Teacher preparation programs face significant challenges in providing secondary mathematics teacher candidates with quality clinical experiences. The problem is two-fold:

• There is an inadequate supply of quality mentor teachers to oversee the experiences. This is related to the quantity of teachers who are well versed in implementing the CCSS, especially embedding the standards for mathematical practice into their teaching of content standards on a daily basis.

• There needs to exist a bidirectional relationship between the teacher preparation programs and school partners in which clinical experiences take place. This relationship should reflect a common vision and shared commitment to the vision of CCSSM and other issues related to mathematics teaching and learning.

Over the past five years, the Clinical Experiences Research Action Cluster (CERAC) drawn from the Mathematics Teacher Education Partnership has been working to improve clinical experiences for secondary mathematics teacher candidates. Specifically, the RAC is answering the following research question: How does a continuum of collaborative and student-focused clinical experiences, including co-planning/co-teaching and paired placement fieldwork models, impact pre-service teachers’ equitable implementation of the Mathematics Teaching Practices (MTPs) (NCTM, 2014) across institutional contexts? The CERAC is using improvement science frameworks drawn from the networked improvement community (NIC) approach (Bryk, Gomez, Grunow, & LeMahieu, 2015); the NIC model is also used by the larger partnership (Martin & Gobstein, 2015). The CERAC consists of 27 university-led teams, each consisting of at least one mathematics teacher educator, a mathematician, and a school partner. The RAC is divided into three sub-RACs based on three types of field experiences: Methods, Paired Placement, and Co-planning and Co-teaching. Below is our Driver’s Diagram:

• The RAC is divided into three Sub-RACs based on the three types of field experiences that we are implementing to meet the goals that we set forth in our primary drivers and our aim statement.

• Each Sub-RAC is implementing PDSA cycles based on their goals and objectives.

• Teams work together via conference calls, email, and the Trellis platform.

• We utilize Dropbox as a way of sharing files and materials.

• Have had face-to-face meetings as a whole RAC with breakout meetings for Sub-RACs.

• There are overlap areas that focus the RAC as a whole, such as the emphasis on NCTM’s mathematics teaching practices, PD for mentors around the CCSS and mentoring mathematics teacher candidates, and outcome measures.

• There are also specific goals to be attained within each of the Sub-RACs.

• Each Sub-RAC has specific research questions, which they are addressing.

Early Field Experiences within Methods Sub-RAC

The methods sub-RAC is focused on strengthening the relationships between teacher candidates, university coursework and faculty, and most-importantly mentor teachers. The primary work of the methods team has been to develop, test, refine, retest, and finalize modules that connect the partners of mathematics teacher education critical to the development of teacher candidates’ abilities and knowledge to plan and impact each learner prior to student teaching. The modules’ work has centered on the Standards for Mathematical Practice (SMP) and the MTPs (NCTM, 2014) with a focus on ensuring opportunities for all learners. From 2012-2016, the SMP module resulted in a well-refined product which helped to improve mentor teachers' views on the MTPs and positively influenced the relationships between teacher candidates and mentor teachers (Yow et al, 2019). Research related to the second module on lesson planning revealed that lessons implemented in mentor teacher classrooms have increased teacher candidates’ implementation of the MTPs and students’ engagement in SMPs as measured by the MCOP2 (Gleason, Livers, & Zelkowski, 2017; Zelkowski & Gleason; 2016). Mentor teachers have reported better understanding of what teacher candidates are expected to be able to learn and implement with respect to the MTPs (Zelkowski et al, 2020). A third module under development is focusing on the use of high-quality written feedback as a means to improve student learning towards mathematical goals with assessment (Zelkowski et al, 2020). For more information on the Methods Sub-RAC, please visit https://cerac-methods.ua.edu/.

Co-Plan/ Co-Teach Sub-RAC

Co-teaching is a pedagogical practice that promotes the collaboration and communication between teacher candidates and mentor teachers who share a common space in the organization, delivery, and assessment of instruction (Bacharch, Heck & Dahlberg, 2010). During clinical experiences, teacher candidates are actively involved in developing and implementing lessons with the guidance of the mentor teacher (Bacharch, Heck, & Dahlberg, 2010). The co-planning and co-teaching sub RAC members have engaged in multiple plan-do study-act (PDSA) cycles, in which they created instruments to measure co-teaching during clinical experiences, developed training resources to help mathematics teacher education programs enact the model, and examined the nature of institutional change as a result of using the model. We found that the use of co-teaching and co-planning increased learning opportunities for students and teacher candidates, developed teacher candidates’ confidence in their ability to become effective teachers of mathematics, as well as strengthened relationships between the university faculty and school personnel, thereby bridging research to practice.

Paired Placement Sub-RAC

The paired placement model for clinical teaching places two teacher candidates with one mentor teacher (Leatham & Peterson, 2010). Paired Placement is dubbed as a model of learning to teach that encourages collaboration, pedagogical risk taking, increased reflection, and better classroom management (Mau, 2013). Members of the paired placement sub-RAC have implemented the paired placement model across multiple institutions for five years and have used PDSA cycles to collect data before, during, and after the clinical teaching experience. PDSA cycles incorporate data from structured and unstructured interviews, surveys, teaching evaluations, and reflective journals. Teacher candidates participating in the model across different contexts have stated that they have become more collaborative, student-centered, and reflective practitioners. The paired placement subRAC has developed protocols for implementing the model, tips for the teacher candidates, and other resources to aid in the implementation of the model.