Hortons Hear Teachers

“I am here. I am in this classroom. I am responsible for teaching these children. I am here – does anyone see me? Does anyone care?” When the bell rings and classroom doors close, even though there are children in the room and there are other teachers in nearby classrooms, every initial educator feels alone on the job. And their feeling of being alone does not stop after the first day. Being the only adult in their classroom is their new daily reality. It is not until their Horton hears their silent cry with an “I hear you and I see you and I care,” that they will breathe easier and settle into being a teacher.

Hortons are professional teacher friends.

Ask teachers about their long-term teacher friends and most will name and describe a teacher or small group of teachers they met in their first days and months as a classroom teacher. Many say their friends found them, they did not find their friends. An early teacher friend is a Horton, just like the Seuss elephant who singularly heard the microscopic community of Whoville. A teacher Horton hears and sees starting teachers and connects with them. But not every teacher is so lucky as to have a Horton.

Hortons and professional teacher friends are different than friend friends. Hortons and teacher friends band together, like kids from the same neighborhood who create invisible understandings that withstand the tests of time. Through their common moments of joy and tribulation, teacher friends make teaching a wonderful career.

Some teacher friends will be other starting teachers, and some will be veterans who “clicked” into a friendship with a young teacher. Many will be job alike teachers – people who teach the same subjects or the same grade levels or share other similarities in their teaching assignments. A Horton is a particular veteran teacher who makes a unique professional connection with a newcomer teacher.

Very few Hortons are school-assigned mentors. Mentors fulfill assignments, Hortons fill needs.

Starting teachers who do not have PTFs typically do not last long as teachers. Although low compensation, extra hour work, and low public esteem are listed as the major reasons for early career resignations, the lack of PTFs is a significant contributor to job dissatisfaction. Consider teachers in your school who resigned in their first years. Did they have Hortons? Bet they did not.

Hortons are just Hortons doing what Hortons do.

Hortons come in all shapes and sizes meaning there is no singular characteristic that describes them.

I saw a Horton knock on a new teacher’s classroom door, walk in, introduce herself, and at once strike up a friendship. Until Horton’s retirement, they were professionally and personally inseparable.

Another Horton watched a new teacher for several days, found a seat next to the rookie at a meeting, and without fanfare began to help a new colleague to understand and interpret information that was being presented. Sensing a willing veteran opened the rookie to sharing his trepidations about school and listening to professional guidance.

Some Hortons view a new teacher as a team member knowing that a strong teaching team requires strong teachers. They prioritize making a rookie part of their team. They also have the insight to coach toward best practices not just talk about them. Their soft explanations and demonstrations exemplify professional collegiality.

Athletics, arts, and activities provide easy Horton connections. Teacher shortages also beget coach and director shortages. Many first-year teachers accept or are assigned extracurricular contracts as part of their employment. Being part of a coaching or theatrical staff or being an activity advisor connects a new teacher with other school adults and creates a unique relationship with school parents. Coaches, directors, and advisors are visible, and extracurricular visibility creates teacher visibility.

Most Hortons are persistent. They know a first-year teacher faces many challenges and will have good and not so good days at school. By recognizing and acknowledging a rookie’s good days, they make a newcomer more receptive to consolations and suggestions when improvements are needed.

Hortons are more likely to be Hortons out of school as well. If they are parents, they help to lead and guide the activities their children join. They join and attend community activities. Their capacity to share is internally not externally motivated and reinforced.

Schools create solitary teachers.

That reads a bit harshly, but it is a true statement. School isolates teachers, starting teachers especially. It happens in these two ways.

First, school principal attention to a new teacher lasts a proverbial ten minutes after the teaching contract is signed. Administrative assistants and school secretaries take care of new teacher onboarding. The principal quickly shifts to the search and hiring of other vacant teaching positions or to any other crisis that dots an administrator’s daily calendar. Once a starting teacher is shown to her classroom, she is on her own.

This is not a criticism of principals. The pandemic and post-pandemic responsibilities of a school principal have changed significantly. The stress of finding and keeping faculty and staff is only one of many, though it may be their most important task.

Second, classrooms are “black boxes.” Most teachers close their classroom doors because what happens in their classroom is their business and no one else’s business. Visitors to classrooms are rare because every other person in the school has their own classroom or job responsibilities. Everyone in school does their job in relative isolation to each other. A math teacher is her classroom is as invisible as a custodian sweeping halls or cleaning a toilet during class time. Exceptions are in the school kitchen; the hustle and bustle of preparing student snacks and lunches requires constant teamwork.

How and why does this happen?

New teachers are easily lost in late August, September, and October. Everyone at school gets into the hype of a new school year. Teachers have new assignments of children to teach, and all fall sports and activities garner the enthusiasm of new seasons. Excitement surrounds and sweeps up starting teachers, but it does not overcome the isolation of their black box work. First-year teachers drift into the backwaters of a new school year.

Doing a good to exceptionally good job in the first year decreases visibility. Problems get attention, but doing well gets no attention. A first-year teacher who is poorly prepared, communicates badly with students and parents, and has trouble with school deadlines, especially if these deficits reach the school board, will have frequent and pointed conversations with a principal. A rookie whose peer, student, and parent relations are okay to good, even exceptionally good, will sail into the second semester without drawing notice. They fit into the expectations of veteran teachers and are lost in the overall impression of “no problems with that one.”

Schools are stingy with accolades and positive reinforcement. Consider the news releases about your local schools to confirm this statement. Athletics get the most press. School musicals and plays come next. Upside academic performances are overshadowed by the downside state assessment news releases. And most teachers humbly avoid the limelight. Good news reflects on students not teachers.

January and February are important months for first-year teachers. Statutorily, teachers who will not receive a continuing contract must be given written notice by the school board. This may be the first time a board member has heard the names of first-year teachers who were not associated with peer, student, or parent problems. At the same time, Boards consider next year’s budget and school staffing. If layoffs are necessary, the order of layoff is “the last hired is first fired.” Some teachers are one-year teachers in multiple school districts when school financing is lean across the state.

Invisibility looks and feels like this.

A first-year teacher is a mailbox in the school office. Communications come to the mailbox not the person. A rookie has more conversations with the school secretary and custodian than any other teachers.

Invisibility breeds hesitancy. First-year teachers are slow to speak in department, grade level, or school faculty meetings. Few veterans call on them for an opinion. As new teachers, they are silent and viewed as peers-in-training. They go to meetings silently, sit silently, and leave silently.

Most arrive at school early and leave late because they are new to their curriculum and need time to prepare lessons and lesson materials. As early/late people, they do not mingle with their coming and going colleagues.

They eat alone in their classrooms. Being alone breeds loneliness.

The Big Duh!

There is a happenstance when a Horton hears, sees, and connects with a new teacher. The number of teachers who resign their positions in the first three years of their career tells us there are not enough Horton connections. Sadly, there are excellent potential teachers in those resignation – they find success in their next careers.

If we intend to build a high-quality teaching faculty in every school, we are required to close the happenstance ratio. I suggest that we keep retiring Hortons, those in their last years as classroom teachers, to serve as post-employment Hortons. Let’s just label them as Hortons, a new, very part-time faculty position. Hortons will not teach students, they will teach teachers how to acclimate to productive, active faculty members. Unlike mentors who may fulfill assignments, post-retirement Hortons continue to fulfill needs.

Let’s set a goal of reducing early teacher resignations by 20% by hiring Hortons.  A Horton will pay for herself in the savings the district will not need to spend on constant turnover replacement costs. More importantly, Hortons will save teaching careers that otherwise end too early.

Improve How We Treat Our Rookies to Resolve Teacher Attrition

The first year a teacher is in a classroom is monumental. During that year, one of three things happens. A teacher is successful and starts a career growing every year in her teaching abilities. A teacher is unhappy, decides teaching is not a good career choice, and begins to drift toward a career change. Or a teacher does the minimal needed from a first-year teacher, enough to earn a continuing contract, and begins a career repeating novice teaching skills. The first is great but the second and third are not.

How many promising teachers leave the profession too early. Too many teachers. How many years do we allow a teacher to be a first-year teacher? Too many years. These two truths are connected. The first years of teaching are critical for those who stay and for those who leave. We need to improve how we work with rookie educators.

First year once or first year forever.

Every teacher experiences a first year as a classroom teacher. It is a birthing process. Most teachers grow through their accumulated professional experiences and the quality of their teaching matures and improves over time. It is common to hear a veteran teacher speak of her beginnings. “In my first year I tried to do too much and did not do very much very well. It took experience to know what was essential to cause children to learn.”  Or “I stayed up past midnight every night working on lesson plans. I thought, ‘If I have a perfect lesson plan, I will have a perfect day of teaching.’ I learned that good teaching is what I do once the plan is in motion.” Equally we hear from principals about how a teacher matures over time and her teaching gets better and better.

But this is not true of every teacher; some teach like a first-year teacher repeatedly. They do not advance their pedagogy or ability to connect with children beyond what they did as a first-year teacher. They are not reflective in considering how a lesson might be improved, and they file every lesson for teaching again next year. They consider student achievement data a reflection of the children they teach not the teaching the children receive. They talk at children rather than listening and engaging with them. There are many descriptors for how a teacher is an habitual first-year teacher.

Consider teachers as flowers. The beautiful perennials keep getting better and better as they cross-pollinate and bloom more colorfully year after year. The annuals bloom in their season and then wilt. Annuals are the same year after year. When I think of high-quality teaching and its impact on the lives of children, I know the teachers I want my grandchildren and their friends to have. Perennials, please; no annuals. So, what do we do to cultivate perennials and cull annuals? Begin with the concept of “first year.”

And, like flower seeds, some teachers do not grow into flowering plants or do grow but never blossom. They quit the garden all too early.

There are two kinds of “first.”

There are two events that define a first-year teacher. One is “this is my first year as a professional teacher” and the second is “this is my first-year teaching in this school.” Each is a valid “first” with a uniqueness that makes these events important in a teaching career. Each of these firsts is wrapped in facts and emotions of “never doing this/never been here before.” It is inarguable that the first day of a teacher’s first year is a huge “first.” By the same definition of first, a teacher who has moved to a different school several times experiences many of the feelings and treatments of a first-day educator. These two “firsts” are essential in teacher development, because they make or break a teacher’s persistence. Whether the first time in a classroom or the first time in a school, what happens then affects a teacher’s career.

First year ever teachers have two learning curves – classroom and institutional. While their pedagogical skills are getting their first, independent, away-from-college testing, their institutional learning curve is almost vertical. They teach by transferring their sheltered student teaching experience to their “you are on your own now” classroom. What seemed like confident teaching in student teaching becomes less confident as an employed teacher. Being singularly responsible for children and their learning is a huge undertaking and weighs heavily on a novice teacher.

For a first year ever teacher, onboarding of institutional procedures is a blur. Bell schedules, attendance taking, grading, office referrals, contact with parents, and calendars of in-school meetings are a piling on of information. It feels like boot camp. A novice does not want to run afoul of institutional procedures, but every novice does mess up on one or two. They get lost and can feel lost. It is the ability to rebound that carries them forward.

“First year in a new school” teachers face similar problems with institutional procedures. Not only do they need to learn new procedures, but they also need to forget the procedures of their former school. Even classroom teaching needs to be recalibrated to the curriculum and priorities of their new school. For example, elementary math is not always the same elementary math. Elementary math is the curricular series the school has adopted and when a teacher is handed a new curricular series her teaching of elementary math must be adapted to that series.

All “firsts” need our improved attention if we are to cultivate annually improving teachers.

First year survivors and leavers.

First-year teaching is a survival of the fittest contest. National statistics are not changing and 40% of classroom teachers leave teaching in their first five years in the profession. Stop and consider that fact for a moment. A teacher pays $80,000 or more for a baccalaureate degree and teaching license. Their move to a new town and investment in renting or buying a home is a huge emotional as well as financial commitment. Then they walk away from that effort and expense. The reasons must be ginormous.

Drilling into why this happens exposes a list of usual suspect reasons that have not changed much over time.

  • Inadequate Preparation -Beginning teachers with little or no preparation are 21⁄2 times more likely to leave the classroom after one year compared to their well-prepared peers.
  • Lack Of Support For New Teachers – New teachers who do not receive mentoring and other supports leave at more than two times the rate of those who do.
  • Challenging Working Conditions – Teachers often cite working conditions, such as the support of their principals and the opportunity to collaborate with colleagues, as the top reason for leaving.
  • Dissatisfaction With Compensation – Beginning teachers earn about 20% less than individuals with college degrees in other fields, a wage gap that can widen to 30% for mid-career educators.
  • Better Career Opportunities – More than 1 in 4 teachers who leave say they do so to pursue other career opportunities.
  • Personal Reasons – More than 1 in 3 teachers who leave cite personal reasons, including pregnancy and childcare, as extremely or very important in their decision.

https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/Teacher_Exodus_Infographic.pdf

Concentrate on the first four reasons.

  1. Hiring teachers is not a game of horseshoes. When there is a shortage of qualified applicants, close to being a qualified applicant is not good enough. However, in too many schools close is good enough. It is wrong to infer that all schools hire unqualified persons as teachers. Yet the reality is that too many schools face too few applicants and our chances to hire a highly qualified teacher every time are becoming scarce.

The choices to not hiring a “good enough” teacher are not teaching the course(s) of that assignment, creating larger class sizes by eliminating a classroom without a teacher, or becoming creative with hybrid instruction that reduces the need for constant face-to-face teaching. Each of these can cause parental and faculty uproar that no principal wants to face. Hence, hiring a “good enough” teacher is too often good enough.

The problem is worsened by some legislation that tries to address teacher shortage by declaring teachers do not need a baccalaureate degree, or unlicensed substitute teachers can be hired as regular teachers, or any military veteran can be hired as a classroom teacher. When these reasonings are apllied, “good enough” really is good enough. Except when we consider child learning. And then unprepared still is unprepared and children suffer when their teacher is not prepared to teach them. Unprepared is never good and far from good enough.

The fix = do not hire “good enough” unprepared teachers. For student learning, unprepared teachers cause more problems than dropped courses and larger class sizes.

Another fix = assign highly qualified teachers to initial and tier 2 instruction only and lesser to unprepared teaches to classroom supervision. Assure that all children get their initial and adjusted instruction from the best teacher available.

  • Hiring is too often a one and done task. The problem with hiring a “close to good enough” teacher is that school principalship is a constant addressing of immediate problems. One hired the problem of a teacher placement is yesterday’s problem. Once the “close to good enough” teacher is hired, principals by necessity turn to the next immediate problem and do not give required attention to their problematic new hire(s).

Most school principals are “fire fighters” – every day is a matter of taking care of immediate and urgently hot problems of student discipline, student attendance, student transportation, building security and maintenance, finding sub teachers, supervising student activities, and resolving parent-school issues. Principals keep problems, like fires, from getting out of control. Professional development is not a September through December issue. It is further back on the fire line.  And observing teachers for professional evaluations waits until late winter and spring. Consequently, new teachers and “good enough” teachers do not see their principal unless the teacher is involved in a hot problem and then it seldom is a positive relationship.

As a generalization, first ever and first year in the school teachers get little personal and professional attention from their principal.

Fix = make principal engagement with each “first” teacher a weekly priority. Even checking in activities count when the “firsts” know the principal is personally interested in their daily teaching. Listening to a “first” is a proactive support.

Mentoring was a school priority du jour a decade ago but has slid back in priorities since. If a mentor is contractually or policy-required, mentor and “first’ relationships are typically on paper not in real time.

Fix = pay mentors, don’t make it volunteer or uncompensated duty.

Fix = require weekly, documented contacts.

Fix = “firsts” need procedural mentoring, and they need curricular mentoring. Do not think mentoring is a one size fits all. By the end of the first year, the curricular needs will outweigh the procedural.

  • Vestiges of seniority benefits are still in play when considering the assignments “firsts” are given. Veteran teachers most often have smaller class sizes, upper-level courses, recently renovated classrooms, even more windows than “firsts.” “Firsts” also are assigned to more supervisory duties than veterans. In my “first ever” year, I was assigned to boys’ restroom supervision during two passing periods every day. Instead of taking care of my needs or arranging for the next class of students, I was expected to stand in and “supervise” boys in their second-floor restroom. The fact that I remember this is testimony to its onerousness.

Fix = reduce the non-instructional assignments usually given to firsts. Not only do firsts not know the routines of these assignments, but it is just another boot camp feature for a first. Children tend to respond better to veteran teachers. Veterans know how to downplay student behavior that needs to be downplayed. Discontinue assigning every lowly duty to “firsts.”

  • Employment is comparative. Even though the average teacher salary in 2024 will be in the mid-$60,000s, “firsts” most often begin much lower. I work in a post-baccalaureate teacher preparation program and see “first year ever” teachers hired in the mid-$30,000s. With households of 2 or more, these “firsts” also qualify for food stamp-assistance in Wisconsin. When they compare their annual salary with other professions requiring a baccalaureate degree, they do not compare well. When they consider their school debts and how long it will take pay off their debt based on teacher pay as compared to other beginning professionals, they do not compare well. Too many novice teachers leave teaching because of inadequate compensation.

Fix = the professional work of a fourth-year teacher qualitatively compares well with a ten-year veteran. By the fourth year, after a “first” satisfies probationary status, pay them the same annual salary as a ten-year veteran. The costs of increasing their annual pay over the 4th thru 9th year is less than the costs for finding new “firsts” who are needed to replace young teachers who leave the profession early.

Cultivate the perennial; weed out the annuals.

The final fix for helping “firsts” who are highly-qualified-teachers-in-the-making is for principals to be more proactive in weeding out “first forever” teachers. One of the hardest smackdowns for “firsts” is their observation that mediocrity is rewarded in public education. An unprepared, “just good enough” teacher gets the same treatment and compensation as a well-prepared, sweating out the details “first.” Adding injury to insult, the “first” who cares is treated the same as the annual who does not care. And when that treatment includes a lack of mentoring, a lack of principal acknowledgement and support, and low levels of beginning and annual increases in pay, it is no wonder that promising “firsts” become “I’m out of here” firsts.