This study addressed whether prior successes with educational interventions grounded in the theory of successful intelligence could be replicated on a larger scale as the primary basis for instruction in language arts, mathematics, and science. A total of 7,702 4th-grade students in the United States, drawn from 223 elementary school classrooms in 113 schools in 35 towns (14 school districts) located in 9 states, participated in the program. Students were assigned, by classroom, to receive units of instruction that were based either upon the theory of successful intelligence (SI; analytical, creative, and practical instruction) or upon teaching as usual (weak control), memory instruction (strong control), or critical-thinking instruction (strong control). The amount of instruction was the same across groups. In the 23 comparisons across 10 content units in 3 academic domains, there were only a small number of instances in which students in the SI instructional groups generally performed statistically better than students in other conditions. There were even fewer instances where the different control conditions outperformed the SI students. Implications for the future of SI theory and the scalability of research efforts in general are discussed.Throughout the first decade of the 21st century, educational re searchers and policymakers have placed an increased emphasis on the twin goals of (a) using experimental designs to evaluate educational interventions and (b) gaining a greater understanding of the issues related to the scalability of educational interventions. The value placed on interventions that have been experimentally tested is high lighted by repositories such as the U.S. Department of Education's "What Works" clearinghouse (http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/). Projects related to issues of scalability were funded by the Department of Education in the early to mid-2000s, and the results of these projects This article was published O nline First April 7, 2014. R obert J. S ternberg, D epartm ent o f H um an D evelopm ent, Cornell U niversity; L in d a Jarvin, Paris C ollege o f Art; D am ian P. B irney, S chool o f Psychology, U niversity o f S ydney; A dam N aples, C hild D evelopm ent C enter, Y ale U niversity; Steven E. S tem ler, D epartm ent o f Psychology, W esleyan U niversity; T ina N ew m an, C enter fo r C h il dren W ith S pecial N eeds, G lastonbury, C onnecticut; R enate O tterbach, D epartm ent o f G eneral E ducation, U niversity o f San F rancisco; C aro lyn P arish, SRA In ternational, Fairfax, V irginia; Judy R andi, D epart m ent o f E ducation, U niversity o f N ew H aven; E lena L. G rigorenko, C hild S tudy C enter and D epartm ent o f P sychology, Y ale U niversity.

This article describes and compares the preparation experiences of the 25 exemplar elementary, secondary English, and math teachers entering teaching through college-based (CB) programs or the New Jersey Teacher Education Project, one of the nation's first alternative routes (AR) to certification. The article then follows these teachers into their first experience “on the other side of the desk.” For CB candidates, their initial foray into teaching occurred in a classroom “borrowed” from a mentor teacher, who worked side by side with the novice. For AR candidates immediately assigned to a classroom of their own, the initial placement extended throughout the school year, and mentors were at times difficult to find. The article continues to follow these novice teachers through their first six years and presents data on those who remained in their initial placement setting and those who chose to leave teaching or move on to a new school. The article highlights the challenges novice teachers face when teachers’ preparation and expectations are mismatched with school culture and work assignments.

This article follows the 25 exemplar elementary, secondary English, and math teachers prepared in New Jersey's alternate route program (AR) or college-based programs (CB) through their 11th year. The article examines retention and attrition patterns, including moving from school to school or to education-related positions outside of K–12 classroom settings. The article presents data on teachers’ reasons for staying or leaving, including their career aspirations. The article concludes with a discussion of the findings and the implications for teacher education.

Findings from a longitudinal survey, interview, and observational study of an early cohort of New Jersey elementary, secondary English, and secondary math teachers participating in a first-generation state alternate route initiative to address issues of supply, quality, and diversity in the teaching pool are discussed. The article explores emerging themes common to the literature on alternate routes and unique contributions of this study in relation to the recruitment, preparation, placement, and retention of teachers prepared in college-based and alternate route programs. The article ends with implications of what has been learned and still needs to be learned about different approaches in the face of the continued need for highly qualified teachers and in light of the contrasting policy agendas surrounding teacher education. Rather than the “horse-race” mentality that dominated earlier debate of alternate route vs. college-based teacher education programs, a more constructive frame considers the short term and long term trade-offs (e.g., recruitment vs. preparation, recruitment vs. retention) that arose from New Jersey's early implementation of an alternate route program.

This article reviews survey findings about the recruitment, preparation, placement and retention of 315 elementary, secondary English, and math teachers prepared to enter New Jersey public schools in fall 1987, either having just completed New Jersey college-based education programs (CB) or entering through the New Jersey alternate route (AR) program. Teachers were surveyed through their sixth year of teaching. The AR program increased the number of teachers for urban and rural schools and diversified the teaching pool. AR teachers held more traditional views than those prepared in CB programs, but neither program recruited teachers with a consistently higher quality profile. Programmatic aspects (i.e., fusing of AR recruitment, preparation, and placement phases) correlated with some differing attitudes of teachers toward teaching and their programs, and qualitatively different experiences in preparing to teach. During the first two years, AR teachers were more likely to teach in urban schools, but differences diminished over the next four years. Three-year retention rates were highest for elementary and CB math teachers and lowest for AR math teachers. Six-year retention rates were highest for CB math teachers and lowest for AR math and English teachers. AR retention rates were higher for males, while CB retention rates were higher for minorities. Attitudes related to retention indicate program, subject matter, and elementary/secondary differences.