When asked in interviews to compare their experience in the institutes with their experience in other kinds of professional development, teachers agreed that the institutes are vastly superior.
"Large majorities of Fellows were unequivocal in saying that their experience in the institutes gave them a real sense of accomplishment and re-kindled their excitement about learning."
         --Policy Studies Associates
The report by Rogers M. Smith concluded:
    No single program can overcome the enormous obstacles to educational achievement faced by economically disadvantaged students, usually from racial, ethnic, and linguistic minorities, in large American cities today. But if recent researchers are right to contend that the single most important factor in student achievement is teacher quality, and if quality teachers are indeed knowledgeable, skilled, and enthusiastic, with high expectations for their students and the means to motivate students to reach those expectations, then the National Demonstration Project provides strong evidence for the value of the Teacher Institute approach.
A League of Teachers Institutes
The three Teachers Institutes participating in the Yale National Initiative now comprise a League of Teachers Institutes, which over time will develop its own procedures. Each of these Institutes engages the serious educational problems associated with low-income communities and a high proportion of racial and ethnic diversity. Each illustrates, however, a somewhat different pattern of needs and relationships to local resources, institutional apparatus, and state mandates. Each may therefore serve as one example for the establishment of Teachers Institutes elsewhere in the United States. The two new Institutes are serving school systems that are considerably larger than that of New Haven. In Pittsburgh the partnership includes a private university focused upon the sciences and a small liberal arts college that has a strong Education program. In Houston the partnership includes a state-supported urban university that includes a college of Education. These Teachers Institutes show that a successful professional development program in the humanities and sciences can exist in each of these institutional contexts. The Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute has had for over a quarter of a century a very significant impact upon its school district. And the two new Institutes, after their successful start during the National Demonstration Project, are now adopting somewhat different scopes and strategies that are directed toward having such an impact upon yet larger districts.
The Pittsburgh Teachers Institute
The Pittsburgh Teachers Institute, bringing the resources of Chatham College and Carnegie Mellon University to a school district that now has 95 schools serving 38,000 students, began in 1999 by working with 20 elementary, middle and high schools, representing the three regions of the district. In 2001 the Institute reached out to several other schools, and in 2002, after the National Demonstration Project, it opened its program yet more widely across the school district. The Director, Helen Faison, an experienced teacher and school administrator, is former chair of the Education Department at Chatham College and a former interim Superintendent of Schools.
(image available in print form)

Pittsburgh Teachers Institute's five-year anniversary celebration held at Chatham College, June 2003.

Chatham College brings to the collaboration with the Pittsburgh Public Schools the strengths of a small liberal arts college; Carnegie Mellon brings those of a university with a strong program in the sciences. Although both institutions have previously worked with the schools--Carnegie Mellon, for example, sponsoring a program in the teaching of science, and Chatham maintaining a program in teacher certification--this is the first collaboration between the two institutions in partnership with the schools.

In 2002 the Institute mounted seven seminars, two of which were developed in collaboration with the Pittsburgh Public Schools. These included "Learning Science by Doing Science," "A Restless People: Americans on the Move, 1760-1900," "Comedy: From Aristophanes to the Present," "Everyday Science," "Genetics and Genomes," "Latin American and U.S. Popular Culture," and "A Survey of African-American History by Way of African-American Literature and Art." There were 55 curriculum units completed by the Fellows.
In 2003 the Institute offered eight seminars, three of which were planned in collaboration with school district staff. The Fellows completed 60 curriculum units. Seminar topics were: "Coming Over: The Old Immigration," "Looking at Everyday Mathematics," "Learning Science by Doing Science II-Electronics," "Integrating Musical Theater into the Curriculum," "Pittsburgh Rivers," "Reading and Teaching Poetry," "U.S. Latino Literature and Culture," and "Understanding Nonfiction Genres."
From the beginning all of the seminars have been approved for increment credit, which qualifies participating teachers for salary increases with the School District. Since 2001 they have been approved by the Pennsylvania Board of Education for Act 48 credit, which the State of Pennsylvania requires that teachers earn to retain their teacher certification. The Institute has also made a strong effort to relate the curriculum units explicitly to the national, state, and local standards that all Pittsburgh Public School curricula must meet.
The Houston Teachers Institute
In the fourth largest city in the United States, the Houston Teachers Institute brings the resources of the University of Houston to the Houston Independent School District, where 280 schools serve 212,000 students. The Houston Teachers Institute builds upon the experience of the Common Ground project at the University, directed first by James Pipkin and then by William Monroe, which assisted high school teachers in expanding the canon of literary texts that are taught in English classes. The late Michael Cooke, a Yale faculty member and participant in the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute, had served as an advisor for that project.
The Houston Teachers Institute began its work with 20 self-selected middle and high schools enrolling 31,300 students to establish a program that would address the needs of an ethnically mixed student-body, a large proportion of whom are non-English speaking. In 2001 the Institute admitted Fellows from 27 schools; and it has now opened its program to a yet wider range of schools. Paul Cooke, who had been a Visiting Assistant Professor of Political Science, serves as Director.
In 2002 this Institute mounted seven seminars, one of which was funded by Project TEACH, a partnership between the Institute and the Houston Independent School District supported by the U.S. Department of Education. They included: "Ethnic Music and Performing Arts in Houston," "Houston Architecture: Interpreting the City," "New Developments in Understanding the Human Body," "Reflections on a Few Good Books," "Shakespeare's Characters: The Lighter Side," "Sports Autobiographies: Mirrors of American Culture," and "Drinking Water: Finding It; Making It Clean; Using It Wisely." There were 69 curriculum units completed by the Fellows. In 2003 the Institute offered eight seminars, two with the support of Project TEACH: "The 20th Century's Most Significant English-Language Books for Children and Young Adults," "Heroes and Heroines in History and Imaginative Literature," "African American Slavery in the New World: A Different Voice," "Literature as Healing Balm: Multicultural Women Writers in America," "There's No Place Like Home: Architecture, Technology, Art, and the Culture of the American Home, 1850-1970," "From FDR's Death to the Resignation of Richard Nixon: America from 1945 to 1974," "Understanding the Wild Things Next Door: The Nature of Houston," and "The Science in Science Fiction." Fellows completed 85 curriculum units.

(image available in print form)

Teacher Representatives of the Houston Teachers Institute in 2000. (Left to right: Daniel Addis, William J. Pisciella, Gwen Lindsay, Michael Olson, Richard Evans, Charles Sauter, Carrie Mitchell, Amber Mackel, Jorge Arrendondo, Mary Jefferson, and Jurrell L. Gilliam.)

Communication and Dissemination
This League of Teachers Institutes has already established an appropriate network of communication. During the Preparation Phase the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute has continued to provide the new Teachers Institutes with a range of technical assistance, which includes the sharing of research, advice on specific problems, meetings of the Directors, and a fourth Annual Conference. Each year the new Teachers Institutes have submitted reports, described in the section on Documentation and Evaluation, to the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute. During this Phase there has continued to be lateral communication among the new Teachers Institutes, and common work undertaken by members of the League of Teachers Institutes and school teachers and university faculty members from affiliated Institutes.

The National Steering Committee, which consists of two teachers from each Institute in the League, has continued to take a major initiative in planning this common work and encouraging communication among the teachers at the various sites. It is complemented by the National University Advisory Council, which consists of two faculty members from each Institute.

The Web site of the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute already makes available the publications of this Institute, including all of its curriculum units. Other Institutes have established similar Web sites. A developing electronic network is therefore linking the Institutes more closely. The League is also seeking ways to increase electronic communication among the school teachers and university faculty members who participate in its Institutes. A Web site--http://teachers.yale.edu--has now been created that is dedicated to the Yale National Initiative as an entity, with links to Teachers Institutes that are members or affiliates of the League of Teachers Institutes. This Web site is not only a communications hub for the work of the Project but also an important continuing means of disseminating its results to the nation.

The Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute has continued to provide the new Teachers Institutes with a range of technical assistance.
The new Web site provides regularly updated announcements and other information about the activities of the National Initiative and the members of the League of Teachers Institutes. Visitors will find descriptions of the Teachers Institute model of university-public school partnership for improving teaching through teacher-initiated seminars led by university experts in fields in the humanities and the sciences. The Web site also provides information on the teacher-leadership principles underlying governance of Teachers Institutes as well as access to resources for those interested in exploring the establishment of a new Teachers Institute.
Teachers and others may also click on the Curricular Resources button to search and download any of the more than 2,000 innovative curriculum units for K-12 classroom use that have been developed by teachers as one result of their participation. The site also provides issues of the periodical On Common Ground) and video materials about the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute in several forms that can be downloaded. It offers an opportunity, as well, for those who visit the Web site to provide comments on curriculum units and other material. As other Teachers Institutes are established, this Web site will assume even greater importance as a national center of information on university-school partnerships.

The periodical On Common Ground is potentially an important means of disseminating the results of the Yale National Initiative. Number 9, for Winter 2000/2001, contained articles by persons from each of the sites on some aspect of the process of establishing a Teachers Institute and meeting the needs of an urban school district. In a similar fashion, Number 10 of On Common Ground will provide a summarizing account of the National Demonstration Project, the Preparation Phase of the Yale National Initiative, and plans for the League of Teachers Institutes. It will contain the results of the four studies mentioned above, with some other material contained in the new booklet, and contributions from persons who have been working with Institutes in the Yale National Initiative.
The new Web site provides regularly updated announcements and other information about the activities of the National Initiative and the members of the League of Teachers Institutes.
Expansion and Systemic Impact
The expansion of existing Teachers Institutes in large cities may occur through a step-by-step process of scaling up, as more school teachers and university faculty become interested in participating, and as increased funding allows the offering of more seminars. A Teachers Institute may begin in this way to expand its scope of operation within a city. When the resources of a single institution of higher education are not adequate to meet the needs of a large school district, it may prove desirable to expand the partnership. There seems a possibility, for example, of expanding the partnership between Chatham College and Carnegie Mellon University to include other institutions in Pittsburgh. It also may be possible at some point for the Houston Teachers Institute to draw upon faculty from other institutions of higher education in Houston.

There are also opportunities for other kinds of expansion or increased systemic impact within a given scope. Teachers Institutes may wish to establish Centers for Curriculum and Professional Development in the schools, as has been done in New Haven, which may bring to a higher proportion of relevant classroom teachers the work of Fellows in the Institute. Through such Centers they may wish to establish Academies in summer or after school, as has also been done in New Haven, in which teachers may collaboratively shape a curriculum for selected students on the basis of their work in the Institute. An Institute may also seek to relate its work quite explicitly to state and local requirements for teachers, as the Pittsburgh Teachers Institute has done. Or, as all three members of the League have done, an Institute may choose to address in certain of its seminars those subjects that have been designated as of signal importance by the school district. This may occur through discussions about possible offerings over the next several years, as in New Haven, or through contractual arrangements and partial funding for specific seminars, as in Pittsburgh and Houston. Finally, as all three members of the League have recognized, an Institute may increase its systemic effect by distributing curriculum units, maintaining a Web site that is easily accessed, and making itself known as a visible example of high-quality professional development.
As all three members of the League have recognized, an Institute may increase its systemic effect by distributing curriculum units, maintaining a Web site that is easily accessed, and making itself known as a visible example of high-quality professional development.
Membership and Affiliation
New Teachers Institutes may be established at other sites through many different ways. Funding might be provided wholly or in part by a Federal or State program, a national or local foundation, a school district that channels government funds to an Institute, or a college or university. Such funding might be provided directly to a new Institute or indirectly through grants to the Yale National Initiative. Institutes that have been established through the Yale National Initiative will have already accepted the "Articles of Understanding" and "Necessary Procedures" given in the booklet on the Yale National Initiative (and included on its Web site), and may then become members of the League of Teachers Institutes. That process will enable them to continue to receive technical assistance and collaborative support from other members of the League.
Other Teachers Institutes, whether established through the Yale National Initiative or through other means, may not be committed to the "Understandings" and "Necessary Procedures" but may share certain of the aims of the League of Teachers Institutes. Such Institutes may ask to be recognized not as members of the League but as affiliated Institutes. The League of Teachers Institutes seeks to remain in close touch with such affiliated Institutes, and will invite selected school teachers and university faculty members from those Institutes to participate in certain of its activities.
© 2004 by the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute