A FEW CLARIFYING THOUGHTS ON SECTION 1526
Carolyn Logan, Director, Professional Preparation & Certification

Section 1526 of the Revised School Code states, AFor the first 3 years of his or her employment in classroom teaching, a teacher shall be assigned by the school in which he or she teaches to 1 or more master teachers, or college professors or retired master teachers, who shall act as a mentor or mentors to the teacher. During the 3-year period, the teacher shall also receive intensive professional development induction into teaching, based on a professional development plan that is consistent with the requirements of section 3a of article II of Act No. 4 of the Public Acts of the Extra Session of 1937, being section 38.83a of the Michigan Compiled Laws, including classroom management and instructional delivery.

During the 3-year period, the intensive professional development induction into teaching shall consist of at least 15 days of professional development, the experiencing of effective practices in university-linked professional development schools, and regional seminars conducted by master teachers and other mentors.

"Issue: What Constitutes a A"Day?""
Response: When implementing Section 1526 of the School Code, which mandates the new teacher induction
and teacher mentoring process was initiated, the Department moved quickly to address the definition of pertinent terms.

For example on page 13 of the widely disseminated "Guidelines and Recommendations for New Teacher Induction/Teacher Mentoring in Michigan" a minimal school year is defined as at least 150 days. However, there are conditions for exceeding this and schools often do so. It is recommended that the definition of a "day" be consistent with the definition used by the local district or governing board. Also, for the purpose of implementing Section 1526 the amount of professional development that is provided during a calendar day should not be counted as more than a single day of professional development. This position is being taken to, again, support consistency and hopefully it will reduce confusion by shifting the focus from the ticking of the clock to the value and quality of the experience.

Think of Section 1526 as the legislature's way of making sure that all individuals in the infant stage of the teaching profession have access to at least a few feedings of professional development to get them off to a good start. Consider for example the second sentence of Section 1526 which states:
A.During the 3 year period, the teacher shall also receive intensive professional development induction into teaching, based on a professional development plan that is consistent with the requirements of Section 3a of Article II of Act 4 of the Public Acts of the Extra Session of 1937 being Section 38.83a of Michigan Compiled Laws including classroom management and instructional delivery. During the 3-year period, the intensive professional development induction into teaching shall consist of at least 15 days of professional development, the experiencing of effective practices in university-linked professional development schools, and regional seminars conducted by master teachers and other mentors.

In this section use of the language:
"the teacher shall also receive intensive professional development induction into teaching based on a professional development plan that is consistent with the requirements of ...," implies and has been interpreted to mean that the new teacher will be provided what is specified in this section. This makes both the assignment of a mentor and the days of professional development the district's responsibility.

Inclusion of the language:
"based on a professional development plan that is consistent with the requirements...," does not imply a particular course of study or the accumulation of semester credits. It does, however, address the fundamental teacher functions of classroom management and instruction, which among other things have been identified as critical by novice teachers.

Hopefully, educators can all get to the point where we can think of effective professional development as something broader than a mere event, which begins and ends by a scheduled time. Example: A workshop that the new teacher attended lasted 5 hours and he/she spent 1 2 hours putting together a report which he/she shared with staff. Can all this time spent be counted (towards the 15 day requirement) as one day of professional development?
Response: Yes, it is reasonable to count all of the time for professional development. To only count the time the actual workshop or conference lasted could drastically limit the potential effectiveness and use of the overall learning experience. On the other hand, there are certain to be situations when the workshop or conference time only should be counted and this should be agreed upon up front in order to avoid confusion.

Decisions of this type should be guided by the individual=s professional development plan and how it is designed and used to address the professional development needs of the teacher. An example related to this approach would be a situation where a teacher takes a group of students on a field trip (e.g. Close-Up), and he/she attends workshops. Question: Can the teacher keep track of the sessions, write a brief report, and count this toward his/her professional development requirement?
The answer is likely to be no, if merely going on the trip and participating is the objective. On the otherhand,
it is feasible that such an experience could be counted to meet the professional development requirement, depending on how the trip is addressed in the professional development plan, as well as the type of support provided by the district. The thing to remember here is that the benefits of the experience should be planned and should be related to an approved professional development goal or objective. Also, this type of experience should be arranged so that the district bears some responsibility (which is its obligation -- if it is to be counted for compliance with Section 1526).

Finally, it can be assumed that a new teacher's professional development plan may be ongoing from one district to another. However, each district reserves the right to approve and support or disapprove what was previously included in the plan. Also, it is very likely that there might be required professional development activities that are unique to a given district or building. As for who is ultimately responsible for approving the new teacher's professional development plan, the answer to this is a matter of local decision-making.

Following are a few issues which the Office of Professional Preparation and Certification has addressed for clarification:
Issue: The 18 hour requirement and the new teacher: Can the days spent accumulating the 18 hours (required to earn a Professional teaching certificate) be used to satisfy the 15 day professional development requirement for new teachers?
Response: The 18 semester hour requirement is one of several requirement established in Rule 390.1132 which qualifies an individual for the Professional Education certificate (Michigan's advanced teaching certificate). In this rule it is specified that these 18 semester hours be earned in a planned course of study (which is usually in the form of a program leading to an additional endorsement or a masters or higher degree).
In that rule use of the language:
"....professional education certificate may be issued to an applicant who presents evidence that he or she has completed all of the following requirements...," implies that the acquisition of these semester cre dits is the teacher's responsibility.
Inclusion of the following statement:
"This advanced course of study is applicable to the applicant's professional development as determined by the State Board upon recommendation of the sponsoring institution and, if appropriate, the local school district...,"
implies that both the State Board of Education and the local district, if necessary, can make a judgement about the relationship or connection between what an individual is certified/hired to teach and his or her advanced course of study. It is also important to note that the completion of the 18 semester hours in a planned program is a matter of individual choice by one who desires to retain a license to teach by acquiring the amount of credits necessary within the validity period of the Provisional/initial teaching certificate, which is 6 years. The district is under no obligation concerning this. To further simplify matters think of the 18 semester hour requirement as parallel to the diet a youngster would follow to become strong after the stage of infancy (during which the infant's
needs are anticipated and others rather than him or herself must necessarily assume responsibility for meeting them).
Speaking of infancy and nurturance, think of the novice teacher with 3 or less years of teaching experience as one in the stage of professional infancy. (Certainly we all know how different infants can be -- but they all have a critical need to be nurtured.)

Issue: The relationship between the Professional Development Plans (PDP) required in Section1526 of PA 335 and in Section 3a.(1) of the Tenure Act (Individualized Development Plan (IDP)
Response: To begin, elements of Section 1526 of PA 335 are expected to be consistent with the Tenure Act
because the 3-year new teacher induction period runs concurrently with the 4-year probation period defined in the Tenure Act. The required IDP outlines the goals and objectives which a teacher is expected to achieve for the
purpose of advancing the teacher's development as a professional, or it may be especially designed to address the remedial needs of a teacher for improved performance. Therefore, it is logical to assume that some or all of the professional activities planned for compliance with Section 1526 may serve the dual purpose of meeting the goals and objectives of the IDP.

Also regarding the IDP, it should be noted that Section 3a.(1) of the Tenure Act Adoes not require a particular method for conducting a performance evaluation or classroom observation or for providing an individualized development plan.@ This language was left open to allow districts the flexibility of determining how these functions will be conducted and managed. The important thing to remember is that the IDP and the PDP are to be completed in consultation with the teacher and should be goal/objective-based. Also, the statement that the PDP is to be consistent with Section 3a.(1) implies that commonality between the two is expected and encouraged.

The major difference between the IDP and PDP lies in the fact that the induction period outlined in Section 1526 does not address teacher evaluation. More importantly, "best practice"" supports the separation of mentoring from the evaluation process to which the IDP is linked.

Issue: The content of a good Professional Development Plan (PDP)
Response: Based on the advice of Linda Darling-Hammond, offered at the West Symposium of the Beginning Teacher Induction Network (California, September 1993), AEffective mentoring/induction activities include:
-topical and theme study groups;
-teacher research and school-based inquiries;
-interdisciplinary curriculum writing teams;
-peer observations; and
-case conferences.
In addition, the "Guidelines and Recommendations for the New Teacher Induction/Teacher Mentoring Process in Michigan" outline a variety of core experiences for the new teacher.
September 30, 1997