Purpose:The purpose of the study was to examine (a) ways in which elementary principals in Connecticut influenced the induction experiences of new teachers and (b) how school leaders’ professional backgrounds and beliefs affected their approaches to induction.
Research Methods:The study included six elementary principals from three Connecticut districts, and 1st- and 2nd-year teachers, mentors, and other teachers from the principals’ schools. Data collection in 2000-01 involved interviewing principals, beginning teachers, mentors, and other educators; and observing principals’ meetings with new teachers, mentor-mentee meetings, and other induction activities.
Findings:The study found that three of the principals strongly promoted new teachers’ instructional growth in their direct interactions with them and by facilitating their work with mentors and grade team members; in contrast, the other three school leaders did not have as much positive impact on new teachers. The article provides evidence that these differences in beginning teachers’ experiences seemed related to variations in the principals’ professional backgrounds; their beliefs and actions regarding leadership, induction, and teacher evaluation; and their responses to district and state policy.
Implications:The implications of the study findings are (a) that principals should promote school cultures in which experienced teachers are actively involved in induction; (b) that researchers should examine how school leaders construct their understandings of induction, teacher development, and district and state policy; and (c) that there is a need for quantitative researchers to employ principal leadership as an independent variable that can affect mentor-mentee matches and new teachers’ experiences and retention decisions.
Achinstein, B., Ogawa, R., & Speiglman, A. (2004). Are we creating separate and unequal tracks of teachers? The impact of state policy, local conditions, and teacher characteristics on new teacher socialization. American Educational Research Journal, 41, 557-603.
2.
Baron, J. B. (1999). Exploring high and improving reading achievement in Connecticut. Washington, DC: National Educational Goals Panel.
3.
Burch, P., & Spillane, J. P. (2003). Elementary school leadership strategies and subject matter: Reforming mathematics and literacy instruction. Elementary School Journal, 103, 519-535.
4.
Bryk, A. S., Lee, V. E., & Holland, P. B. (1993). Catholic schools and the common good. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5.
Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. New York: Russell Sage.
6.
Carver, C. L. (2003, April). Principals and mentors working together: A case of distributed expertise. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
7.
Coburn, C. E. (2005). Shaping teacher sensemaking: School leaders and the enactment of reading policy. Educational Policy, 19, 476-509.
8.
Cohen, B. A. (2005). Enhancing the “learning profession”: Improving teacher retention with teacher induction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.
9.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Sykes, G. (2003). Wanted: A national teacher supply policy for education: The right way to meet the “Highly Qualified Teacher” challenge. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(33). Retrieved January 31, 2004, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n33/
10.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103, 1013-1055.
11.
Feiman-Nemser, S., Carver, C., Schwille, S., & Yusko, B. (1999). Beyond support: Taking new teachers seriously as learners. In M. Scherer (Ed.), A better beginning: Supporting and mentoring new teachers (pp. 3-12). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
12.
Goldring, E. B. & Rallis, S. F. (1993). Principals of dynamic schools: Taking charge of change. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin.
13.
Goldstein, J. (2004). Making sense of distributed leadership: The case of peer assistance and review. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26, 173-197.
14.
Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
15.
Grossman, P. L., & Thompson, C. (2004). District policy and beginning teachers: A lens on teacher learning. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26, 281-301.
16.
Henke, R. R., Chen, X., & Geis, S. (2000). Progress through the teacher pipeline: 1992-93 college graduates and elementary/secondary teaching as of 1997 (NCES No. 2000152). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
17.
Johnson, S. M., & The Project on the Next Generation of Teachers. (2004). Finders and keepers: Helping new teachers survive and thrive in our schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
18.
Kardos, S. M., Johnson, S. M., Peske, H. G., Kauffman, D., & Liu, E. (2001). Counting on colleagues: New teachers encounter the professional cultures of their schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37, 250-290.
19.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2001). Crossing over to Canaan: The journey of new teachers in diverse classrooms. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
20.
Little, J. W. (1990). The mentor phenomenon and the social organization of teaching. In C. B. Cazden (Ed.), Review of research in education, 16, 297-351.
21.
Louis, K. S., Kruse, S. D., & Marks, H. M. (1996). School-wide professional community: Teachers’ work, intellectual quality, and commitment. In F. M. Newmann & associates (Eds.), Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality (pp. 179-203). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
22.
Luczak, J. (2004, April). Who will teach in the 21st century? Beginning teacher training experiences and attrition rates. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego.
23.
Murnane, R. J., Singer, J. D., Willett, J. B., Kemple, J. J., & Olsen, R. J. (1991). Who will teach? Policies that matter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
24.
Pecheone, R. L., & Stansbury, K. (1996). Connecting teacher assessment and school reform. The Elementary School Journal, 97(2), 163-177.
25.
Prowda, P. (1998). Information packet on teacher supply and demand: CT historical data. Hartford, CT: Connecticut State Department of Education.
26.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
27.
Smith, T. M., & Ingersoll, R. M. (2004). Reducing teacher turnover: What are the components of effective induction?American Educational Research Journal, 41, 681-714.
28.
Smylie, M. A., & Hart, A. W. (1999). School leadership for teacher learning and change: A human and social capital perspective. In J. Murphy & K. S. Louis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (2nd ed., pp. 421-440). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
29.
Spillane, J. P. (2000). Cognition and policy implementation: District policymakers and the reform of mathematics education. Cognition and Instruction, 18(2), 141-179.
30.
Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2001). Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 23-28.
31.
Stein, M. K., & D’Amico, L. (2002). Inquiry at the crossroads of policy and learning: A study of a district-wide literacy initiative. Teachers College Record, 104, 1313-1344.
32.
Sykes, G. (2004). Cultivating quality in teaching: A brief for professional standards. In F. M. Hess, A. J. Rotherdam, & K. Walsh (Eds.), A qualified teacher in every classroom? Appraising old answers and new ideas (pp. 177-199). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
33.
Wideen, M., Mayer-Smith, J., & Moon, B. (1998). A critical analysis of the research on learning to teach: Making the case for an ecological perspective on inquiry. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 130-178.
34.
Wilson, S. M., Darling-Hammond, L., & Berry, B. (2001). A case of successful teaching policy: Connecticut’s long-term efforts to improve teaching and learning. Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington.
35.
Youngs, P. (2002). State and district policy related to mentoring and new teacher induction in Connecticut. New York: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.
36.
Youngs, P. (in press). Influences of district induction policy on new teachers’ experiences: An examination of local policy implementation in Connecticut. Teachers College Record.
37.
Youngs, P., & King, M. B. (2002). Principal leadership for professional development to build school capacity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38, 643-670.
