Further Unpacking the Influence of Clinical Mentors on Student Teacher Outcomes

• In Event: Extending and Interrogating the Quantitative Evidence That Clinical Mentors Matter

Abstract

Recent research shows that pre-service student teachers (PSTs) who student teach with more effective clinical mentors (CMs) also become more effective teachers (Ronfeldt et al., 2018; Goldhaber et al., 2020; Bastian et al., 2020). Prior studies have also demonstrated that learning to teach in schools where teaching faculty are, on average, more instructionally effective also predicts PST instructional effectiveness (Bastian et al., 2020; Ronfeldt, 2015). However, only one prior study has examined whether having more instructionally effective CMs predicts PST retention, finding no relationship (Goldhaber et al., 2020b); no prior work has examined whether student teaching in schools with instructionally effective faculty predicts PST retention. Moreover, the studies cited above use samples of select programs or from specific university systems, raising questions about their generalizability.
This study makes three main contributions. First, we replicate prior work examining the relationship between the instructional effectiveness of PSTs and their CMs but extend the sample to most programs in the state. Second, given only one prior study has investigated the association between CM instructional effectiveness and PST retention, we examine this relationship in a different state context. Third, we provide the first evidence for whether student teaching in a placement school with more instructionally effective faculty predicts better PST retention.
We ask: Are PSTs who learn to teach with more instructionally effective CMs or in schools which have, on average, more instructionally effective faculty more instructionally effective and more likely to persist in teaching?
We use data from STATE’s educational statewide longitudinal data system (SLDS) from the 2010-2011 to the 2019-2020 school year. We match 10,917 PSTs to CMs, 7,529 of whom are subsequently employed in a STATE public school and receive at least one evaluation score during our data timeframe. Our final sample includes 17,483 PST-by-year observations.
We specify multilevel mixed effects models with teacher-by-year evaluation scores nested in PSTs, nested in schools, and nested in school districts when we focus on instructional effectiveness measures (observation ratings (ORs) and value-added to student achievement measures (VAMs) as outcomes); for retention outcomes we nest PSTs within districts.
Consistent with prior work, PSTs who completed their field placements with more instructionally effective CMs were more instructionally effective themselves but were no more or less likely to be retained. When considering the effects of student teaching in schools with faculty who are, on average, more instructionally effective, we find positive associations with PST instructional effectiveness but no significant associations with PST retention. In separate models, we also examine the effects of student teaching in schools with, on average, more experienced faculty, finding positive associations with PST observation ratings and retention in the same school but no associations with PST VAMs or retention in teaching.
Results from this study suggest teacher education programs to place PSTs with highly effective CMs and in field placement schools with instructionally effective and experienced faculty. They also support policies that set minimum instructional effectiveness requirements for teachers to serve as CMs.

Authors

• Cristina Stanojevich, Michigan State University
  Presenting Author

• Emanuele Bardelli, Santa Rosa City Schools
  Presenting Author

• Matthew Ronfeldt, University of Michigan
  Non-Presenting Author

• Matthew Truwit, University of Michigan
  Non-Presenting Author

• Lauren Fisher, University of Michigan
  Non-Presenting Author