Search

Controlling building electric loads could alleviate the increasing grid strain caused by the adoption of renewables and electrification. However, current approaches that automatically setback thermostats on the hottest day compromise their efficacy by neglecting human-building interaction (HBI). This study aims to define challenges and opportunities for developing engineering models of HBI to be used in the design of controls for grid-interactive efficient buildings (GEBs). Building system and measured and just-in-time surveyed psychophysiological data were collected from 41 participants in 20 homes from April-September. ASHRAE Standard 55 thermal comfort models for building design were evaluated with these data. Increased error bias was observed with increasing spatiotemporal temperature variations. Unsurprising, considering these models neglect such variance, but questioning their suitability for GEBs controlling thermostat setpoints, and given the observed 4{\deg}F intra-home spatial temperature variation. The results highlight opportunities for reducing these biases in GEBs through a paradigm shift to modeling discomfort instead of comfort, increasing use of low-cost sensors, and models that account for the observed dynamic occupant behavior: of the thermostat setpoint overrides made with 140-minutes of a previous setpoint change, 95% of small changes ( 2{\deg}F) were made with 120-minutes, while 95% of larger changes ( 10{\deg}F) were made within only 70-minutes., Comment: 17 pages, 11 figures

For the last 4 years, 10 leading education organizations have collaborated on a study series that includes teacher voice in conversations and research about educator effectiveness. Initially conceptualized by teacher leaders from the National Network of State Teachers of the Year (NNSTOY) and with their continued input, the "From Good to Great" study series has asked exemplary teachers to share which professional supports and experiences helped them to increase their effectiveness as educators as they progressed through the various stages of their careers. There are multiple reasons why exemplary teachers' perspectives provide key insights for researchers and policy makers, including: (1) The need for smart investments in teacher development; and (2) The need for teacher voice in policy. This report (the third in the study series) summarizes the findings from a 2016 survey of National Board Certified Teachers (NBCTs) and builds on the results of a similar survey of State and National Teachers of the Year in 2013-2014. Namely: (1) At the preservice stage, once again respondents ranked a high quality clinical practicum as by far the most important experience; (2) This study again confirmed that an effective school principal and mentors (both assigned and informal) rose to the top of the list, with appropriate school placements and common planning time following close behind; (3) National Board Certification and other ongoing formal education (such as graduate coursework) were seen as the most important experiences, followed by self-chosen professional development outside of the school district and collaboration with peers; and (4) At the teacher leader stage, as with the 2013-14 survey, the National Board Certified Teachers (NBCTs) surveyed thought serving as a mentor or coach was most important for helping them continue to improve their practice, even after they had already been established as effective teachers. These findings call attention to the need for applied learning opportunities for early-career teachers, opportunities for collaboration across the career continuum, and teacher leadership. Other themes that emerged from this survey included the importance of a full-year final clinical practicum and teacher choice in ongoing professional development options, including teacher leadership roles.

Social and emotional competencies and skills help students succeed in school. In fact, researchers have documented significant academic gains for students who participate in social and emotional learning programs in which they can strengthen their social and emotional skills (Durlak, Weissberg, Dymnicki, Taylor, & Schellinger, 2011). Skills such as growth mindset (Blackwell, Trzesniewski, & Dweck, 2007), sense of belonging (Allen, Kern, & Vella-Broderick, 2016a; Allen, Vella-Broderick, & Walters, 2016b), and grit (Duckworth & Quinn, 2009) have been shown to correlate to student grades, scores on achievement tests, attendance and other academic outcomes. Given the influence that social and emotional skills have on student academic outcomes, some policymakers are considering using measures of these skills to assess the performance of teachers and schools. In some states and localities, student perceptions of their social and emotional development are being considered for high-stakes accountability purposes, with incentives and consequences for schools based upon scores on these measures. This paper uses both a systematic review of research on these competencies and skills as well as focus groups with National Network of State Teachers of the Year (NNSTOY) teachers to examine whether measures of social and emotional learning are appropriate for use in accountability systems. Specifically, the authors consider the following topics: (1) the role of teachers and schools in fostering social and emotional competencies and skills; (2) the use of data about social and emotional competencies and skills; and (3) perceptions about the appropriate use of measures of social and emotional development in accountability systems. For the first two questions, they examined the academic studies that have addressed it, and then discussed the questions with teachers in focus groups. For the third question, they described policies for including these measures in accountability systems and researcher opinions about doing so, and then discussed the question with teachers in a focus group.

This study continues the work that National Network of State Teachers of the Year (NNSTOY) and its partners, Clowder Consulting and Education-Counsel, began with their "Right Trajectory" study (see ED581172), released in 2015, and continued in their "Still the Right Trajectory" study (see ED581173) released in early 2017. In addition to these studies examining the prior 5th grade state tests and the consortium assessments, this research includes analysis of the 11th grade Smarter Balanced assessment. Although the research is based on the same survey used for the 5th grade study, the design for the 11th grade research was fundamentally different because reviewers only examined the Smarter Balanced test, without using a prior test as a basis for comparison. Twelve expert teachers from Department of Defense, Idaho, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, Utah and Washington participated in the panel, and each panelist evaluated either the reading/English language arts (ELA) or mathematics portion of the assessment. Despite the limitations imposed by the lack of context from prior tests, the impressions of outstanding educators about the strengths and areas for improvement of the 11th grade assessment provide an important contribution to the ongoing conversation about the value of standardized assessments. This analysis presents both positive and constructive feedback for consideration as test developers and states reflect and engage in continuous improvement.

As part of state transitions to college- and career-ready (CCR) standards, including the Common Core State Standards in more than 40 states (NGA & CCSSO, 2010), states are for the first time administering new summative assessments aligned to those standards and aiming for a higher bar in assessment quality. For a majority of states, this means the "consortia assessments"--the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) or Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (Smarter Balanced). In this supplement to the original "Right Trajectory" study, the authors evaluate only the Smarter Balanced consortium assessment. To do this, they assembled a group of former State Teachers of the Year (STOYs) from multiple states, each of whom has been recognized at local and state levels for their teaching excellence. The panel reviewed the 5th grade Smarter Balanced and two prior state assessments: OAKS from Oregon and the Nevada state assessments (both states currently use Smarter Balanced). The results were clear: There was consensus across participating teachers that the new consortium assessment--Smarter Balanced--is an improvement and still the right trajectory. [For "The Right Trajectory," see ED581172. For "Beginning a Higher Trajectory: Grade 11 Study," see ED581170.]

This report is the second in a series from a collaboration of nine leading organizations working to advance teaching and elevate the profession. For years, education leaders have sought to pinpoint how teachers become effective in order to better leverage teachers' impact on student learning and improve student outcomes. Teacher leadership is receiving increased attention as a potential lever for improved instruction, recruitment and retention of effective teachers, and student outcomes. A growing body of research on teacher leadership models and its potential impact on the field suggests that teacher leaders may play a critical role in creating high-functioning schools that can create sustainable improvements in teaching and learning. This report offers insights from teacher leaders themselves on this topic, exploring the specific ways in which teacher leaders can contribute to instructional improvement. This report includes three main sections: (1) the characteristics of teacher leaders; (2) the roles teacher leaders take in improving teacher practice; and (3) the supports and barriers to teacher leadership. The report concludes with specific policy recommendations for supporting teacher leadership in state and local contexts. Contains an appendix. [Originally proposed by the National Network of State Teachers of the Year (NNSTOY) and led by NNSTOY and the Center on Great Teachers and Leaders (GTL Center) at American Institutes for Research, the study involves the following partner organizations, many of which contributed to this second report by assisting in the development of the focus group protocol, analysis of preliminary findings, and review of the report: American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education (AACTE), American Federation of Teachers (AFT), Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP), Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), GTL Center, National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS), National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ), National Education Association (NEA), and NNSTOY. For the first report in the series, "From Good to Great: Exemplary Teachers Share Perspectives on Increasing Teacher Effectiveness across the Career Continuum," see ED555657.]

"The Right Trajectory" brings to the forefront an often-overlooked voice in the debate about new state assessments developed in consortia: that of the best teachers in the country. This research suggests, despite challenges still to overcome, that these front-line experts believe that the new consortia tests are an improvement on the former assessments and so represent movement in the right direction for students and for education in their states. What do great teachers think of the new assessments compared to the previous ones? As part of state transitions to college and career ready (CCR) standards, including the Common Core State Standards in more than 40 states (NGA & CCSSO, 2010), states are for the first time administering new summative assessments aligned to those standards and aiming for a higher bar in assessment quality. For a majority of states, this means the "consortia assessments"--the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) or Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (Smarter Balanced). To better understand what excellent teachers--given the opportunity to closely examine new and former tests side by side--would think about these new consortia assessments, the National Network of State Teachers of the Year (NNSTOY) sought to answer the following questions: Do the new assessments better reflect what great teachers are doing in their classrooms? Do they reflect higher quality than former state tests? Do these assessments represent movement in the right direction? To do this, they assembled a group of former State Teachers of the Year (STOYs) from multiple states, each of whom has been recognized at the local and state levels for their teaching excellence. One panel reviewed PARCC and two prior state assessments: Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT), and New Jersey's Assessment of Skills and Knowledge (NJASK) (both states currently use PARCC). The second panel reviewed Smarter Balanced and two prior state assessments: Delaware Comprehensive Assessment System (DCAS), and New Hampshire's New England Common Assessment Program (NECAP) (both states currently use Smarter Balanced). All assessments were for fifth grade reading and math because it is on the cusp between elementary and middle school, making assessments at that grade relevant to elementary and middle teachers and students. What they found was clear: There was consensus across participating teachers that the new consortia assessments--both PARCC and Smarter Balanced--represent an improvement and the right trajectory. [For "Still on the Right Trajectory," see ED581173. For "Beginning a Higher Trajectory," see ED581170.]

The premise of the white paper is that education policy results are better for students when policies are informed and shaped by highly effective educators who know firsthand what it takes to deliver excellent teaching and learning. Policymakers and educators should share a sense of urgency to work together to provide every child in our country with an excellent education. Through interviews with ten educators throughout the United States, the authors provide real-life examples of ways in which these practitioners have successfully engaged in the policy process. In some examples, that engagement is at the local level; at the state or national level; and through different policy mechanisms. The paper is organized by the types of policy engagement experienced by State Teachers of the Year (STOYs) and Finalists. These are: (1) Informing and Shaping Federal Policy; (2) Engaging Educator Colleagues in the Policy Process; (3) Working With Policymakers to Craft Legislation; (4) Effectively Engaging With State Policymakers; (4) Hybrid Roles: Bridging Policy Development and the Classroom; (5) Advancing Teacher Leadership Through Policy at the National and International Levels; (6) Shaping Policy Through Relationships with Unions and Organizations; (7) Educators Serving as Policymakers; and (8) Supporting Engagement in Policy Through Teacher Leadership.

For well over a decade, teachers have been recognized as the single most important school-level factor influencing student achievement (Darling-Hammond, 2000; McCaffrey, Lockwood, Koretz, & Hamilton, 2003; Rivkin, Hanushek, & Kain, 2000; Rowan, Correnti & Miller, 2002; Wright, Horn, & Sanders, 1997). Tremendous public resources have been invested across the country in new systems to both assess and address teacher effectiveness. Yet the lion's share of existing research seeking to understand the factors that make teachers effective focuses on quantifiable--yet more surface-level--inputs, such as years on the job, grade point averages, certifications, and degrees. This research leaves many important policy questions unanswered--particularly questions about the specific types of professional experiences and supports necessary to maximize teacher effectiveness. This report helps to fill these gaps through a first-of-its-kind exploratory survey of National and State Teachers of the Year. These teachers are chosen by their states as among the best, and one teacher each year is selected as among the best in the nation (see "Who Are the National and State Teachers of the Year?" on page 3). In this report, we offer insights on the professional experiences and supports that these teachers believe most contributed to their growth and eventual excellence as a teacher. Reflecting back on their careers, from preparation through mastery and even into retirement, the National and State Teachers of the Year surveyed in this study provide education leaders and policymakers with needed information about the formative experiences of great teachers. The findings both surprise us and confirm much of what we knew about how teachers evolve from good to great. The main body of the report takes readers through the four stages that this study used to define the teacher career continuum: Preservice, Novice, Career, and Teacher Leader stages. For each stage, it describes the professional experiences and supports that the National and State Teachers of the Year viewed as increasing teacher effectiveness as they progressed through the stages of their career. The report concludes with considerations for policymakers at the school, district, and state levels as well as for teacher preparation programs. Methodology for the survey is appended. [Proposed by the National Network of State Teachers of the Year (NNSTOY) and led by the Center on Great Teachers and Leaders (GTL Center) at American Institutes for Research, this study involved the following partner organizations, which collaborated extensively on this study, contributing to the development of the survey questions, data analysis, and drafting of the report: American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education, Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation, Council of Chief State School Officers, GTL Center, National Council on Teacher Quality, National Education Association, and NNSTOY.]

In recent years, there has been a focus on what constitutes effective teaching and how to measure teacher performance. Efforts to more rigorously evaluate teachers, to hold them accountable for student learning, and to help them improve practice have been initiated at the district, state, and federal levels. However, many teachers believe that additional accountability, in the absence of efforts to improve the conditions in which teachers work, is a step in the wrong direction. The National Network of State Teachers of the Year (NNSTOY) has identified five critical structures that is lacking in education: (1) professional career continuums; (2) distributed leadership models; (3) collaborative practice; (4) actionable feedback to inform practice; and (5) guiding professional principles developed by educators, for educators. In this white paper, the authors examine the five critical structures, with educators' perspectives, and advocates for the inclusion of these critical structures for two primary reasons: (1) educators are the best suited and best situated to determine what the profession should look like internally and externally; and (2) the inclusion of these structures in the profession creates an educator-developed framework around which district, state, and federal policies can be developed to support what educators have determined is needed most in their profession.

This paper examines various definitions and frameworks that have been used to justify the emergence of a new category for the teacher professional: teacher leader. The emergence of this new professional category may lead to greater retention levels, and improved knowledge management and transfer within the teaching profession. Various key dimensions of this profession are examined, allowing us to highlight some key personal skills that would appear requisite for the teacher leader. An agenda for developing and validating assessments of teacher leadership is then proposed. It is argued that these assessments have the potential of legitimizing research within this field, as well as providing the opportunity to better understand what it takes to become a successful professional in this new domain of teaching practice. Appended are: (1) Kansas Teacher Leader Standards; and (2) What Makes an Assessment "Authentic"? (Contains 6 tables and 1 figure.)

Performance-based assessment of teachers includes a class of measurement methods designed to assess the quality of teacher performance on one or two important aspects of teaching. It may include portfolios, structured observations, video records of practice, and teacher work samples. Performance-based assessment can be contrasted with assessments that assess knowledge of particular concepts without examining the application of that knowledge to particular teaching tasks. Scoring of performance-based assessment requires the application of professional judgment to evaluate the quality of the performance, because there is no single correct answer as with traditional multiple-choice tests. Performance-based assessment methods are scored by trained and calibrated assessors who use rubrics--written scales that define levels of quality performance based on standards of practice--to make judgments of performance quality. This paper presents strategies for implementing performance-based assessment.