The Collective Impact in ‘Creating’ a Teacher-Lessons Learned from Participation in a Grow-Your-Own Initiative

Abstract

Teachers are critical to the success of students, and when school districts struggle to fill vacant positions with highly qualified teachers, student success suffers. To mitigate the problems that persist with ongoing teacher shortages, we are at a critical juncture that calls for strategies that support districts in overcoming these shortfalls through reflective practice and inquiry in sustaining and scaling collaborative efforts through school and university partnerships. This paper discusses lessons learned during the first year of a ‘Grow-Your-Own’ collaborative partnership between a school district and a university educator preparation program. Reflections and lessons learned for continuous improvement are shared, related to student recruitment, enrollment, and retention.

1. Introduction

The United States is experiencing a certified teacher shortage for the most difficult-to-fill positions, including special education, general education (elementary), foreign languages, and science [1,2,3], particularly in schools that serve more students of color and students who are from low-income backgrounds [4]. Of teachers who entered the PK-12 workforce, 80% identified as White, even though the diversity of students in classrooms continues to rise—with half of students identifying as Black, Hispanic, or Asian American Pacific Islander, only a quarter of teachers identify in the same way [5,6]. In addition, approximately 365,000 teachers were placed in teaching assignments who were not fully certified, with an additional 41,920 positions that were unfilled across the U.S. [7]. Educator preparation program (EPP) enrollment has also declined over the past five years, with twenty-seven states showing declines of 5% or more and seven states with flat enrollment numbers [7,8,9].

These national trends are particularly evident in Texas, where the challenges of teacher shortages are intensified by unique state circumstances (e.g., growing bilingual student population, politicized school curriculum changes). Texas faces a mounting crisis in early childhood education staffing, driven by multiple converging factors. According to enrollment projections for Texas public schools, student enrollment is expected to continue growing between fall 2024 and fall 2027, contributing to an overall projected increase of 13.6% from fall 2015 to fall 2027, when enrollment is expected to reach approximately 6 million students [10]. The state’s rapid population growth is colliding with a troubling decline in the teacher pipeline, where the number of newly certified teachers has shifted dramatically over the past decade, with intern-certified new hires (those coming from alternative certification or post-baccalaureate programs) decreasing from 11,807 (28.06% of new hires) in 2014–2015 to 4910 (9.98% of new hires) in 2023–2024. During this same period, the proportion of new hires entering with no Texas certification or permit has risen substantially from 6.84% to 33.75% of all new hires, while overall teacher attrition has increased from 10.31% to 12.17% [11]. This shortage is further compounded by ongoing teacher retirements and continued COVID-19-related attrition.

The situation has become more urgent due to Texas House Bill 3 (HB 3, 2019), which mandated full-day, high-quality prekindergarten for eligible four-year-olds across all districts by 2023, a mandate that remains partially unfulfilled in both meeting the quantity of classrooms needed as well as the quality of teacher expertise. This expansion requires more school districts to maintain the required 11:1 student–teacher ratio in Pre-K classrooms (compared to 22:1 in higher grades), along with paraprofessional teaching assistants. Previously, the state’s Pre-K programs had long waiting lists for qualified students from low-income families or those with disabilities; now, districts must accommodate all eligible children. While Texas serves the largest number of children in state-funded preschool nationally, significant quality challenges remain. During the 2022–2023 school year, the Texas Public School Pre-K Program served 243,592 children, reaching 52% of 4-year-olds and 11% of 3-year-olds, yet met only 4 of 10 research-based quality standard benchmarks recommended by NIEER, which included the Early Learning & Development Standards Benchmark, Teacher Degree Benchmark, Teacher Specialized Training Benchmark, and Screening & Referral Benchmark [12].

It is without question that teachers are critical to the success of students, and when districts struggle to fill vacant positions with highly qualified teachers, student success suffers [1,2]. To mitigate the problems that persist with ongoing teacher shortages, we are at a critical juncture that calls for strategies that support districts in overcoming these shortfalls through reflective practice and inquiry in sustaining and scaling impact efforts through school and university partnerships.

2. Empowering the Paraprofessional

Paraprofessionals (also commonly referred to as teaching assistants, instructional aids, or paraeducators) perform a variety of roles in the classroom. Their daily duties may include small group instruction with students, assisting with classroom behavior management, and preparing classroom activities [13] that aid in providing classroom teachers additional time to support differentiated instruction. Paraprofessionals often work with students who need varied academic support such as students with disabilities and/or culturally and linguistically diverse students [14,15] and assist in accommodating the various linguistic backgrounds of students they support, helping children transition into school settings and translating with parents/families [16]. For example, multilingual paraeducators can provide information to students in multiple languages, which is extremely important when communicating with families as they can explain academic concepts and strategic areas of educational practice and share common, lived experiences [17,18,19]. Not only are these assets critical to the overall educational progress of culturally and linguistically diverse students in today’s classrooms, but they can also help mitigate critical teacher shortages in areas of most need if paraprofessionals have opportunities to obtain their degrees and become certified teachers of record.

Racially, ethnically, and linguistically diverse paraeducators have been an untapped resource in mitigating teaching vacancies due to systemic barriers such as financial constraints, limited access to teacher preparation programs, and a lack of institutional support [20]. Research has identified that there are significant benefits when diverse students have teachers who reflect their diverse backgrounds such as an increased sense of belonging and self-awareness, heightened cultural competence and understanding, and overall improvement in social skills [21]. With approximately 100,000 paraprofessionals employed in schools across the United States [22], school districts can leverage this existing employee pool by finding pathways that remove barriers in becoming a certified teacher so that they can then be employed as full-time teachers in the district upon program completion.

Grow Your Own Initiatives

Grow-Your-Own (GYO) initiatives have gained popularity in recent years for strategizing and filling district teaching vacancies and amplifying the diversity of the teaching workforce. GYO models may differ from state to state, with their focus on recruiting high school students, paraprofessionals, community members, noncertified school staff, or substitute teachers; however, the premise of a GYO program is often a collaborative partnership between school districts and EPPs that focus on addressing teacher shortages and who work together to remove ‘barriers’ to degree completion (e.g., the cost of tuition, certification test costs, and a lack of mentorship), which can result in a less diverse representation of employed as teachers [1]. GYO programs often utilize a focused approach on recruiting and retaining existing employees from the local district and/or community, like those who are currently employed in a school district (i.e., paraprofessionals) or engaging with community colleges (i.e., transfer students with a completed associates degree) or state education agencies (i.e., providing grants to local education agencies or EPPs to create and implement teacher apprenticeship programs) [23,24]. The variation in GYO programs is a key facet of their success, as they focus on the specific needs of the school and communities which they serve.

3. Methodology

This self-study focused on three main research questions: (1) What recruitment strategies were most effective in identifying and attracting candidates from the partner school districts to the Grow-Your-Own pathway? (2) What systemic barriers did candidates experience during the Grow-Your-Own pathway? (3) What supports contribute to candidate persistence or attrition and how are they addressed within the program design?

3.1. Research Design

This study employed a qualitative self-study methodology that critically examined the systems, processes, and structures within our GYO teacher preparation pathway in collaboration with our partner school district. Self-study was well-suited to the investigation of professional practice and allowed the researchers to explore questions of equity, collaboration, and institutional change within authentic contexts. We engaged in a cyclical process of reflection, documentation, analysis, and revision to better understand how the GYO model supported diverse, aspiring educators and aligned with systemic goals in educator preparation.

3.2. Research Setting and Participants

The GYO pathway examined in this study was situated within a public university in the southern region of the United States, in collaboration with a large urban district in the southern region of the United States. The program was designed to recruit and prepare paraprofessionals, community members, and other non-traditional candidates from historically underrepresented communities to become certified teachers in high-need areas, who were employed at the school district. Purposive sampling was used to include school district staff, educator preparation program staff, institutional leadership, and stakeholder voices through focus groups and document review to triangulate perspectives.

3.3. Data Sources and Collection

To capture the complexity of the varied systems and processes as a student entering the GYO pathway, we utilized multiple data sources: (1) Meeting Artifacts and Planning Documents: Agendas, notes, and communications from related GYO meetings, planning sessions, and partner communications were collected to analyze programmatic systems. (2) Semi-Structured Interviews: Interviews were conducted with institutional partners (e.g., district liaisons, program staff) to understand their perceptions of coordination, accountability, and systemic alignment. (3) Participant Feedback: Conversations with GYO candidates were carried out (e.g., via phone, Zoom, or email) to capture their experiences navigating program structures, support systems, and field-based learning.

4. Collaborative Planning

The authors invested in the initiation of a Grow-Your-Own program at their university, located in the southern part of the United States, through a request for proposal from an urban school district. The proposal aimed at supporting paraprofessionals within the district to earn degrees and certifications as teachers of record and required universities to identify a ‘plan’ that proposed specific teacher preparation programs/certification area (s) and explicit support that would be provided while students completed the program. Our application focused on the preparation of certified Pre-K-3 teachers who could select a dual certification in either English as a second language (ESL), bilingual education, or special education.

Upon notification of funding, we began immediate collaboration with the school district to ensure that thoughtful consideration was given to the recruitment, enrollment, and retention processes, as those factors are critical to the overall success of any student entering an institution of higher education [25]. To ensure a strategic and reflexive partnership process between the university EPP and the school district, we determined that supporting students through a collaborative ‘wraparound’ approach was essential throughout the recruitment, enrollment, and retention processes. A wraparound approach approaches these processes holistically, keeping student experience at the forefront, in tandem with potential barriers, so that explicit supports that would best serve students are put in place in the GYO program, as they are intended to support the individualized needs of students by people in a variety of different roles. Equity-minded approaches, practices that focus on addressing systemic inequities and ensure equal access to opportunities, should be encouraged by institutional culture to reflect on, examine, and adjust practices, which can foster positive changes in interactions with students both in and outside the classroom [26,27]. Therefore, we remained cognizant of the importance in understanding the needs of the school district, the students it served, and the needs of the participants in the GYO program. We also kept the end goal in mind (e.g., successful graduates of our program) to strategize how the recruitment, enrollment, and retention phases of the student’s academic journey would need to be supported through wraparound supports through a reflexive process (Figure 1).

To begin the reflexive and collaborative planning process, we gathered information on what was already known about existing structures related to recruitment, enrollment, and retention at the university and school district levels. Then, we identified any potential barriers that GYO students may encounter in those areas. Finally, we made deliberate changes to processes to mitigate potential barriers and that would intentionally underpin the wraparound support as the program began.

4.1. Recruitment

In the initial information gathering phase related to recruitment efforts, we collaboratively identified that current recruitment structures were inclusive of in-person recruitment fairs that were often held during work hours, were not specifically personalized to subpopulations within schools (i.e., paraprofessionals), and were often inclusive of existing degree pathways (i.e., non-GYO options and information). Strategizing on the information we discovered, changes that needed to be made to recruitment efforts included the location, time, and availability of sessions. We also identified that, during recruitment sessions, it was vital that both the school district and university EPP were present so that the GYO students recognized the collaborative efforts between both entities. Lastly, because of specific requirements of the GYO initiative, it was important that screening of potential GYO candidates was conducted up front to determine their eligibility in the program so that they could move to the application process. Areas of improvement discovered in this step identified the need for increased wraparound supports [25] such as tracking of missing application items once the application process is started (i.e., missing transcripts or financial aid information of incoming GYO students) and the need to personalize this process with consistent information and communication. Strategies to mitigate areas of improvement specific to recruitment will be discussed in the following sections.

4.2. Enrollment

Advising students toward success at the university level often solely focuses on academic advising alone, which can greatly hinder student retention rates [28]. The Hunt Institute [28] suggested that with incoming transfer students into a GYO program, other types of support should be provided in a ‘wraparound’ context to ensure that a student’s full range of needs is addressed, which can include but is also not limited to competing priorities (e.g., work/school balance, child care, mental health, sense of belonging), financial burdens (e.g., housing, transportation, daily living), and navigating higher education processes (e.g., application and financial aid processes). As information was gathered on the existing structures related to enrollment and advising processes at the university, identified potential barriers for incoming GYO students included the depersonalized aspect of the application process (e.g., the university admissions and financial office not knowing if the applicant is a GYO student), ensuring that advisors (university and EPP) understood the district’s requested timeline of completion for the GYO program to effectively advise students into coursework and build out a complete program plan for district and student transparency. These identified barriers allowed us to better understand that a streamlined communication process would need to be established with the university and EPP admission offices, the financial aid office, education program advisors, and the school district in addition to supporting the individualized needs of the GYO students. Strategies to mitigate areas of improvement specific to enrollment will be discussed in the following sections.

4.3. Retention

Students face challenges not only due to gaps in college readiness but also because they often lack the necessary support and resources to fully engage with their college studies [29]. Retention information was gathered by looking at undergraduate transfer student retention data from the previous academic year, as the incoming GYO students all had some college credit or had acquired an associate’s degree at a community college. We realized holistic university data existed; however, department and program specific data (i.e., teacher education—ESL, bilingual, and special education) was not readily available. This information allowed us to identify the need to better understand explicit retention data from each of our educator preparation pathways and change the way in which data was reported, analyzed, and strategized at the EPP level. We also needed to better understand how the school district would strategically provide support in tandem with the EPP. Lastly, we needed to amplify advising practices at all levels (e.g., university, EPP, and school district) to ensure that GYO students felt supported and had consistent and accurate communication throughout their degree completion. Strategies to mitigate areas of improvement specific to retention will be discussed in the following sections.

5. Data Analysis

Data was analyzed using an inductive thematic analysis approach that allowed us to identify recurring patterns and themes that emerged organically from the data rather than being pre-imposed by existing theoretical frameworks. This approach allowed for a nuanced understanding of the ways that institutional practices and decisions intersected with student and district GYO leadership and program outcomes. The analytic process began with a thorough reading of all data sources, followed by initial coding that remained close to the language of involvement of individuals in the GYO program. As coding progressed, a constant comparative method examined how institutional practices and decisions intersected with participant experiences and program outcomes, which allowed the refinement of codes and the clustering of similar codes into emergent themes/categories. Throughout this process, memos were written to document preliminary interpretations and to ensure reflexivity rather than preconceived notions. Triangulation of data sources enhanced the trustworthiness and credibility of findings to confirm patterns that provided a more comprehensive view of the GYO program implementation.

Trustworthiness

To ensure rigor in the self-study process, we incorporated critical friend reviews by inviting external colleagues to question interpretations and provide feedback. Member checking was used to validate interview data, and an audit trail was maintained to document analytic decisions, reflections, and methodological adaptations.

6. Findings

The self-study process allowed the researchers to better understand how the school district and university GYO partnership could leverage collective resources and expertise to enhance student achievement and engagement. Through a collaborative process, targeted wraparound supports were identified and implemented to enhance student recruitment, enrollment, and retention, as these are three key factors in ensuring that students successfully complete their program of study. These initiatives were implemented through coordinated supports, including dedicated advising staff, technology platforms for program access, and the establishment of a textbook lending library where students borrowed required course materials each semester, ensuring continuous access to essential learning resources throughout their program. A key feature of the program was “Success Saturdays,” which provided focused professional development for GYO students. These sessions aimed to develop best practices through a Developmentally Appropriate Practice Framework, offering coordinated learning opportunities within the GYO program. Students engaged directly with content experts and mentors, gaining practical insights while building a face-to-face community that complemented their online learning experience.

6.1. Recruitment

The recruitment process was a critical piece of this specific GYO process, as it allowed the district to recruit their targeted population, which were currently employed paraprofessionals. Together, the university and the school district identified minimum qualification requirements to participate in the GYO program that included a minimum GPA of 2.7, current employment within the district, and an Associate of Arts degree or attendance at ‘some college’ with at least 60 obtained college credit hours. Exclusionary factors, decided by the district, included individuals who already held a bachelor’s or graduate degree or would be a first-time college student.

Because the location of the GYO school district was approximately 300 miles from the main campus of the university, consideration was given on the location and frequency of recruitment opportunities. It was important to the EPP and school district to create a face-to-face presence with potential students, so we worked together to create strategic marketing materials in tandem with online and in-person recruitment sessions, so that interested individuals could gain more information about the program. During the reflexive planning process, it was realized that the location, time, and availability of recruitment sessions would need to be modified from what was currently in place so that potential candidates could attend the information sessions, as almost all were employed full-time. Therefore, various Zoom information sessions were planned during after-work hours to accommodate additional availability, in addition to evening and weekend in-person information sessions, which were held at a centralized location in the school district. Additionally, in-person student interactions and inquiries via email or phone calls identified that they needed additional instruction on the enrollment processes, which indicated refinement of the collaborative wraparound supports that the university and school districts utilized [25,26,27].

It was important to the EPP and school district that we streamlined processes and used the same language to avoid confusion and to ensure that interested students were receiving the most accurate and consistent information. Each recruitment information session collaboratively explained the GYO program, with the university and school district personnel creating and presenting the information together. Following the information sessions, interested individuals completed a district screening questionnaire that provided information about their previous college credits, GPA, and unofficial transcripts. This information was reviewed in tandem with university education advisors to ensure that the minimum GYO qualifications were met prior to the participant starting the application process at the university. If potential applicants were found eligible for participation in the GYO program, they were referred to a university education advisor to initiate the university application process. This step of the process allowed the university to connect with applicants individually and assist them in working the application process, track required application documents (e.g., official transcripts), and then work with an academic advisor upon acceptance into the university so that the enrollment process could begin (see Figure 2).

6.2. Enrollment

Once students reached the enrollment process, the university and district were highly aware of the continued, streamlined communication process that needed to occur, based on the initial introspective analysis of existing processes and procedures. We realized that when students apply to the university, they are not typically tracked throughout the process to ensure that they are aware of missing application documents, what to do after admission to the university, etc. Therefore, we assigned a designated GYO contact person at the university to follow each GYO applicant and ensure that this explicit communication occurred until each application was complete. A running list of applicants was created and communicated to multiple stakeholders (i.e., university admissions office, school district, education advisors), so all were aware of ‘who’ to look for and process in a more expedient manner and to track the status of each applicant.

Once the application materials were processed and the GYO students met the university admissions criteria, they were accepted to the university (N = 14 Hispanic students across one academic year; fall and spring semesters). Next, they were ‘handed over’ to both a program faculty advisor and an EPP advisor so that their program plan could be built in collaboration with the requirements of the GYO program (e.g., 12–15 credits per semester). This was a newly improved strategy, as typical students entering the EPP did not have as explicit of a 1:1 advisership (see Figure 3).

The students, once accepted, began the program, which had a comprehensive focus on early literacy development for children ages 3–5 years old, preparing teachers for PreK- 3 instruction. The curriculum exceeded the minimum state requirement of 15 semester credit hours for PreK-3 teacher certification, offering a robust program rather than the “add-on” approach. The major coursework delivery structure had been designed as a modified “hybrid flexible” or “HyFlex” delivery structure to prepare students in methodical and pedagogical practices in early childhood education and early literacy. HyFlex supports a teaching model that combines face-to-face and online learning, offering students flexibility in how they participate in a course, whether it be in person or remotely. The HyFlex nature of the delivery structure denoted an understanding of the GYO learners’ multi-faceted lives and life/work demands and supported these with a flexible learning environment.

Course delivery was strategically structured in two formats:

• ECE Methods Courses:
  • Taught in synchronous 7-week sessions in the evening;
  • Paired with complementary methods courses in the same semester;
  • The second 7-week course builds on content from the first 7 weeks for deeper, accelerated learning.
• Literacy Methods Courses (READ):
  • Delivered in 15-week synchronous HyFlex sessions in the evening;
  • Simultaneous instruction for face-to-face and distance learners;
  • Extended format accommodates field experiences;
  • Focused preparation for Science of Teaching Reading certification exam.
• The course sequence progresses through
  • Core ECE development courses;
  • Early literacy methodology and assessment;
  • Practical teaching applications and field experiences;
  • Science of Teaching Reading certification preparation.

The program learning outcomes emphasized comprehensive preparation for a thorough understanding of ECE development, examining physical, cognitive, social, linguistic, and cultural domains that influence young learners and fine tune the processes of early literacy development while building expertise in implementing effective observation and assessment techniques. Additionally, students learned to design and implement research-based instructional strategies and create appropriate learning environments that supported diverse young learners. This course format and curriculum structure provided flexibility for students to teach in various settings (public, private, charter schools, and early learning centers) while offering optional elective tracks for additional certifications including special education and bilingual education.

The continuous improvement of the enrollment process became more streamlined as new systems and processes were created at the university and program levels for the GYO students (e.g., university applications, advising). Additionally, the degree program plans, course design, and course sequencing reflected the format that was strategically needed for GYO students given their full-time school district employment through courses that were offered in varied start times and/or formats.

6.3. Retention

Retention was the most critical aspect related to the success of the GYO program because students who graduated with their degree and teaching certification would be teachers of record in the school district. Our initial reflexive analysis revealed that systemic variables impacted true understanding of retention practices; therefore, we engaged in a strategic data collection mechanism for GYO students (see Figure 4). A spreadsheet was created that contained student demographic info, coursework enrolled per semester, GPA tracking across semesters, and any other notes as necessary that would add to the overall comprehensive understanding of the student.

The university and school district emailed each GYO student individually multiple times across each semester to provide reminders (e.g., registration, textbook information, online and in-person student support dates/resources) and to provide encouragement (e.g., informal check-in’s, access to university resources to support student success, school check-in’s). Weekly, the school district met with the university to discuss updates, to self-reflect on what was working and what was not working, and to maintain collective communication, clarity, and scaling of the GYO program.

Specific to the GYO program were strategic modifications to the more traditional support structures utilized in the EPP. A dedicated, fully bilingual Student Success Liaison provided consistent support from recruitment through program completion, enabling effective communication with Spanish-speaking paraprofessionals. Enhanced technology platforms helped streamline program access, with an e-Portfolio for field observations and targeted exam preparation resources. A 3-year induction program featuring a New Teacher Academy ensured successful transition into teaching careers. This comprehensive system aligned support from admission through career placement, integrating traditional advising with modern technology solutions to maintain student engagement and success.

7. Conclusions

The leveraging of university and school district resources throughout a GYO process is essential so that a reflexive process occurs and continuous program improvement and supports occur as they work together to coordinate programming based on the specific needs of the community and district [30]. By bringing together P-12 schools and universities, the impact of GYO initiatives is a unified vision for addressing teacher shortages and helps align resources and efforts toward a common purpose. Our GYO collaborative partnership gleaned many new perspectives that will allow us to refine practices and processes to remove barriers for future students.

First, collaborative approaches to recruitment, enrollment, and retention need to be handled in a wraparound format, meaning that incoming students to university programs receive academic and social-emotional support throughout the duration of their program, from the time they apply through graduation. Careful analysis of existing structures and programmatic elements is imperative so that intentional and continuous improvements occur. This requires that all parties (i.e., university-wide leadership/staff, college-level leadership/staff, program faculty/staff, and school district leadership) become involved so that systematic and strategic modifications occur, intentionally allowing a more streamlined, positive student experience that is based on the needs of all constituents involved. Changes to systems and structures also require training that must occur at all levels so that a unified awareness, accompanied by a common language and set of practices, occurs.

Next, essential to partnerships are collaborative efforts to establish shared data systems to track retention rates, identify patterns of attrition, and assess the effectiveness of various recruitment and retention strategies. Feedback mechanisms should be established to continuously evaluate the effectiveness of these pathways and make necessary adjustments based on real-time data. This iterative process will ensure that the enrollment strategies remain relevant and responsive to the evolving landscape of educational needs. This data-driven approach enables stakeholders to make informed decisions and adapt strategies accordingly based on individualized student needs that are available per programmatic area and identify patterns that can better inform systematic, continuous improvement. Moreover, this data allows programs to better understand incoming and graduating students, in addition to students that ‘stop-out’, and understanding these facets improves advising efforts because the data will glean information on specific areas of student difficulty (e.g., external factors, work–life balance, course time/schedule, organization, and communication) so that improved supports can be put in place.

Finally, the importance of learning collectively (school districts and universities) makes an impact for the greater good because prospective students (i.e., paraprofessionals) are prospective teachers. Implementing such changes requires a multidisciplinary approach, engaging a diverse array of stakeholders from both the university and school district. Faculty from education preparation programs, district administrators, and teachers need to collaborate closely to identify specific needs and create actionable plans through regular meetings that facilitate ongoing communication and allow the sharing of insights and best practices. When collaborative learning occurs, regarding how systems and processes work to individuals becoming a certified teacher, barriers are removed and everyone wins. Ultimately, aligning the enrollment process with the district’s needs is not just about filling vacancies; it is about fostering a sustainable, qualified workforce that can deliver high-quality education to all students, thereby enhancing the overall educational ecosystem. Furthermore, the collaborative and data-informed practices developed through GYO pathways have implications beyond teacher preparation. Other professional fields seeking to grow local talent pipelines—such as healthcare, social work, or community development—can adapt similar strategies to build sustainable, community-rooted workforces that reflect the populations they serve.

8. Limitations and Future Research

Several limitations should be considered when interpreting the findings of this self-study. First, the study was conducted within a single school district, which inherently constrains the diversity of contexts and limits the transferability of findings to broader educational settings. The district’s unique demographics, administrative structure, and community partnerships may not reflect the experiences or operational dynamics of other districts implementing similar GYO initiatives. Second, the sample size was relatively small, involving a limited number of participants enrolled in the EPP, which further restricts the generalizability of the results. Lastly, this self-study is continuously in progress, and participants have not yet completed their degrees or obtained teacher certification. As such, the study’s capacity to assess long-term outcomes, such as teacher retention, instructional effectiveness, or student impact, remains limited.

While the preliminary findings presented in this self-study offer valuable insights into the early implementation and formative outcomes of a GYO teacher preparation pathway, additional research is needed to deepen understanding of the long-term impacts and sustainability of such initiatives. Future research should incorporate longitudinal designs to track participants over extended periods, enabling the evaluation of program effectiveness in relation to candidate persistence, licensure attainment, and eventual classroom performance. Moreover, examining GYO programs across multiple school districts would provide a comparative framework to better understand the contextual variables influencing program implementation and success. Such cross-site analyses would allow EPPs to engage in more targeted evaluations of continuous improvement mechanisms, refine programmatic strategies, and enhance alignment between institutional supports and the needs of diverse student populations. Increased enrollment in GYO pathways over time would also facilitate a more granular analysis of changes in recruitment, advising, and instructional practices, which would support the identification of scalable practices that promote candidate retention, foster meaningful collaboration among stakeholders, and yield stronger outcomes in teacher preparedness and professional effectiveness. By expanding the scope and duration of inquiry, future research can more fully illuminate the systemic and pedagogical factors that contribute to the success and sustainability of GYO initiatives in addressing teacher shortages and diversifying the educator workforce.