This article reports on a 2-year qualitative research study of the processes by which middle school principals’ policies and actions shaped the experiences of five novice teachers in two Michigan school districts. We examined beginning teachers’ perceptions of principals’ approaches to managing student behavior, instructional leadership, and teacher collaboration and their perceptions of the extent to which each principal was trusted by his or her teaching staff. At the end of the second year of data collection (2007–2008), all five beginning teachers expressed high levels of satisfaction and planned to remain teaching in their schools. We argue that leadership related to student behavior and instruction (as perceived by the novices), combined with high levels of teacher–principal trust (again as perceived by the novices), contributes to these outcomes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AchinsteinB., OgawaR. T., & SpeiglmanA. (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(3), 557–603.
2.
AdamsC. M., & ForsythP. B. (2009). The nature and function of trust in schools. Journal of School Leadership, 19(2), 126–152.
3.
AllensworthE., PonisciakS., & MazzeoC. (2009). The schools teachers leave: Teacher mobility in Chicago Public Schools.Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
4.
BoydD., GrossmanP., IngM., LankfordH., LoebS., & WyckoffJ. (2011). The influence of school administrators on teacher retention decisions. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 303–333.
5.
BoydD., GrossmanP., LankfordH., LoebS., & WyckoffJ. (2006). How changes in entry requirements alter the teacher workforce and affect student achievement. Education Finance and Policy, 1(2), 176–216.
6.
BrykA., & SchneiderB. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement.New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
7.
ChanW. Y., LauS., NieY., LimS., & HoganD. (2008). Organizational and personal predictors of teacher commitment: The mediating role of teacher efficacy and identification with school. American Educational Research Journal, 45(3), 597–630.
8.
ChapmanD. W., & LowtherM. A. (1982). Teachers’ satisfaction with teaching. Journal of Educational Research, 75(4), 241–247.
9.
CoburnC. E. (2001). Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), 145–170.
10.
CoburnC. E. (2005). Shaping teacher sensemaking: School leaders and the enactment of reading policy. Educational Policy, 19(3), 476–509.
11.
DeyhleD. L., HessG. A., & LeCompteM. D. (1992). Approaching ethical issues for qualitative researchers in education. In LeCompteM., MillroyW., & PreissleJ. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 598–641). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
GoldhaberD., GrossB., & PlayerD. (2011). Teacher career paths, teacher quality, and persistence in the classroom: Are public schools keeping their best?Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 30(1), 57–87.
14.
GuarinoC., SantibanezL., & DaleyG. (2006). Teacher recruitment and retention: A review of the recent empirical literature, Review of Educational Research, 76(2), 173–208.
15.
HanushekE., KainJ., & RivkinS. (2004). Why public schools lose teachers. Journal of Human Resources, 39(2), 326–354.
16.
HoyW. K., & Tschannen-MoranM. (1999). Five faces of trust: An empirical confirmation in urban elementary schools. Journal of School Leadership, 9(3), 184–208.
17.
HulpiaH., DevosG., & Van KeerH. (2011). The relation between school leadership from a distributed perspective and teachers’ organizational commitment: Examining the source of the leadership function. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(5), 728–771.
18.
IngersollR. M., & MayH. (2010). The magnitude, destinations, and determinants of mathematics and science teacher turnover. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34(4), 435–464.
19.
KardosS. M., JohnsonS. M., PeskeH. G., KauffmanD., & LiuE. (2001). Counting on colleagues: New teachers encounter the professional cultures of their schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(2), 250–290.
20.
KeigherA. (2010). Teacher attrition and mobility: Results from the 2008–09 Teacher Follow-up Survey (NCES Document No. 2010–353). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
21.
KennedyM. (2005). Inside teaching: How classroom life undermines reform.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
22.
LaddH. F. (2011). Teachers’ perceptions of their working conditions: How predictive of planned and actual teacher movement?Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(2), 235–261.
23.
LeithwoodK., & JantziD. (2005). A review of transformational school leadership research. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3), 177–199.
24.
MarinellW. H. (2011). The Middle School Teacher Turnover Project: A descriptive analysis of teacher turnover in New York City's middle schools.New York: Research Alliance for New York City Schools.
25.
MilesM. B., & HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26.
MurphyJ. F., GoldringE. B., CravensX. C., EliotS. N., & PorterA. C. (2007). The Vanderbilt Assessment of Leadership in Education: Measuring learning-centered leadership.Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
27.
ScafidiB., SjoquistD. L., & StinebricknerT. R. (2005). Race, poverty, and teacher mobility (Research Paper Series No. 06–51). Atlanta: Georgia State University, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies.
28.
SchurrS., & ForteI. (2009). The definitive middle school guide: A handbook for success (Rev. ed.). Nashville, TN: Incentive.
29.
SkaalvikE. M., & SkaalvikS. (2011). Teacher job satisfaction and motivation to leave the teaching profession: Relations with school context, feeling of belonging, and emotional exhaustion. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(6), 1029–1038.
30.
SmithT. M., & IngersollR. M. (2004). Reducing teacher turnover: What are the components of effective induction?American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 681–714.
31.
StakeR. (2004). Qualitative case study. In DenzinN. K. & LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 443–466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32.
StraussA., & CorbinJ. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
33.
TickleB. R., ChangM., & KimS. (2011). Administrative support and its mediating effect on U.S. public school teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(2), 342–349.
34.
Tschannen-MoranM. (2009). Fostering teacher professionalism in schools: The role of leadership orientation and trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(2), 217–247.
35.
Van MaeleD., & Van HoutteM. (2012). The role of teacher and faculty trust in forming teachers’ job satisfaction: Do years of experience make a difference?Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(6), 879–889.
36.
YinR. (2008). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37.
YoungsP. (2007). How elementary principals’ beliefs and actions influence new teachers’ induction experiences. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(2), 101–137.
