Thoughtful mentoring can shape and challenge a beginning teacher’s practice in educative ways, especially when the novice is well prepared and adopts the stance of a learner. What responsibility does a mentor have when the novice performs at the edge of acceptable practice? Drawing on interview and observation data collected for a national study of new teacher induction, this article explores how a well-supported mentor routinely missed opportunities to address difficulties faced by three novices. Through the construct of professional accountability, the authors argue for a more sophisticated approach to mentoring that blends assistance with standards-based assessment, as found in recent reform proposals. As the pool of new teachers shrinks, the phenomenon of teaching at the boundary of acceptable practice is likely to be exacerbated. This analysis raises timely questions about mentors’ professional obligations to new teachers and the public they serve.
American Federation of Teachers. (2001). Beginning teacher induction: The essential bridge(Educational Issues Policy Brief). Washington, DC: Author.
2.
Anctil, M. (1991, April). Mentor accountability: Acting in accordance with established standards. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
3.
Bartell, C. (1995). Shaping teacher induction policy in California. Teacher Education Quarterly, 22(4), 27-43.
4.
Carnegie Task Force on Teaching as a Profession. (1986). A nation prepared: Teachers for the 21st century. Washington, DC: Carnegie Forum on the Education and the Economy.
5.
Commission on Teacher Credentialing & California Department of Education. (1997). Standards of quality and effectiveness for beginning teacher support and assessment programs. Sacramento, CA: Author.
6.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (2000). New teacher induction: Programs, policies and practices. Intro to the final report. Unpublished report, National Partnership for Excellence and Accountability in Education.
7.
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.
8.
Fideler, E. F., & Haselkorn, D. (1999). Learning the ropes: Urban teacher induction programs and practices in the United States. Belmont, MA: Recruiting New Teachers, Inc.
9.
Gold, Y. (1996). Beginning teacher support: Attrition, mentoring and induction. In J. Sikula, T. J. Buttery, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 548-594). New York: Macmillan.
10.
Holmes Group. (1986). Tomorrow’s teachers. A report of the Holmes Group. East Lansing, MI: Author.
11.
Huling-Austin, L. (1990). Teacher induction programs and internships. In W. R. Houston, M. Haberman,& J. Sikula (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education(pp. 535-548). New York: Macmillan.
12.
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium. (1992). Model standards for beginning teacher licensing and development: A resource for state dialogue. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
13.
Medley, D. M., & Coker, H. (1987). The accuracy of principals’ judgments of teacher performance. Journal of Educational Research, 80, 242-247.
14.
National Commission for Teaching and America’s Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching for America’s future. New York: Author.
15.
Norman, P., & Feiman-Nemser, S. (2002, April). Mind answering mind in teaching and mentoring. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
16.
Odell, S. J.,& Huling, L. (2000). Quality mentoring for novice teachers. Washington, DC & Indianapolis, IN: Association of Teacher Educators and Kappa Delta Pi.
17.
Schwille, S. A., & Wolf, N. (1995, April). Forms of mentoring practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
18.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19.
Stanulis, R. (2003, January). Analysis of student work in the Santa Cruz New Teacher Project. Presentation at the Research on New Teacher Induction Pre-Session of the New Teacher Symposium, San Jose, CA.
20.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21.
Yusko, B. (2001, April). Paradoxical coherence: Combination of new teacher assistance and summative assessment in the Cincinnati Peer Assistance and Evaluation Program. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
22.
Villani, S. (2002). Mentoring programs for new teachers: Models of induction and support. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
23.
Wise, A. E., Darling-Hammond, L., Bernstein, H. T., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1984). Teacher evaluation: A study of effective practices(A report for the National Institute of Education). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
