Three approaches to school-university partnerships among teacher residencies: can HBCUs lead the way to an equity-centric model?

Abstract

Purpose

School-university partnerships (SUPs) probe a range of P12 challenges and interests, with teacher residencies being chief among them. Because historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) have impressive track records (Hill-Jackson, 2017) and knowhow (Marchitello & Trinidad, 2019; Petchauer & Mawhinney, 2017) in preparing teacher candidates to work effectively in diverse schools, this paper seeks deeper understandings of the types of SUPs for teacher residency collaborations employed by traditional versus HBCU programs.

Design/methodology/approach

This article draws upon the self-study as a methodology to review a SUP for a teacher residency at an HBCU in the southwestern United States to illustrate an equity-centric model.

Findings

Leveraging an equity and third space perspective, three separate approaches to the SUPs are unpacked to establish the outline for this proposal: ceremonial, conventional and communal teacher residency approaches.

Originality/value

A novel typology of three distinct approaches to SUPs for teacher residencies is outlined to establish the extent to which equity is foregrounded among teacher residencies.

Citation

Hill-Jackson, V. (2023), "Three approaches to school-university partnerships among teacher residencies: can HBCUs lead the way to an equity-centric model?", School-University Partnerships, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/SUP-08-2023-0030

Introduction

With teacher education in their founding missions, historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) were established by government bureaus, philanthropists and the local community in the 19th century to educate African Americans (Hill-Jackson, 2017) because most institutions of higher education would not accept them (Abelman & Dalessandro, 2009; Brown & Davis, 2001; Ginsburg et al., 2023; Hill-Jackson, 2017). The historical record of HBCUs working within the local communities of color to intentionally design their teacher education programs is expansive and, along with some minority serving institutions (MSIs), they have “extensive experience and expertise in successfully preparing teacher candidates to work effectively in diverse schools” (Marchitello & Trinidad, 2019, p. 11). Irvine and Fenwick (2011) observe, “in many urban and rural settings that have HBCUs [are] high percentages of [Black] teachers to the local school districts” (p. 198).

School-university partnerships (SUPs), even among colleges of education at HBCSs, address a range of P12 challenges and pursuits, with teacher residencies being chief among them. A SUP is “a deliberately designed, collaborative arrangement between different institutions, working together to advance self-interest and solve common problems” (Goodlad, 1988, p. 13). The hallmark of teacher residencies “are partnerships among school districts, universities, and other stakeholders to prepare and retain effective teachers” (National Center for Teacher Residencies [NCTR], 2018, p. 3). Teacher residency programs are, by definition, district-serving teacher education programs that pair an initial teacher alongside a cooperating or mentor teacher for a rigorous full-year classroom. The federal government defines a residency as a yearlong, school-based teacher preparation program in which a prospective teacher:

1. Teaches alongside a mentor teacher, who is the teacher of record;

2. Receives concurrent instruction, which may be taught by district or residency program faculty, in the teaching of the content area in which the teacher will be certified or licensed to teach;

3. Acquires knowledge of planning, content, pedagogy, student learning, assessment, management of the classroom environment and professional responsibilities, including interaction with families and colleagues;

4. Earns a master’s degree and attains licensure prior to the completion of the program, and;

5. Receives ongoing mentoring support in a structured induction program for not less than the first two years as teacher of record (cited in Wasburn-Moses, 2017, p. 35).

Teacher residencies are advanced forms of clinical training (Hill-Jackson et al., 2020) and an essential function of school-university collaborations that are “committed to nurturing and developing the next generation of educators by engaging candidates and valuing them as active members of the school and PDS communities” (National Association for Professional Development Schools [NAPDS], 2021, p. 15).

Given the overwhelming presence of diversity among teacher education candidates at HBCUs (Harper & Mawhinney, 2017), the storied legacy of HBCUs’ commitment to social justice (Hill-Jackson, 2017; Irvine & Fenwick, 2011; Petchauer & Mawhinney, 2017), the increasing diversity of P12 learners (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2020) and the growing gender and racial diversity among teaching residents (Guha & Kini, 2016), HBCUs are situated as ideal sites for exploring diversity and equity-focused teacher residency processes for SUPs (Harper & Mawhinney, 2017; Marchitello & Trinidad, 2019). It would be prudent for traditional teacher education programs to pay attention to how educators are prepared at HBCUs to gain insight into SUPs that further equity pedagogy. I concede, however, the notable role of HBCUs to teach among underserved populations and their mission of “advancing justice cannot simply be replicated by other institutions. That said, many of those institutions’ approaches to teacher education can be adapted and implemented to fit” (Marchitello & Trinidad, 2019, p. 40). This conceptual article attends to the query tendered in its title: Can HBCUs offer an equity-focused model for implementing SUPs among teacher residencies? The thesis maintains that since HBCUs are called upon at a disproportionate rate to respond to the increasing diversity of students (Gasman et al., 2017; Gursky, 2002), there may be much to learn from their tradecraft in teacher education (Ginsburg et al., 2023), but more specifically as it relates to their teacher residency models.

Aware of the role that equity plays in supporting effective teacher residencies, and the paucity of reviews or studies on processes that advance our collective knowledge of SUPs among residencies, this conceptual article begins by centering equity for teacher residencies as complicated third spaces as the theoretical perspective. Therefore, three separate approaches to the teacher residency are unpacked to establish the outline for this proposal: ceremonial, conventional and communal teacher residency approaches. The methods offered here are distinguished by the degree to which equity practices are honored by each of the entities of the teacher residency partnership. In unpacking the three types of teacher residencies, I will also share the design of a novel teacher residency program at ABC University (ABCU, a pseudonym for an HBCU) to illustrate a communal teacher residency fortified within an equity-centric model. I regret in advance that in conveying the communal approach at ABCU with little data, an equity-centric model emerges that is more promising than convincing.

Theoretical perspective

Two major ideas form the theoretical perspective of this article. First, and building on the thoughts of Nieto (2000), Cochran-Smith et al. (2016) and Dyches and Boyd (2017), I argue that the work of teacher residencies must be foregrounded in a commitment for equity, understood to be synonymous to social justice work (Cochran-Smith et al., 2009; Kaur, 2012; Savick et al., 2020), to be effective. Equity in teacher education has many definitions, ranging from equity of outcomes (Secada, 1989), participation (Beane & Apple, 2007) and access (Harvey & Klein, 1989). Quite simply, equity is defined as “fairness” (Cochran-Smith et al., 2016, p. 69) and manifested when educators participate in “establishing a classroom environment that is not colorblind and teaching in a manner that affirms learning style differences, based on culture and gender socialization” (Grant, 1989, p. 9). From an equity perspective, SUPs are not neutral but steeped in issues of (in)justice that silence conversations or the enactment of equity.

This position presumes that the entire teacher education structures, including the partnerships that maintain them, are laden with hegemonic ways of doing things. While SUPs are often reified (Bernay et al., 2020; Day et al., 2021; Driscoll et al., 1994), others chide that schools (Burke & Whitty, 2018; McDonald & Zeichner, 2009; Souto-Manning, 2019) and universities (Hartman, 2018) often waive their role as institutions that promote democracy, behaving instead as educational actors consigned to remaining apolitical and devoid of equity sensibilities. There is a choice, therefore, for SUPs to engage in equity decision-making, practices and policymaking for the benefit of beginning teachers and stakeholders. The decision to center, or not to center, the work of SUP collaborations in justice-focused endeavors is therefore an ideological stance itself, with some spaces of the teacher residencies deciding to avoid equity in their functions, while others take up this work unabashedly. Equity as a framework for teacher residencies encourages collaborations that acknowledge and upend oppression and recognizes SUPs as channels by which to realize P12 teaching and learning outcomes. In this way, equity presents itself simply as the way things are done by the teacher residency and as the goal for preparing the next generation of teachers. SUPs should push the boundaries of existing processes to further develop ways of leading within collaborative spaces and begin to rely upon, facilitate and reflect equitable approaches in teacher education.

Second, this conceptual paper also borrows from third space theories. The activity of teacher residencies, which transpire within SUP structures, is not easy because numerous forces shape the ways in which the school and the university, as autonomous spaces, come together to form third or hybrid spaces (Arhar et al., 2013; Miller et al., 2006; Soja, 1996), who must then act to negotiate the:

development of trust, identification of individual interests and objectives that can become the basis for common goals and mutual interests, creation of ways of talking and ways of working together that bridge cultural and communication differences … The two different cultures are not easy to harmonize in any event, but in this case, where a new organization is being invented that requires fundamental changes in both of the parent organizations, the work is both daunting and devoid of guidelines. (Darling-Hammond, 1994, p. 21)

Ideally, the first space (university) and second space (school or district) are reimagined in a new third space (school-university sphere). My standpoint on conceptualizing equity-centric teacher residencies is to regard them as places where school and university, as separate entities, are equally compelled to ensure that equity as a process and a goal. Equity as a third space enactment cannot be actualized unless and until the entities have wrestled, on their own, with the ideals of care and justice.

The university as a first space and the school as a second space, must independently and in unison be committed to a clearly articulated mission that “aims to advance equity, antiracism, and social justice within and among schools, colleges/universities, and their respective community and professional partners” (NAPDS, 2021, p. 1). The third space becomes ineffective if separately the entities do not represent a demonstrated duty for guaranteeing that care and justice guide their work. Although few recommendations exist in foregrounding equity in teacher residencies, McDonald and Zeichner (2009) argue that within-program efforts in teacher education (e.g. recruitment, social relations, instructions, strategies, and structures) are the typical places driving the conversations around issues of equity and social justice. Taking their lead, I contend that each space of the residency (university, school, and the school-university partnership) must independently conduct such interrogations of equity in earnest to consider new routes as:

This path requires both a fundamental rethinking of program content and structure….Social justice redesign efforts, if they are to embody a democratic process consistent with a social justice mission, must look to all those concerned with improving children’s educational opportunities, including K-12 educators, college and university faculty and staff, community members, and parents to participate and make decisions about how teachers are prepared. (McDonald & Zeichner, 2009, p. 596)

Since the 19th century, HBCUs have long acted “To deepen its focus on advancing education equity and more closely aligning teacher preparation with the communities graduates will serve” (Marchitello & Trinidad, 2019, p. 23). Houston et al. (2022) add, “teacher education programs at HBCUs routinely situate education in context with human freedom and social justice” (p. 139). Equity work among SUPs is promising, yet thorny, because:

K-12 educators—critical partners of teacher education programs—are also under increased pressure as a result of high stakes accountability and in many cases are less likely to engage in the seemingly ambiguous work of social justice. Despite these conditions, we find teacher education programs across the country negotiating this difficult terrain and attempting to prepare teachers… (McDonald & Zeichner, 2009, p. 596)

Teacher training programs that are genuinely dedicated to working alongside school district partners, despite the hurdles, continue because both entities understand that the major vision of teacher residencies is to reimagine teacher training. The extent to which SUPs are effective for implementing teacher residencies is dependent on the cultural features of each context (Wegemer & Renick, 2021) and an unrelenting steadfastness to equity. By exploring the enacted structures of SUPs among teacher residencies, it is possible to evaluate the ways in which school-university collaborations reflect equitable practices.

Three approaches to SUPs among teacher residency structures

Three separate approaches to the teacher residency are unpacked in Figure 1 to establish the framework for this proposal: ceremonial, conventional and communal teacher residencies. This conceptual article takes up each of the three approaches in turn, theorizing about issues of equity as it relates to frequency, perspective and outcome. This typology aims to demonstrate SUPs among teacher education programs from traditional (ceremonial) in contrast to an approach that includes equity on the margins (conventional) to one in which all three spaces are focused on equity (communal). HBCUs and MSIs are role models which highlight the importance of equity and social justice as a driving force behind the mission to support P12 learners from underserved communities (Marchitello & Trinidad, 2019; Petchauer & Mawhinney, 2017). To illustrate the communal approach that is cemented in justice, I share the functions within a federally funded teacher residency program at ABCU and its local school district partners.

The ceremonial teacher residency approach

The ceremonial approach for implementing a teacher residency is one of the most frequently used interactions for SUPs because it requires little effort by its implementers. Driven by the demand for more intensive clinically based teacher preparation programs, these traditional university-based programs partner with school districts and education reform organizations to responding to this call. A deeper look at the field experience for the ceremonial teacher residency and it becomes evident that it mirrors the traditional teacher model, except for the extended time in the field. Ceremonial residencies maintain the veneer of a teacher residency as they appear to follow the basic definition, principles and best practices of clinical teaching. In the state of Texas, for example, residencies entail nearly 1,000 hours of clinical preparation, compared to approximately 50-70 hours for most traditional programs (Hill-Jackson et al., 2020).

While the residency hours are easy to accumulate, the negligence of the ceremonial teacher residency in recognizing the important role of equity in pedagogy and among the structures of the three entities will be its downfall. Teacher residencies should be opportunities for pre-service teachers to be engaged in the classroom for an extended period and to experiment with specific and concrete strategies under realistic and diverse classrooms, which are typically rare in traditional university-based teacher preparation programs. Critical education scholars believe teacher residencies that prepare teachers for targeted settings will improve teacher quality by providing clinical experiences where their training to teach diverse learners can be enhanced and where the teacher candidates will likely be hired (Gaikhorst et al., 2015; Hammerness & Craig, 2016; McKinney et al., 2008). Thus, a commitment to equity goes unaddressed to appease political factions who maintain a colorblind fealty to teacher education. Although there is an increasing demand to prepare teachers for schools with diverse students, traditional clinical teaching experiences and ceremonial teacher residencies continue to neglect equity-focused approaches in the field experiences of pre-service teachers (Bowman & Gottesman, 2013; Hill-Jackson & Lewis, 2010) and:

programmatic approaches to multicultural concerns, culturally relevant teaching, or social justice issues typically remain isolated from the core teacher education curriculum. In part and as a result, the overall impact of such efforts on preservice teachers’ beliefs and practices is limited and often shorter. (McDonald et al., 2011, p. 1670)

The inability to acknowledge equity as a foundational principle to good teaching will cause the ceremonial residency to devolve into merely focusing on counting time, as opposed to focusing on what counts for P12 student achievement. The ceremonial approach is characterized by field-based teaching practices that look exactly like the student teaching model – just expanded across two semesters. As teacher residencies are on the rise around the country (e.g. Texas Education Agency [TEA], 2023a), ceremonial teacher residencies are on the rise and may fall easily into business as usual by only attending to a checklist for doing teacher residencies. Mourlam et al. (2019) warn us that we must reconceptualize teacher residencies as being different from our traditional understandings of student teaching.

Another problem of the ceremonial teacher residency is one of power imbalances between the schools and the university’s educator preparation program. Many residencies that engender a ceremonial approach are driven by patriarchal and self-serving needs of the educator preparation program (Bortolin, 2011), and an asymmetrical ethical responsibility to the partnership becomes the norm (Danley & Christiansen, 2019). Consequently, the top-down decisions by the university are based on a preoccupation to adhere to state or federal compliance standards. The “school-university” partnership is practiced instead as a “university-school” partnership in which the needs of the university supersede the third space of the partnership. The university actions are focused on internal stakeholders, and community partnerships are looked upon as service tasks for which there is little time and less interest in pursuing. Hence, the objective of ceremonial teacher residencies becomes one of short-term quantitative wins as opposed to having a shared vision of teaching and learning among all stakeholders.

Observers are warned to look beyond high resident numbers, cleverly worded partnership agreements, signing events for residents or ribbon cuttings by media-seeking institutions as these outcomes and grand gestures may hide the fact that sincere collaborations are yet to be actualized. In the ceremonial approach to teacher residencies, SUPs are transactional, and the impact is fleeting. When the effort is on the ritualistic aspects to SUPs, the outcome is often broken promises to the partner with lesser power, lack of impact on teacher quality, disregard for teacher diversity and an unsustainable residency program.

The conventional teacher residency approach

The conventional teacher residency approach has taken root in the few decades with the emergence of civic- and engagement-minded scholars and practitioners. Guided by a perspective of humility and incorporation of stakeholder voice, this approach is fundamentally different from the ceremonial teacher residency. The conventional teacher residency approach abides by the definition that the “University community partnerships involve motivating potential stakeholders, promoting collaboration and team effort, communicating clear commitments to educational development, and distributing leadership” (Hudson et al., 2006; as cited in Hudson et al., 2012, p. 773). To the extent possible, the SUP within the teacher residency is treated with respect, trust, external support, shared decision-making and continuous improvement (Thorkildsen & Stein, 1996). In a conventional approach, the teacher preparation program demonstrates deference to the district, and the needs of each collaborator are met through the amplification of their own voices to ensure a balance of power.

Above all, the conventional teacher residency is tethered to a moral goal of teacher education and strengthening the teacher pipeline by ensuring pedagogic renewal through the field experiences of novice teachers “where coursework and clinical experiences are closely coupled, ensuring that educators are profession ready” (NAPDS, 2021, p. 15). Grossman (2010) proposes that “Taking clinical practice seriously will require us to add pedagogies of enactment to our existing repertoire of pedagogies of reflection and investigation” (p. 274). The emphasis is on ensuring that theory espoused in the universities is taken up by real-world practice in schools, and:

Over time, teacher education programs have implemented structural and pedagogical responses to lessen the separation between university courses and school field placements. For example, in the 1980s and 1990s, a wide range of teacher education programs aimed to build professional development schools—one aim of which was to provide greater opportunities for interaction between courses and field placements (Darling-Hammond, 1994). As part of this effort, some teacher educators located methods courses in K-12 schools with the assumption that changing the location of the course would increase the likelihood that preservice teachers would see and forge connections between theory and practice. (p. 276)

The vision of good teaching is co-constructed by all the stakeholders and focused on the needs of P12 learners in an increasingly diverse society. The clinical experience reflects the definition and best practices of the teacher residency, but with an ethic of care to ensure a shared vision of moral teaching among all the stakeholders. University and school district representatives work in unison to foster a program to ensure strong and coherent course-to-field connections. The residency is envisioned as “the potential to” “live theory in the immediate” and “deconstruct the barrier between the academy and the lives of the people it professes to represent” (Routledge, as cited in Taylor & Klein, 2015, p. 201). In words and in deeds, the products (curricula, logic models, handbooks, marketing and dissemination plans) and processes (resident recruitment, staff hiring, communication) articulate a dedication to equity.

Residents enrolled in conventional teacher residency programs are exposed to both high-leverage and culturally attuned practices that may help to sharpen their cultural acuity, giving them the ability to shape-shift or adapt to the needs of their diverse learners. While some residencies are designed to rethink teacher quality in general, other conventional models of residencies are specifically created as a means for more obvious expression of teaching as a form of activism by the district and the university. Unlike ceremonial approaches, the residents of conventional teacher residencies are better able to meet their learners where they are because they use the culture of the P12 learners as a tool to advance the teaching and learning process. Recent studies of emerging programs focus on environmental features based on improving field work. A review of national studies on residencies in New York (Hammerness & Craig, 2016; Matsko & Hammerness, 2014), Chicago (Feiman-Nemser et al., 2014; Hammerness & Matsko, 2013), San Francisco (Williamson et al., 2016), Newark-Montclair (Klein et al., 2013) and Boston (Papay et al., 2011) has spurred a spirited debate over the immeasurable value of teacher residencies in high-need communities.

Further, the goal of the SUP for the conventional approach is defined by a dynamic collaboration in which all stakeholders are invested in the relationship however fluid and malleable. Despite the good intentions of leaders of the conventional teacher residency to produce a genuine school-university partnership that elevates equity, they are often run by teacher educators who themselves have little experience in ensuring it (Savick et al., 2020). The first or second space is co-opted by status quo systems and motivations at work among traditional school districts and universities, so the equity work in the third space becomes endangered. This notion was exemplified:

in the work of Miller and Hafner (2008) who studied a community-based teacher education program that was specifically rooted in the work of Paulo Freire on dialogue and collaborative relationships. Despite the explicit mission of the program to promote mutual dependence and benefits, community partners still felt disenfranchised within this program—a testament to the persistence of power dynamics in school-university partnerships and the complexities of creating a third space in teacher education. (Beck, 2016, p. 52)

As a result, well-intended educational partnerships often fail to meet the actual needs of stakeholders (Rahman et al., 2022). The long-term outcome of SUPs for conventional teacher residencies is hard to predict and ranges from the respectable to the convenient when one or more of the entities in the partnership loses its commitment to equity.

The communal teacher residency approach

The perspective in the communal approach is one that utilizes the conventional approach as a starting point but adds human-centered ideals of democracy and justice by the school district, the university and within the newly formed third space of the partnership. Although aspirational and rarely actualized, the communal teacher residency approach can only be achieved by those who reflect deeply on the “why” of their residency programs. This viewpoint is further upheld by the belief that all entities of the SUP must enter “community” in a space where each is affirmed and faithful to equity. In this way, the activities of school-university collaborators reflect equity values that can withstand changing public sentiment and untested reform agendas.

Equity in the three spaces (first space, second space and third space) has a direct impact on the residents. The responsibility to equity creates a sense of belonging – a measure of psychological safety that allows all stakeholders in the residency to feel safe, take risks and engage in culturally sustaining work as their authentic selves. Paris (2012) asserts that:

The term culturally sustaining requires that our pedagogies be more than responsive of or relevant to the cultural experiences and practices of young people—it requires that they support young people in sustaining the cultural and linguistic competence of their communities while simultaneously offering access to dominant cultural competence. (p. 95)

An equity-centric teacher residency operates within the mandated infrastructure of the partnership, while maintaining a devotion to the needs of the diverse residents and P12 learners. At its core, each partner of communal teacher residencies insists upon culturally sensitive practices and perspectives that position the well-being of beginning teachers and the P12 learners they serve as the central goal in the democratic process of schooling.

Since the university often wields the most power in the partnership, it is imperative that it takes the lead in the self-examination of equity as a core function in its teaching mission. HBCUs, for example, prepare future schoolteachers who keep the needs of culturally diverse students at the forefront of their instructional and pedagogical goals. Because of ABCU’s long history of producing culturally proficient educators, it was determined to be a model first space partner for engaging in an innovative teacher residency program. With nearly 150 years of producing teachers of color for the state of Texas, ABCU accepted my invitation in 2022 to initiate a teacher residency program for its post-baccalaureate program.

Toward an equity-centric model for teacher residencies

ABCU’s postbaccalaureate/alternative teacher preparation program is one of several university-based educator preparation programs at the institution. Prospective education students have two options in ABC-HBCU program. In option one, students with an earned bachelor’s degree have an option of pursuing a teaching certification with some credit toward an education-related master’s degree through an internship experience as the teacher of record. In option two, students complete a residency that allows them to pursue a teaching certification while earning a master’s degree, and train as an apprentice for a full year alongside a master teacher.

Context

Founded in 1876, ABCU began its charter as an institution of higher education with teaching as core to its mission (Woolfork, 1975). It is home to the largest and oldest public teacher preparation program in the state of Texas (Hill-Jackson et al., 2020), and has produced thousands of educators of color to date. ABCU, like many HBCUs that started at the close of the Civil War and after the Second Morrill Land Act, provided:

a pre-collegiate curriculum or normal schools for training teachers” (Irvine & Fenwick, 2011, p. 197). Three colleges for Negroes were established before 1862: Cheyney University of Pennsylvania in 1837; Lincoln University in Pennsylvania and Wilberforce College in Ohio were established in the 1854 and 1856, respectively. Redd adds, “The Freedmen’s Bureau helped to establish several colleges, including Howard University (Washington, DC), Atlanta University (Georgia; now known as Clark Atlanta University), St. Augustine’s College (North Carolina), Fisk University (Tennessee), and Johnson C. Smith University (North Carolina) (p. 34). (as cited in Hill-Jackson, 2017, p. 18)

In the fall of 2022, a total of 16 teacher residents of color (who self-identify as African American and Latino) enrolled in a postbaccalaureate program at ABCU, funded through a federal grant, receive a living wage stipend, technology support, on-demand and real-time professional development and induction workshops, a classroom mentor teacher, community mentor and instructional coach, all organized with support within a learning community. The residents’ self-efficacy for teaching in culturally diverse high-need classrooms along with retention of the residents in their district placement (Hill-Jackson et al., 2020) is expected to be positively impacted.

Methodology

By studying a program for which I am the director and principal investigator, I can provide an insider’s perspective. When implementing a communal approach that reimagines how beginning teachers are trained, the residency program at ABCU is propelled by five central attributes of the comprehensive community induction framework (CCIF^©) that links equity and community. My methodology for organizing the CCIF^© framework for this model follows familiar approaches to synthesizing best practices in clinical teaching, teacher residencies, that is types of research in which analyses of the tensions, dilemmas and problems of practice for context-specific residencies directly influence the improvement of centering justice and equity in teacher education (Philip et al., 2019) more broadly and for HBCUs or MSIs specifically (Ginsburg et al., 2023). Hence, my method indulges philosophies of reflective practice (Dewey, 1933; Lane et al., 2014; Lupinski et al., 2012; Schön, 1983; Zeichner & Liston, 2013) and utilizes some of the noteworthy research on self-study (Lassonde & Galman, 2019; Loughran, 2004; Tidwell et al., 2009; Zeichner, 2007). I am attempting to elevate this knowledge base beyond a singular residency program so that a shared language of equity-centric practice is more accessible beyond HBCU contexts, and therefore more applicable to residency programs more broadly.

1. A coherent vision of teaching between school and university partners. The proximity of teacher preparation programs of HBCUs, like PVAMU, to large urban school districts offers opportunities to cross organizational and cultural boundaries (Hora & Miller, 2011) and cater to equity-focused instructional practices. The ABCU program is the collaborative partner of several school districts, all of which are in a metropolitan area in southeast Texas. Residents are placed in partner schools after a needs assessment completed by the school district leaders. The ABCU partnership boasts a lucid mission to “develop a teaching force with the skills and dispositions, not only to teach in these schools of greatest need, but also to be change agent social justice educators dedicated to challenging deeply held notions of schooling and society” (Shakespear et al., 2003, p. 5).

2. Comprehensive strategies that enhance clinical experiences. A set of wide-ranging tactics to support preservice teacher programs accelerate the professional growth of new teachers, reduce the rate of new teacher attrition, decrease human resources costs for school districts and increase student learning (Davis & Higdon, 2008; Ingersoll et al., 2016; Bledsoe et al., 2016). Beginning teachers who receive multiple supports are less likely to leave the profession after the first year (Ingersoll & Smith, 2004). The residency program serves as the laboratory in which residents have opportunities to implement a variety of instructional strategies, materials and technologies for working with diverse populations in high-need schools and have frequent and supported opportunities to apply evidence-based theories of child development and high-leverage teaching practices in real school settings driven by culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP). CRP is a pedagogical mindset and set of teaching approaches to empower students socially, intellectually and politically (Ladson-Billings, 2014).

As part of their master’s program that links theory to practice, residents gain in the knowledge, skills and dispositions of an equity pedagogue, they concurrently gain a sound understanding of their role as agents of change. Residents learn how to abandon a deficit perspective of students’ cultures (Ford et al., 2001), and use instruction to validate P-12 students’ cultures to elevate interests and thereby improve academic performance (Brown et al., 2019; Christ & Sharma, 2018). Residents receive closely supervised interaction with faculty, experienced teachers, principals, other administrators and school leaders. The ABCU program takes advantage of existing school and university structures that allow experimentation and adaptation. Residency programs support candidates who serve as paid apprentices while completing coursework that capitalizes on strong course-to-field connections (Arundel, 2020).

1. Shared governance. The key to a successful SUP is authentic alliances between each entity whereby the mutual benefits drive the relationship, vision, goals and outcomes. The nature of the collaboration dictates a shared commitment for selecting residents, professional learning, the collection and analyses of data and retention of residents to positively impact P-12 students’ academic and emotional achievement (Burns et al., 2016; McCall et al., 2017). The residency program at ABCU facilitates monthly implementation and semi-annual governance meetings whereby district leaders and stakeholders, as a community of practice, co-manage the residency program and are empowered to make just-in-time changes that support continuous improvement efforts.

2. Developmental induction training for clinical teachers and mentors. In most high-need schools, new teachers are departing at alarming rates; some estimate upward of 50% are gone by year five (Blake, 2017; Hill-Jackson et al., 2020; Hill-Jackson & Stafford, 2017). Breaux and Wong (2003) advise that an induction process is the best way to send a message to your teachers that you value them and want them to succeed and stay. Induction activities for the teacher residency program at ABCU include orientation to the workplace, but then continues with a planned and systemic approach to supporting the beginning teacher into the profession (Bledsoe et al., 2016) and features socialization, mentoring and guidance through the first two years as a practicing beginning teacher. Residents need a prolonged set of learning experiences that utilize job-embedded induction activities (Bolen, 2018), that are sustained over the first two to three years of their career (Kearney, 2023), utilize professional learning communities (De Neve & Devos, 2017), and promote a growth not evaluative professional development model (Amrein-Beardsley & Collins, 2018). Beginning teachers have access to real-time professional development workshops and webinars, as well as on-demand mini courses through a learning management platform. The mentors for the residents also receive training that is growth-oriented (Luet et al., 2018; Weisling & Gardiner, 2018) through asynchronous online training opportunities.

3. Anchored in the community. This attribute is based on the belief that good teachers know the school, while exemplary teachers understand their learners’ community. The teacher residency program at ABCU utilizes mentors, a site coordinator/coach, university supervisors, community mentor and a school-university leadership team to provide a “culture of community” for the teacher candidates. The teacher residency program at ABCU offers community service, community tours and professional gatherings at sporting events, game nights, book clubs, cultural field trips and holiday gatherings. All stakeholders engage to form a sense of belonging and an extended family for the resident and are willing to “go off script to build connections, letting the candidates know that we care about them professionally and personally” (Coburn, 2020, para. 6). Teacher education experiences that are embedded in the community (Hill-Jackson, 2017) positively impact candidates’ perceptions of diverse learners (Murrell, 2001).

When the features of the CCIF^© model are actualized among HBCUs, the work of residents is not only about teaching content but also about adapting their instruction for P12 learners that emote a sense of kinship in culturally affirming ways (Hill-Jackson et al., 2020). And while the teacher residency program at ABCU is new and the data are yet to be analyzed, our team remains excited about the model’s potential for the partnership. ABCU is the leading producer of African American teachers in Texas (TEA, 2023b), and this space offers a unique opportunity to explore the transformative possibilities for furthering a communal model for teacher residencies.

Implications and conclusion

Two major implications and a conclusion suggest that “not all teacher residencies are created equal.” The first implication of this conceptual paper reminds us of the growing diversity across every cultural group in the nation. Demographic shifts and complexities among P12 teachers (NCES, n.d.) and learners (NCES, 2020) in the United States create increased levels of cultural, ethnic and linguistic diversity (Madsen et al., 2019). In addition to demographic mismatches between teachers and students, teacher education is characterized by normative ways and systems of knowing (Souto-Manning, 2019), that further add relational/pedagogical distance between teachers and students. Teacher training programs must explore ways that HBCUs develop strong relationships with local schools to better prepare candidates for the schools and students they will eventually serve. Since HBCUs help prepare most of the teachers of color in the nation as they work alongside underserved and diverse school district partners, these spaces may serve as exemplars for how to create teacher residencies in our increasingly diverse society.

My theoretical perspective builds upon the thoughts of Nieto (2000), Cochran-Smith et al. (2016) and Dyches and Boyd (2017) for which I argue that the work of teacher residencies must be duty-bound to equity to be effective. The teacher residency is governed by standards that guide its components (Marchitello & Trinidad, 2019; NCTR, 2020), but much effort is still needed in pushing the boundaries of the status quo to further develop ways of leading within collaborative spaces that begin to rely upon, support and reflect equitable approaches to teacher residencies. Preparing future teachers for teaching students in multicultural classrooms has been recognized as a key element of success in teacher training (Howard & Rodriguez-Minkoff, 2017). According to NCTR (2020), nearly 58% of residents are people of color, compared to 17% of beginning teachers of color entering the field through the traditional route.

As there has been a national push to ensure clinical practice is more robust (American Association for Colleges of Teacher Education [AACTE], 2018), the second implication recognizes teacher residencies as a promising mechanism to improve clinical practice for beginning teachers. There is a rising number of over 7,000 residents (NCTR, 2020) and nearly 40 residency programs (Wasburn-Moses, 2017) across the United States. Teacher residencies are becoming prolific due to an injection of state (e.g. TEA, 2023a) and federal monies (e.g. Silva et al., 2014; Wasburn-Moses, 2017). Teacher candidates who complete clinical experiences through residency models report greater capacity to work with culturally diverse P12 students with diverse learning needs than their non-residency peers (NCTR, 2020). Research suggests that teacher residencies offer a mechanism to increase racial diversity into the teaching workforce (Guha et al., 2016; Guha & Kini et al., 2016). By 2040, racial minority groups will make up most of the US population (Colby & Ortman, 2014) and, by extension, the student population. Residencies allow novice teachers to grasp and employ evidence-based classroom practices (Ross & Lignugaris-Kraft, 2015), and provide residents extensive clinical practice, which is essential to teacher effectiveness for beginning teachers (AACTE, 2018; NAPDS, 2021). This additional time in the field correlates to a higher sense of self-efficacy (Mazzye et al., 2023) and cultural competence for residents in the field (Hill-Jackson, 2020; Peebles & Mendaglio, 2014).

In summary, three distinct approaches to the teacher residency are outlined to establish the extent to which equity is foregrounded among teacher residencies. The first approach to the teacher residency, ceremonial, explores the normative and traditional method of residencies that push university-centric goals and have largely ignored culture as a mediator for robust residencies or highly effective residents. Conventional is the second approach to the teacher residency that is often partnership-centric and embraces the basic tenets of strong school-university partnerships, but this approach often falls short to positioning equity among each space and entity as a lever for effective teacher residencies. The communal approach, the least explored teacher residency option, is equity-centric because each entity for the first space (university), second space (school) and third space (school-university partnership) reflects an equity mindset that is displayed by an uncompromising pledge to equity that is reflected in its institution’s structures and program’s strategies. The teacher residency program at ABCU, while a new residency, pushes back on the status quo or conventional approach because each entity is clear-eyed about its obligation to care and justice and embodies the tenets of community, equity and belonging. Since the 19th century, HBCUs and the local school districts have done equity work with no fanfare or acknowledgment of this fact (Harper & Mawhinney, 2017).

Therefore, programs that currently include or are developing residency programming should consider the extent to which a commitment to equity exists among each entity of the partnership. Since teacher residencies exist in the third spaces of school-university partnerships, and growing research is focused on high-need second spaces, scrutiny of the first space’s (university) commitment to equity is warranted. The methods offered here are distinguished by the degree to which equity practices are honored by each of the entities of the teacher residency partnership and suggest that every space does not have the equity-readiness to engage teacher residencies. HBCUs have a time-honored legacy for doing equity work. It is not what they do, but who they are. It may be that HBCUs are well positioned to meet the moment in teacher preparation and lead the way in developing equity-centric models for teacher residencies.

Figures

Figure 1

Three approaches to school-university partnerships among teacher residencies