“Next year will be different:” Two First-Year History Teachers’ Perceptions of the Impact of Virginia’s Accountability Reform on their Instructional Decision-Making
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online October, 2006
“Next year will be different:” Two First-Year History Teachers’ Perceptions of the Impact of Virginia’s Accountability Reform on their Instructional Decision-Making
This study examines two beginning teachers’ perceptions of a high-stakes test in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Data analysis revealed that the teachers’ perceptions towards the test had changed during their first year of teaching. This issue is important because how first-year history teachers perceive and respond to the high stakes tests will, in a large part, influence how they conceptualize and develop their instructional practice and, possibly, determine whether or not they stay in the teaching profession. This study explores these issues and implications for teacher education and new teacher induction.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AngellA. V. (1998). Learning to teach social studies: A case of belief restructuring. Theory and Research in Social Education, 26, 509-529.
2.
BulloughR. V. (1986). First-Year Teacher: A Case Study. New York: Teachers College Press.
3.
BulloughR. V. (1987). Planning and the first year of teaching. Journal of education for teaching, 75,231-250.
4.
BulloughR. V. (1990). Supervision, mentoring, and self-discovery: A case study of a first-year teacher. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 25(4), 338-360.
5.
BulloughR. V. (1994). Analyzing personal teaching metaphors in preservice teacher education as a menas for encouraging professional development. American Educational Research Journal, 57(1), 197-224.
6.
BulloughR. V. (1997). “First-Year Teacher” Eight Years Later: An Inquiry Into Teacher Development. New York: Teachers College Press.
7.
BulloughR. V.KnowlesJ. G. & CrowN. A. (1992). Emerging as a teacher. London: Routledge.
8.
CornettJ. W. (1990). Teacher Thinking About Curriculum and Instruction: A Case Study of a Secondary Social Studies Teacher. Theory and Research in Social Education, 18, 248-273.
9.
Darling-Hammond. (1998). Learning to teach in the 21st century. Principal, 75(1), 23-25.
10.
ForeL. C. (1995). A Case Study of Curriculum Controversy: The Virginia Standards of Learning for History and the Social Sciences. Unpublished Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
11.
FoundationF. (2003). Fordham Foundation Assessment of History Standards. Retrieved June9, 2003, from http://www.edexcellence.net/een/abouteen.html
12.
GoldY. (1996). Beginning teacher support: Attrition, mentoring, and induction. In SikulaJ.ButteryT. G. & GuytenE. (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Teacher Education (pp. 548-593). New York: MacMillan.
13.
GoldY. & RothR. A.,(1993). Teachers managing stress and preventing burnout: The professional health solution. London: Falmer Press.
14.
GrantS. G. (2003). History Lessons: Teaching, Learning, and Testing in U.S. High School Classrooms. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
15.
GratchA. (1998). Beginning teacher and mentor relationships. Journal of Teacher Education, 49, 220-227.
16.
GroganM. & RolandP. B.,(2003). A study of successful teachers preparing high school students for the standards of learning tests in Virginia. In DukeD. L.GroganM. TuckerP. D. & HeineckeW. F. (Eds.), Educational Leadership in an Age of Accountability: The Virginia Experience (pp. 114-134). Albany: SUNY Press.
17.
GroganM. & ShermanW. H.,(2003). How Superintendents in Virginia Deal with Issues Surrounding the Black-White Test-Score gap. In DukeD. L.GroganM. TuckerP. D. & HeineckeW. F. (Eds.), Educational Leadership in an Age of Accountability: The Virginia Experience (pp. 155-180). New York: SUNY Press.
18.
Hartzler-MillerC. (1999). Learning to teach teachers in a standards-based program: When experience isn”t enough. Action in Teacher Education, XXI(3), 88-101.
19.
Hartzler-MillerC. (2001). Making sense of. “best practice” in teaching history. Theory and Research in Social Education, 29, 672-695.
20.
HeineckeW. F.Curry-CocoranD. E. & MoonT. R. (2003). U.S. Schools and the New Standards and Accountability Initiative. In DukeD. L.GroganM.TuckerP. D. & HeineckeW. F. (Eds.), Educational Leadership in an Age of Accountability: The Virginia Experience. New York: SUNY Press.
21.
HubermanA. M. (1989). The Professional Life Cycle of Teachers. Teachers College Record, 97(1), 31-56.
22.
McMillanJ.MyranS. & WorkmanD. (1999). The impact of mandated statewide testing on teachers’ classroom assessment and instructional practices. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Quebec, Canada.
23.
MilesM. B. & HubermanA. M.(1994). Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. National History Standards. (1996). Los Angeles: National Center for History in the Schools.
24.
PattonM. Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications.
25.
PierceE. (2004). “There are times when you just want to get by:” The influenes on a first year history teacher’s instruction and theories of teaching. University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.
26.
RustF. (1994). The first year of teaching: It’s not what they expected. Teaching & Teacher Education, 10(2), 205-217.
27.
SegallA. (2002). Disturbing Practice: Reading Teacher Education as Text (Vol. 8). New York: Peter Lang.
28.
SegallA. (2003). The Impact of State-Mandated Testing According to Social Studies Teachers: The Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) as a Case Study of Consequences. Theory and Research in Social Education, 31(5), 287-325.
29.
StakeR. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oak: Sage Publications.
30.
StrongeJ. H. (2002). Qualities of Effective Teachers. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
31.
TuckerP. D. (2003). The Principalship: Renewed Call for Instructional Leadership. In DukeD. L.GroganM.TuckerP. D. & HeineckeW. F. (Eds.), Educational Leadership in an Age of Accountability: The Virginia Experience (pp. 97-113). New York: SUNY Press.
32.
Van HoverS. (in press). Teaching History in the Old Dominion: The Impace of Virginia’s Accountability Reform on Seven Secondary Beginning History Teachers. In GrantS. G. (Ed.), Measuring History: Cases of High-Stakes Testing Across the States.
33.
Van HoverS. & HeineckeW. F.(in press). The Impact of Accountability Reform on the “Wise Practice” of Secondary History Teachers: The Virginia Experience. In YeagerE. & J. DavisO.L. (Eds.). >“Wise Practice” in the Teaching and Learning of History in an Era of High Stakes Testing.
34.
Van HoverS. & YeagerE.(2003). “‘Making’ students better people?” A case study of a beginning history teacher. International Social Studies Forum, 3(l), 219-232.
35.
Van HoverS. & YeagerE.(in press). Challenges Facing Beginning History Teachers: An Exploratory Study. The International Journal of Social Education, 19(1).
36.
VanSledrightB. (1996). Closing the gap between school and disciplinary history? Historian as high school teacher. In BrophyJ. (Ed.), Advances in Research on Teaching: Teaching and Learning History (Vol. 6, pp. 257-289). Greenwich, Connecticut: Jai Press.
37.
VanSledrightB. (2002). In search of America”s past: Learning to read history in elementary school. New York: Teachers College Press.
38.
VDOE. (2003). Virginia Department of Education. Retrieved May15, 2003, from http://www.pen.kl2.va.us/VDOE
39.
WineburgS. (2001). Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts: Charting the Future of Teaching the Past. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
40.
WinklerA. M. (2002a). Division in the Ranks: Standardized Testing Draws Lines between New and Veteran Teachers. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(3), 219-225.
41.
WinklerA. M. (2002b). Factors that Affect Teacher Beliefs About State Educational Accountability Systems: A Comparison of Virginia and Vermont. Unpublished Dissertation, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.
