Following an established REL Northeast & Islands research protocol, we conducted a search for recent research on the recruitment of teacher candidates of color into educator preparation programs. We focused on identifying resources that specifically addressed research on best practices in the recruitment of teacher candidates of color into educator preparation programs. The sources searched included ERIC and other federally funded databases and organizations, academic research databases, and general Internet search engines (For details, please see the methods section at the end of this memo.)

We have not evaluated the quality of references and the resources provided in this response and we offer them only for your reference. Because our search for references is based on the most commonly used resources of research, it is not comprehensive and other relevant references and resources may exist.

Research References

1. Goings, R. B., Walker, L. J., & Cotignola-Pickens, H. (2018). School and District Leaders’ Role in Diversifying the Teacher Workforce. Educational Planning, 25(3), 7-17.
   https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1207943
   From the abstract: “Diversifying the teaching profession has garnered attention from researchers, policy makers, and educational stakeholders. However, missing within this conversation is the role of school and district leaders in diversifying the teaching profession. We argue that without considering school and district leaders, diversity initiatives will not have a long-term systemic impact. Thus, this article fills in a gap in the literature on this topic. First, we provide a brief overview of the current racial and ethnic demographics of the teaching workforce and student population and discuss the barriers to recruiting and retaining a diverse teacher workforce. Second, we highlight the factors that have been found to influence the recruitment and retention of racial diversity of teachers at the pre-service and in-service levels. Lastly, we provide recommendations for school-based and district leaders on how they should plan for diversifying their teacher workforce.”
2. Irizarry, J. G. (2007). “Home-growing” Teachers of Color: Lessons Learned from a Town-Gown Partnership. Teacher Education Quarterly, 34(4), 87-102.
   https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ795190
   From the abstract: “Many institutions that prepare teachers profess a commitment to issues of diversity and educational equity in their mission and vision statements. However, despite the fact that the enrollment of students of color in institutions of higher education has increased by 48% over the last ten years, the racial/ethnic composition of teacher preparation programs has changed relatively little. Although teacher preparation programs have had a larger pool of students of color from which to recruit, they have not been successful in attracting more students of color into the profession through traditional preservice pathways. If diversifying the teaching force is a goal from which people of color as well as Whites benefit, then the active recruitment of people of color into the profession should be part of the work of teacher preparation programs and district-based teacher recruitment efforts. As such, colleges and schools of education need to develop new approaches aimed at improving the recruitment, retention, and preparation of teachers of color. This article explores the challenges associated with diversifying the teaching force through preservice teacher education programs and forwards "homegrowing"--that is, recruiting individuals to work as educators in the communities in which they were raised and educated--as one strategy to do so. It highlights Project TEACH, a town-gown partnership between an institution of higher education and a local community, examining features of the program that were identified by participants as influential to their successful transition into the teaching profession.”
3. Ukpokodu, O. N. (2017). Faculty Teaching Perspectives about an Urban-Focused Teacher Education Program. Journal of Urban Learning, Teaching, & Research, 13, 161-173.
   https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1149881
   From the abstract: “This qualitative study investigates the perspectives of faculty teaching engagement in a uniquely designed, collaborative urban-focused teacher education program. The study analyzes interviews conducted with seven participating faculty from both the School of Education and the College of Arts and Sciences in an urban university. The findings reveal critical perspectives including personal and professional transformation and purpose-driven teaching, awareness of the depth of substandard education in urban schools, learning to empathize, embracing culturally responsive and social justice teaching, valuing diverse teacher candidates' cultural assets, and appreciation of cross-unit collaboration. The paper concludes by discussing critical implications for rethinking teacher education for diversity.”
4. Waddell, J. & Ukpokodu, O. N. (2012). Recruiting & Preparing Diverse Urban Teachers: One Urban-Focused Teacher Education Program Breaks New Ground. Multicultural Education, 20(1), 15-22.
   https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1014823
   From the abstract: “This article explores a university's Urban Teacher Education Program (UTEP) and its success not just in recruiting, preparing, retaining, and graduating its students, but in likewise leading to employment and retention as teachers in urban schools. It focuses on critical aspects of the program, including recruitment of diverse candidates, specifically for urban schools; collaborative partnerships; student support and mentorship; curriculum conceptualized for social justice and multicultural education; extended field experiences in urban schools and communities; and induction for program graduates. It also describes the program's context and its basic features, including the recruitment process and programmatic innovations, and offers an analysis of the assessment of the program's impact and sustainability.”
5. Wong, P. L., Murai, H., Berta-Avila, M., Williams-White, L., Baker, S., et al. (2007). The M/M Center: Meeting the Demand for Multicultural, Multilingual Teacher Preparation. Teacher Education Quarterly, 34(4), 9-25.
   https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ795183
   From the abstract: “The Multilingual/Multicultural Teacher Preparation Center (M/M Center), a teacher preparation program offered by the Bilingual/Multicultural Education Department (BMED) at California State University, Sacramento, is entering its third decade of operation. The M/M Center was established by a group of progressive teacher educators, most with a history of activism and advocacy around democratic education, immigrant rights, and the elimination of racism and other forms of discrimination in local schools and our own university. The Center founders developed a comprehensive program to prepare teachers to be change agents actively working towards social justice in low-income and culturally and linguistically diverse classrooms, schools, and communities. Race-conscious and language-conscious policy-making and program development characterize the program's history and current operations. Multicultural content and the application of theory into practice through extensive field experiences in schools serving low-income and culturally and linguistically diverse students anchor the program's design. Focus on these issues combined with active and strategic recruiting and support make the M/M Center an attractive option for students of color and bilingual students who typically select the teaching profession as the avenue through which they will work towards social justice for the children in their communities. By sharing details and analysis of the M/M Center, the authors hope to engage other social justice educators in critical reflection on effective practices in multicultural/multilingual teacher recruitment to and retention in teacher preparation programs. This article is organized as follows: (a) the theoretical framework that orients the authors' efforts to recruit and retain students of color and bilingual students; (b) history of the M/M Center; (c) highlights from their multiple and single subject programs; and (d) reflections on the M/M Center's accomplishments. It describes the M/M Center based on the experiences and perspectives of the authors--one of whom was a co-founding member of the M/M Center and of BMED, and others who have been active in recent transformations of the Center and Department. Where appropriate, they accentuate their description with data from a limited set of sources including graduate exit surveys, student work, student interviews, and anecdotal stories and accounts.”

Methods

Keywords and Search Strings

The following keywords and search strings were used to search the reference databases and other sources:

Educator program + person of color/diversity/diversifying/minority groups + recruitment

Diversity + recruitment + teacher program

Alternative educator program/certificate recruitment

Successful recruitment + educator program

Multi cultural + teacher educator programs + recruitment

Databases and Resources

We searched ERIC for relevant resources. ERIC is a free online library of over 1.6 million citations of education research sponsored by the Institute of Education Sciences. Additionally, we searched Google Scholar and What Works Clearninghouse

Reference Search and Selection Criteria

When we were searching and reviewing resources, we considered the following criteria:

Date of the publication: References and resources published for last 22 years, from 1997 to present, were included in the search and review.

Search Priorities of Reference Sources: Search priority is given to study reports, briefs, and other documents that are published and/or reviewed by IES and other federal or federally funded organizations, academic databases, including WWC, ERIC, and NCEE.

Methodology: The following methodological priorities/considerations were given in the review and selection of the references: (a) study types – randomized control trials, quasi experiments, surveys, descriptive data analyses, literature reviews, policy briefs, etc., generally in this order; (b) target population, samples (representativeness of the target population, sample size, volunteered or randomly selected, etc.), study duration, etc.; (c) limitations, generalizability of the findings and conclusions, etc.