Brent Maddin and Rebecca Hutchinson on Reimagining One Teacher, One Classroom
Key Points
-
Team-based teaching models improve outcomes for both students and educators by fostering collaboration, flexibility, and shared responsibility.
-
Effective implementation requires system-wide support, including professional development, revised schedules, and leadership commitment to innovation.
Shownotes
In this episode of the Getting Smart Podcast, host Nate McClennen is joined by Dr. Brent Maddin of the Next Education Workforce Initiative at ASU Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College and Dr. Rebecca Hutchinson, superintendent at Concord Community Schools in Michigan. Together, they explore the transformative potential of team-based teaching models that reimagine the traditional “one teacher, one classroom” approach. From improving teacher retention and fostering collaboration to enhancing student outcomes and creating personalized learning opportunities, this conversation dives into how innovative staffing models can reshape the future of education. Listen in to hear firsthand experiences from Concord’s groundbreaking implementations and learn why now is the time to embrace team-based education.
Outline
- (00:00) Introduction and Context
- (07:18) The Next Education Workforce Initiative
- (14:33) Team-Based Staffing at Concord
- (22:07) Impact and Student Outcomes
- (36:50) Why This Time Is Different
Introduction and Context
Nate McClennen: Hello, everybody. You’re listening to the Getting Smart podcast, and I am Nate McClennen, your host for today. Today, we’re talking about classroom models and specifically about how we staff schools and classrooms around the country. The one-classroom, one-teacher model, which we all think about when we think about schooling, has existed throughout the last 100 years of formal education. We know that, and yet it cycles with these occasional glimpses of team teaching initiatives where teachers decide to work together in different formats. Specifically, in the 1950s, ‘60s, and ‘70s, there was a big push for open classroom models. If you look back in literature from that time, you’ll find that it was all the rage and what people were talking about.
Just like many other things in education, we cycle up and down through various agendas and approaches. Generally, teacher satisfaction increased with these models from the research done over those decades, and outcomes were mixed—some positive, some negative. Models continue to emerge and get evaluated. If our listeners want to know more about it, Larry Cuban had an excellent blog in 2018. We’ll put it in the show notes. It was titled Whatever Happened to Team Teaching, and it discusses team teaching and the historical context behind it.
We know that staffing is a challenge, and we locate it at Getting Smart within the learning ecosystem element of our learning innovation framework. It’s critically important and, along with scheduling, one of the hardest things to manipulate and change for the benefit of young people. We’re always intrigued by emerging models that work to budge what we think are really difficult levers in education. Today, we’re joined by some awesome people who are thinking about this deeply. We’re joined by Dr. Brent Maddin and Dr. Rebecca Hutchinson. Brent works at ASU Mary Lou Fulton and leads the Next Education Workforce initiative. He is the author of a new book called Unlocking the Potential of Team-Based Staffing with a number of co-authors. We’ll put that link in the show notes. Thank you, Brent, for sharing that. He is visually sharing that for those who are listening.
Becky is the superintendent at Concord Community School District in Michigan, an incredible district doing amazing things with innovation and especially great work in documenting what the system of learning looks like in the district, which really helps it thrive, grow, and do great things for young people. Concord Community Schools is part of the Future Learning Council network of innovative schools in Michigan. Becky, I think you just hosted a school visit this week or last week?
Rebecca Hutchinson: I did. It was last week—the largest one in the history of FLC.
Nate McClennen: Oh my gosh. How many folks visited? How many different attendees?
Rebecca Hutchinson: We had 83 attendees.
Nate McClennen: Okay, that’s a lot. Well, congratulations on that. Super excited. At Getting Smart, we partner with the Future Learning Council to work with 60 or more districts in Michigan who are really rethinking education. Concord is leading the way in that area and is also a partner with Next Education Workforce at ASU. We’re really lucky today to have both of you here to walk us through what it looks like to create a next education workforce—either on the ground at Concord or the big picture, Brent, the problem you’re trying to solve and the opportunity you see in education. So, hello to both of you. Welcome, and thank you for taking the time to join me today on this podcast.
Brent Maddin: It’s so good to be back. I love this podcast. And Becky, what a treat to be on here with you.
Rebecca Hutchinson: Oh, thank you. I’m excited to be here and talk about the work. I could talk about it forever.
Nate McClennen: Let’s start with an easy one. We’re talking about educators today. I love this question. Becky, who was your favorite teacher? And Brent, you’ll get the same question, so you get a few more minutes to prep.
Rebecca Hutchinson: My favorite teacher ever was my fifth-grade teacher. Her name was Mrs. Jackson. It was a point in my educational career where I had transitioned from one academic learning program to another, and I felt very out of place. I just didn’t feel like I fit, but she completely redesigned education. It was a totally different learning experience. We did inventor fairs, maker space activities before there was maker space, and she really did a lot to make me feel welcome and part of the class. She allowed me to explore as a student. So, she was by far my favorite.
Nate McClennen: Sounds like there’s some influence on Concord today from that experience. Is that true?
Rebecca Hutchinson: Yes, I would definitely say so.
Nate McClennen: Awesome. All right, Brent, we’ve got Mrs. Jackson. Who are you going to bring up today?
Brent Maddin: You’re not going to be surprised when I say, oh, I don’t—I’m going to break the rule here. I’m going to give you two favorite teachers lightning quick for two very different reasons. The first is Mrs. Olson, now Mrs. Chatters, who was my second-grade teacher. I grew up in rural northern Arizona—like 12 kids in my class, kind of small rural school—and she saw something in me. She was constantly looking for ways to push me in ways I didn’t even totally understand. For example, when we were all doing research on animals—this is back in the days of encyclopedias or something—most people had deer or dogs, and I had the platypus because she thought, “Oh, this kid needs something else.” I really appreciated the personalized nature she brought to this.
The second is, and rest in peace, Steve Sexton, who was a teacher educator—the person who actually taught me how to teach back in the day at a Teach for America Summer Institute. I got the luck of the draw. This consummate educator, a person who had trained with Ted and Nancy Sizer and went on to build the Lighthouse Community Charter School in Oakland, was truly amazing. Of all the people who could have been my trainer to become a new teacher, I was lucky enough to get him. He set a complete tone for me to be the educator I have grown into and aspired to be. So much of my life has been about how we don’t “Steve Sexton” ourselves into the opportunities that allow people to be great teachers. It shouldn’t be the luck of the draw that I got a particular educator like Steve Sexton. You’ll hear echoes of that throughout the day.
Nate McClennen: That’s amazing. Yeah, I think the Sizer Trilogy—was it Horace’s Hope and the others? Those are some of the earliest books I read that really made me rethink education in so many interesting ways. I don’t know how many more people read them anymore, but I think they’re amazing.
Brent Maddin: Not enough is the answer. I don’t know what the answer is, but it’s not enough.
Nate McClennen: Yeah, exactly. All right. Well, thank you both. Favorite teachers are important, and maybe at least Ms. Olson and Ms. Jackson are listening, and maybe they’ll hear our shoutout to them. So kudos to great teachers. Brent, start with the big picture. What’s your overall sense of the teaching profession? You can’t just go doom and gloom, which I know you won’t, but what’s the opportunity, and what are you seeing in the big picture before we jump down into the ground with Becky?
Brent Maddin: Oh my God. I mean, Nate, I—you know, I was totally freaking out, I think, was what I was going to start with. But I can’t be all doom and gloom. So, you know, what I would say is, emerging from the pandemic, I feel like we learned a couple of things. One, that educators don’t like to be alone. And two, they certainly want more flexibility in their jobs. I think that as I look to the horizon, we need an education profession that allows for educators to do more work collaboratively. We need a profession that allows for educators to have more flexibility to lean into their strengths.
We see declining enrollments in teacher prep programs. We see educators increasingly less likely to recommend this profession to others, whether they be aspiring teachers—even in our program at Arizona State—or to parents saying, “Hey, don’t go into the education profession.” Sixty percent of parents would not recommend their own children go into this work. As a National Board Certified Teacher myself, as a person who, when I describe my identity, I start with “teacher,” I love this work. I love this job. And we’ve got to make it a job that people can be wildly successful at. I think the way that we structure our education workforce has a large part to do with that.
Nate McClennen: Yeah, it’s super interesting—the words that you use to describe it, I just wrote down. So teachers like to not do work alone. They want to be collaborative. They want some choice, more flexibility. All these things are very resonant with personalized learning for young people, right? Which is a real target in the United States—how do we better serve all students to achieve better outcomes? It’s interesting that we actually don’t do as well around that with the educators who are teaching, even those who are teaching in personalized environments. So just a point that maybe we’ll come back to. Becky, let’s set the context. We’ve got the big picture context. Talk a little bit about your district. Do a little bragging—size, location, and learning model. What’s happening, and talk to us about Concord.
Rebecca Hutchinson: Concord is a small rural school district in south-central Michigan. We’re about 45 minutes away from Indiana and about an hour away from Ohio, directly in between Ann Arbor and Kalamazoo. So, in the middle of a cornfield—you definitely have to drive through one to get here. We have been on a transformational journey for the last nine years, really trying to figure out how to make school a worthwhile and meaningful learning experience for our students and staff.
We’ve done a lot of work. We’ve worked with Getting Smart a little bit, even before FLC, and we developed our learner profile and instructional framework. What it comes down to is we want to create the systems and conditions in which our students and staff are building the knowledge, skills, and confidence they need to fulfill their personal vision. A lot of times, I talk about it as being happy, healthy, and whole. Everything we do here should make sure that every individual in the system is happy, healthy, and whole. If it’s not, if we’re not reaching that goal, then what do we need to do differently? We’re not afraid to really assess where we’re at and look at what changes we could make to help get us to that vision.
We’re a small district, and because of that, we went through a period of time where we couldn’t get teachers to apply for open positions. That’s not unusual, but when you’re the lowest-paid district in the county, in the middle of a cornfield, and there’s no Target nearby, what’s the draw to this space? We’re in a space where, in the next three to five years, 50 to 60% of our teaching staff can retire. Knowing that and thinking about what comes next for us has been really important. How do we get to our vision, and how do we ensure the program we put in place is maintained at a high level, no matter whether I have one teacher retire or 10?
Nate McClennen: Yep. And knowing rural as well, there are times—especially for you listeners out there in suburban or urban sectors—there are times in a rural school when you’ll post something and get no applicants.
Rebecca Hutchinson: Oh my. The last three special education teaching positions I’ve posted had zero credentialed applicants.
Nate McClennen: Yeah, right. So the advantage—there are certainly advantages for learners for building an extraordinary learning system in the school. I think when you make it a great place to work at the same time, as we’re talking about with Next Ed Workforce, there’s even more attraction to that as well. Just real quick, how long have you been superintendent there, Becky?
Rebecca Hutchinson: This is my sixth year as superintendent. It’s my ninth year as a principal and my 18th year as a teacher in the district.
Nate McClennen: Oh, in the district. Okay, so you’ve been there, you’ve seen all these changes.
Rebecca Hutchinson: Yes.
Nate McClennen: Awesome. All right. So now we have context. We have a sense of the big picture and a sense of the teaching profession. Brent, thank you—you did some optimism, which I thought was good. Let’s talk about—back up to 50,000 feet. Next Education Workforce. We need a preamble for it. What was the genesis of it? How did it start? And then eventually get us down to what we might see in a partner school, which will then help us transfer back to where Becky’s at.
Shorts Content
The Next Education Workforce Initiative
Nate McClennen: You can’t just go doom and gloom, which I know you won’t, but what’s the opportunity, and what are you seeing in the big picture before we jump down into the ground with Becky?
Brent Maddin: I mean, Nate, I—you know, I was totally freaking out, I think, was what I was going to start with. But I can’t be all doom and gloom. So, you know, what I would say is, emerging from the pandemic, I feel like we learned a couple of things. One, that educators don’t like to be alone. And two, they certainly want more flexibility in their jobs. I think that as I look to the horizon, we need an education profession that allows for educators to do more work collaboratively. We need a profession that allows for educators to have more flexibility to lean into their strengths.
We see declining enrollments in teacher prep programs. We see educators increasingly less likely to recommend this profession to others, whether they be aspiring teachers—even in our program at Arizona State—or to parents saying, “Hey, don’t go into the education profession.” Sixty percent of parents would not recommend their own children go into this work. As a National Board Certified Teacher myself, as a person who, when I describe my identity, I start with “teacher,” I love this work. I love this job. And we’ve got to make it a job that people can be wildly successful at. I think the way that we structure our education workforce has a large part to do with that.
Nate McClennen: Yeah, it’s super interesting—the words that you use to describe it, I just wrote down. So teachers like to not do work alone. They want to be collaborative. They want some choice, more flexibility. All these things are very resonant with personalized learning for young people, right? Which is a real target in the United States—how do we better serve all students to achieve better outcomes? It’s interesting that we actually don’t do as well around that with the educators who are teaching, even those who are teaching in personalized environments. So just a point that maybe we’ll come back to. Becky, let’s set the context. We’ve got the big picture context. Talk a little bit about your district. Do a little bragging—size, location, and learning model. What’s happening, and talk to us about Concord.
Rebecca Hutchinson: Concord is a small rural school district in south-central Michigan. We’re about 45 minutes away from Indiana and about an hour away from Ohio, directly in between Ann Arbor and Kalamazoo. So, in the middle of a cornfield—you definitely have to drive through one to get here. We have been on a transformational journey for the last nine years, really trying to figure out how to make school a worthwhile and meaningful learning experience for our students and staff.
We’ve done a lot of work. We’ve worked with Getting Smart a little bit, even before FLC, and we developed our learner profile and instructional framework. What it comes down to is we want to create the systems and conditions in which our students and staff are building the knowledge, skills, and confidence they need to fulfill their personal vision. A lot of times, I talk about it as being happy, healthy, and whole. Everything we do here should make sure that every individual in the system is happy, healthy, and whole. If it’s not, if we’re not reaching that goal, then what do we need to do differently? We’re not afraid to really assess where we’re at and look at what changes we could make to help get us to that vision.
We’re a small district, and because of that, we went through a period of time where we couldn’t get teachers to apply for open positions. That’s not unusual, but when you’re the lowest-paid district in the county, in the middle of a cornfield, and there’s no Target nearby, what’s the draw to this space? We’re in a space where, in the next three to five years, 50 to 60% of our teaching staff can retire. Knowing that and thinking about what comes next for us has been really important. How do we get to our vision, and how do we ensure the program we put in place is maintained at a high level, no matter whether I have one teacher retire or 10?
Nate McClennen: Yep. And knowing rural as well, there are times—especially for you listeners out there in suburban or urban sectors—there are times in a rural school when you’ll post something and get no applicants.
Rebecca Hutchinson: Oh my. The last three special education teaching positions I’ve posted had zero credentialed applicants.
Nate McClennen: Yeah, right. So the advantage—there are certainly advantages for learners for building an extraordinary learning system in the school. I think when you make it a great place to work at the same time, as we’re talking about with Next Ed Workforce, there’s even more attraction to that as well. Just real quick, how long have you been superintendent there, Becky?
Rebecca Hutchinson: This is my sixth year as superintendent. It’s my ninth year as a principal and my 18th year as a teacher in the district.
Nate McClennen: Oh, in the district. Okay, so you’ve been there, you’ve seen all these changes.
Rebecca Hutchinson: Yes.
Nate McClennen: Awesome. All right. So now we have context. We have a sense of the big picture and a sense of the teaching profession. Brent, thank you—you did some optimism, which I thought was good. Let’s talk about—back up to 50,000 feet. Next Education Workforce. We need a preamble for it. What was the genesis of it? How did it start? And then eventually get us down to what we might see in a partner school, which will then help us transfer back to where Becky’s at.
Team-Based Staffing at Concord
Brent Maddin: So, for the first couple of decades of my professional career, I spent a lot of time preparing educators—both as a classroom teacher working with novice or incoming teachers and eventually helping to found something called the Relay Graduate School of Education. At Relay, we were trying to tighten the screws on teacher preparation. I thought, “If we can just get teacher prep at the right nexus of authentic and actionable, along with the right amount of theory, we’ll have something great, and people won’t leave the profession at the numbers they are.”
It turns out, though, that the reason people ultimately leave the profession isn’t because they weren’t well-prepared. It’s because of the structure of the job itself. People aren’t leaving the work; they’re leaving the working conditions. So, for the last seven or eight years at Arizona State University, we’ve been working on what we call the Next Education Workforce Initiative. This is essentially a change in the way we staff schools.
I wouldn’t want listeners to think the end goal of our work is simply to build teams of educators. Teaming is a means to a larger end. Right now, in schools, we often put a grade level or subject area at the center and then build educators around that idea. For example, we might have a third-grade PLC or a science team. But when you put students at the center and ask, “Who are the educators these students need to thrive?” the answer is never one person.
The work we do involves partnering with schools and systems across the country to build new ways of staffing schools. These models are based on teams of educators wrapping around a shared roster of students. There are three big ideas that animate this work, and I’m sure Becky will talk about them. The first is that the work has to look different depending on the community in which it’s happening. You’ve got a particular set of educators, curricular ambitions, and students, and you need to build a team that makes sense for your context.
The second big idea is that these models must lead to better outcomes for both students and educators. We’re unapologetic about focusing on both. Of course, we want great outcomes for learners, but we also need great outcomes for educators. The third piece is that transformative work often starts small—maybe with a single team of educators wrapping around a shared group of students. For example, instead of three third-grade teachers each having 20 students behind closed doors, you might have those three educators sharing 60 students.
Becky has created one of these models in partnership with her thoughtful educators and community. So, Becky, what does this work look like in Concord? What were you trying to solve for, and where are you in the process?
Rebecca Hutchinson: We were solving for two problems. First, what does our instructional and staffing design need to look like to achieve our vision for all students and staff? The one-classroom, one-teacher model wasn’t working. It was exhausting for the adults in the system. Even if you had a learner profile and were teaching into it, if you didn’t have the necessary supports or someone to brainstorm with, the system failed. The conditions were failing the adults and the students.
Second, we needed to grow our own teachers. We weren’t getting applicants, and I wanted people in our system who came up through it and fully embodied the critical attributes we’d identified. I also needed adults in the building. So, I pitched the idea of team-based staffing to our school board and teachers. Some weren’t interested, and that was fine—I said, “I’ll take the willing.”
Last year, we ended up with five teams, covering every student from second through ninth grade. Each team looked different. For example, our second- and third-grade team started slow. They weren’t sure about the model, so I suggested they try teaming for intervention. They created it, built it, and tried it. The results were incredible—students were growing 1.5 to 2 years in foundational reading. Now, everyone K-8 has some version of intervention modeled after what they tried.
We also had teams in grades four and five, six and seven, eighth grade, and ninth grade. The impact has been profound. Students responded so well that we had to expand this year to include a 10th-grade team. Every model looks a little different this year compared to last. We’re keeping what worked and adjusting what didn’t.
When we hosted a visit last week, people asked, “What does it look like?” I told them, “It’s different everywhere you go, and it’s different at any given time.” Most of our students are now experiencing some version of team-based teaching. The most impressive thing I heard from our student panel last week was, “I know the adults in this district care about me. I know my teachers know me, what I need, and how to reach me.” To me, that’s the most important thing we could ever do.
Nate McClennen: It’s amazing. With team teaching, every student has a trusted adult, which we know from research is critical. With teaming, you’re probably doubling or tripling that. Would you say that’s true, Becky?
Rebecca Hutchinson: Yes. We’re small enough that it wasn’t unusual for a student in middle school to be known by everyone. But now, the collective efficacy and conversations among educators are deeper. They’re talking about kids on a more detailed level because they know them better. This shows up when students see multiple adults throughout the day who know how they’re doing in different subjects and know their interests. It’s created a different sense of community for both kids and teachers.
Impact and Student Outcomes
Nate McClennen: It’s amazing. With team teaching, every student has a trusted adult, which we know from research is critical. With teaming, you’re probably doubling or tripling that. Would you say that’s true, Becky?
Rebecca Hutchinson: Yes. We’re small enough that it wasn’t unusual for a student in middle school to be known by everyone. But now, the collective efficacy and conversations among educators are deeper. They’re talking about kids on a more detailed level because they know them better. This shows up when students see multiple adults throughout the day who know how they’re doing in different subjects and know their interests. It’s created a different sense of community for both kids and teachers.
Curricularly, we get to do a lot of different things. Teachers get to see students in new ways because their strengths show up differently. For example, a student who might struggle in one subject could shine in another, and the team can celebrate and build on that. It’s been transformative.
Nate McClennen: I think one of the things we’ve been talking a lot about in the age of AI is this emerging superpower of connection—the ability to connect with other human beings. There’s a bigger picture here: humans like to connect with one another. Education has been increasingly isolated, whether through technology or the one-classroom, one-teacher model. There’s something powerful about the sense of community you’re building at Concord.
Thank you for sharing the on-the-ground perspective. Brent, I want to ask you a two-part question. First, what have you learned from this larger implementation? Second, how do you respond to naysayers who say, “We’ve tried this before”? Is this a different time or a different approach?
Brent Maddin: First, Becky, congratulations on the outcomes you’re seeing. It’s inspiring to hear about better outcomes for both students and educators. That’s what we’re seeing across the board—better outcomes for kids and better outcomes for educators. For example, we’ve seen first-, second-, and third-year teacher retention increase by 13 percentage points. These are the teachers most likely to leave the profession, and keeping them is critical. We’ve also seen a 9% increase in veteran teachers taking on leadership roles in these models. Some educators are even delaying retirement because they feel more energized than ever.
We’re also seeing academic gains. For example, in literacy and secondary mathematics, we’ve seen increases of 7% to 9% in Algebra I passing rates. A big quasi-experimental study with a large dataset is coming out soon, and the early results are promising. Of course, I have questions about whether we’re measuring the right things. For example, how do we capture the sense of being seen and known that Becky described? That’s harder to quantify but incredibly important.
Now, to your second question: why is this different? Why won’t this be like the team-teaching efforts of the 1960s that Larry Cuban described as a “shooting star” that disappeared? I think there are four reasons.
Why This Time Is Different
First, there are generational differences. People aren’t necessarily planning to stay in the profession for 30 years, but we’ve built an entire system assuming they will. That’s not sustainable. We need to create a profession that accommodates different career trajectories.
Second, we know more about the science of learning and development than we did in the 1960s. If we’re not using that knowledge to inform how we staff schools, that’s a missed opportunity.
Third, technology—especially AI—is changing the role of the teacher. While we need to avoid a dystopian future where everyone is plugged into devices and disconnected from each other, we can use AI to supercharge the role of the educator.
Finally, professional development has to align with these new models. Educators need time to collaborate and plan. Teaming doesn’t happen automatically. You can’t just put adults in a room and say, “Work together.” You need to create the time and space for trust and vulnerability to develop. Teams also need a clear answer to the question, “What can we do together that we couldn’t do alone?” If you don’t have a compelling answer to that, you shouldn’t be doing this.
Nate McClennen: It feels like a sports coaching analogy. You can’t have 11 individual players on a soccer field without thinking about what they can do better as a team. Becky, let’s close with you. What’s the first step a system should take if they’re interested in this work? And what’s next for Concord?
Rebecca Hutchinson: The first step is to think about how you’ll change your system to accommodate a new model. You need strong systems and professional learning to support this work. You can’t just assume teachers will figure it out on their own. You also need to honor their time. Teachers can’t do this within their traditional schedules. You have to provide additional time, compensation, or support.
As for Concord, we’re focused on ongoing professional learning to enhance our models. We know the elements that work, but how do we take it to the next level? How do we ensure our teams continue to grow stronger and better? It’s all about iteration and making sure everyone—students and staff—is happy, healthy, and whole.
Nate McClennen: That’s a great way to frame it. Brent, what’s next for the Next Education Workforce?
Brent Maddin: We’re working with 85 schools right now, but there are 14,000 school districts in the U.S. There’s so much more to do. Michigan is a great example of a state investing in teacher pipelines and retention. More states should follow their lead. We’re also focused on creating opportunities for schools to explore these models, whether through site visits, virtual visits, or professional development. The goal is to create the conditions for early adopters to take risks and do something better—not just different—for educators and students.
Nate McClennen: Becky, Brent, thank you so much for your time today. This has been an incredible conversation. I know our listeners will find it valuable. Thank you both.
Brent Maddin: Thanks, Nate. It’s always great to be here. Becky, it was a pleasure.
Rebecca Hutchinson: Thank you. It was a joy.
Guest Bio
Brent Maddin
As Executive Director of the Next Education Workforce, Brent collaborates with colleagues across Arizona State University, P12 educators and the community to redesign models of schooling based on teams of educators with distributed expertise who are better able to deliver on the promise of deeper and personalized learning for ALL students. Additionally, these team-based models help address many of the reasons educators leave the profession by creating more equitable and sustainable ways to enter and advance in the profession. Prior to coming to ASU, Brent was a co-founder and Provost at the Relay Graduate School of Education, where he set the curricular vision for the institution and managed teams focused on curriculum design, institutional research and programmatic innovation. While at Relay, Brent also founded TeacherSquared, a national center dedicated to increasing collaboration among teacher preparation institutions. Prior to helping launch TeacherSquared and Relay, Brent earned a doctorate from the Harvard Graduate School of Education, served as a founding staff member at IDEA College Prep and was a National Board Certified Teacher in secondary science.
Rebecca Hutchinson
Rebecca Hutchinson is the Superintendent of Concord Community Schools, where she leads with a focus on collaboration, student achievement, and community engagement. Beginning her career as a 5th grade teacher in Reed City, Michigan, she later taught science and coached robotics at Concord Middle School before becoming principal of Concord Elementary and Middle School in 2016. Under her leadership, student mastery scores have steadily risen each year. Hutchinson holds degrees from Grand Valley State University and the University of Michigan–Flint, and lives in Concord with her husband, Eric, and their two children.
Links
0 Comments
Leave a Comment
Your email address will not be published. All fields are required.