This article puts forth a multidimensional framework for empirically testing the effects of teacher mentoring, focusing on interactions between formal mentors and novice teachers and the setting in which these interactions occur. Analyzing survey and administrative data from Chicago Public Schools with a multilevel propensity-score weighting approach, our analyses identifies the combination of stronger leadership and high-quality mentoring that features at least biweekly mentor-mentee interactions, comprehensive content, and opportunities for engagement with teaching practice as the most effective for building teacher organizational commitment. The results also reveal that stronger principal leadership may protect teachers from lack of access to any mentor or to high-quality mentoring while weaker leadership may diminish the potential benefits of high-quality mentoring.
AchinsteinB.BarrettA. (2004). (Re)framing classroom contexts: How new teachers and mentors view diverse learners and challenges of practices. Teachers College Record, 106, 716–746.
2.
AllenT. D.EbyL. T.PoteetM. L.LentzE.LimaL. (2004). Career benefits associated with mentoring for proteges: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 127-136. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.127
Alliance for Excellent Education. (2004). Tapping the potential: Retaining and developing high-quality new teachers. Washington, DC: Author.
5.
AthanasesS. Z.AchinsteinB. (2003). Focusing new teachers on individual and low performing students: The centrality of formative assessment in the mentor’s repertoire of practice. Teachers College Record, 105, 1486–1520.
6.
BarnaikL.RolingE. A.EbyL. T. (2010). Why does mentoring work? The role of perceived organizational support. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76, 366–373.
7.
BartellC. A. (2005). Cultivating high-quality teaching through induction and mentoring. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
8.
BorkoH.PutnamR. T. (1995). Expanding a teacher’s knowledge base: A cognitive psychological perspective on professional development. In GuskeyT. R.HubermanM. (Eds.), Professional development in education: New paradigms & practices (pp. 35–65). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
9.
BoydD.GrossmanP.IngM.LankfordH.LoebS.WyckoffJ. (2011). The influence of school administrators on teacher retention decisions. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 303–333.
10.
BrownB. P.ZablahA. R.BellengerD. N. (2008). The role of mentoring in promoting organizational commitment among Black managers: An evaluation of the indirect effects of racial similarity and shared racial perspectives. Journal of Business Research, 61, 732–738.
11.
CarterK. J. (1990). Teachers’ knowledge and learning to teach. In HoustonW. R. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 291–310). New York, NY: Macmillan.
12.
CarterK. J.SabersD.CushingK.PinnegarS.BerlinerD. C. (1987). Processing and using information about students: A study of expert, novice, and postulant teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 3, 147–157. doi:10.1016/0742-051X(87)90015-1
13.
ChanW.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, 597–630.
14.
CherianF.DanielY. (2008). Principal leadership in new teacher induction: Becoming agents of change. International Journal of Education Policy & Leadership, 3(2), 1–11.
15.
CurtisM. B.TaylorE. Z. (2018). Developmental mentoring, affective organizational commitment, and knowledge sharing in public. Journal of Knowledge Management, 22, 142–161.
DavisB.HigdonK. (2009). The effects of mentoring/induction support on beginning teachers’ practices in early elementary classrooms (K-3). Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 22, 261–274.
18.
DeAngelisK. J.PresleyJ. B. (2007). Leaving schools or leaving the profession: Setting Illinois’ record straight on new teacher attrition (ERIC report No. 2007-1). Edwardsville: Illinois Education Research Council.
19.
DeeJ. R.HenkinA. B.SingletonC. A (2006). Organizational commitment of teachers in urban schools: Examining the effects of team structures. Urban Education, 41, 603–627.
20.
DesimoneL. M.HochbergE. D.PorterA. C.PolikoffM. S.SchwartzR.JohnsonL. J. (2014). Formal and informal mentoring: Complementary, compensatory, or consistent?Journal of Teacher Education, 65, 88–110.
21.
DesimoneL. M.PorterA. C.GaretM. S.YoonK. S.BirmanB. F. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 81–112.
22.
Feiman-NemserS. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103, 1013–1055.
23.
Feiman-NemserS.SchwilleS.CarverC.YuskoB. (1999). A conceptual review of literature on new teacher induction. College Park, MD: National Partnership for Excellence and Accountability in Teaching.
24.
Feiman-NemserS.TamirE.HammernessK. (Eds.). (2014). Inspiring teaching: Preparing teachers to succeed in mission–driven schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Press.
FletcherS.StrongM. (2009). Full-release and site-based mentoring of new elementary grade teachers: An analysis of changes in student achievement. New Educator, 5, 329–341.
FullerF. F.BrownO. H. (1975). Becoming a teacher. In RyanK. (Ed.), Teacher education: Seventy-fourth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp. 25–52). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
29.
GanserT. (2002). Supporting new teacher mentor programs: Strategies for principals. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Mentoring Association, Fort Worth, TX.
30.
GaretM. S.PorterA. C.DesimoneL.BirmanB. F.YoonK. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 915–945.
31.
GirvanC.ConneelyC.TangneyB. (2016). Extending experiential learning in teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 129–139.
32.
GoldY. (1996). Beginning teacher support: Attrition, mentoring, and induction. In SikulaJ. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 548–594). New York, NY: Macmillan.
33.
GoldrickL.OstaD.BarlinD.BurnJ. (2012). Review of state policies on teacher induction. Santa Cruz, CA: New Teacher Center.
34.
GoodT. L.BrophyJ. E. (1984). Looking in classrooms (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
35.
GrayL.TaieS. (2015). Public school teacher attrition and mobility in the first five years: Results from the First Through Fifth Waves of the 2007–08 Beginning Teacher Longitudinal Study (NCES 2015-337). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.
36.
GrossmanP.LeobS.MyungJ.DonaldB.HamiltonL.JamesW. (2012). Learning to teach in New York City: How teachers and schools jointly determine the implementation of a districtwide mentoring program. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 111, 309–341.
37.
HobsonA. J.AshbyP.MalderezA.TomlinsonP. D. (2009). Mentoring beginning teachers: What we know and what we don’t. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 207–216.
38.
HongG. (2015). Causality in a social world: Moderation, mediation and spill-over. West Sussex, England: Wiley-Blackwell.
39.
HongG.RaudenbushS. W. (2008). Causal inference for time-varying instructional treatments. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 33, 333–362.
40.
HongY.HongG. (2015, April). Exploring the role of in-house mentoring in the study of comprehensive teacher induction programs. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
41.
HopkinsM.SpillaneJ. P. (2014). Schoolhouse teacher educators: Structuring beginning teachers’ opportunities to learn about instruction. Journal of Teacher Education, 65, 327–339.
42.
HulpiaH.DevosG.KeerH. V. (2011). The relationship between school leadership from a distributed perspective and teachers’ organizational commitment: Examining the source of the leadership function. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47, 728–771.
43.
ImaiK.Van DykD. A. (2004). Causal inference with general treatment regimes. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 99, 854–866.
44.
ImbensG. W. (2000). The role of the propensity score in estimating dose-response functions. Biometrika, 87, 706–710.
45.
ImranR.AllilK.MahmoudA. B. (2017). Teacher’s turnover intentions: Examining the impact of motivation and organizational commitment. International Journal of Educational Management, 31, 828–842.
46.
IngersollR. M. (2003). Is there really a teacher shortage? (CPRE Research Report No. R-03-4). Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania.
47.
IngersollR. M.SmithT. M. (2004). Do teacher induction and mentoring matter?NAASP Bulletin, 638(88), 28–40.
48.
IngersollR. M.StrongM. (2011). The impact of induction and mentoring programs for beginning teachers: A critical review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 81, 201–233.
49.
JohnsonS. M. (2004). Finders and keepers: Helping new teachers survive and thrive in our schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
50.
JohnsonS. M. (2006). The workplace matters: Teacher quality, retention and effectiveness (Working paper). Washington, DC: National Education Association Research Department.
51.
JonesN. D.YoungsP.FrankK. A. (2013). The role of school-based colleagues in shaping the commitment of novice special and general education teachers. Council for Exceptional Children, 29(3), 1–19.
52.
KapadiaK.CocaV.EastonJ. Q. (2007). Keeping new teachers: A first look at the influences of induction in the Chicago Public Schools. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research, University of Chicago.
53.
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, 250–290.
54.
KramK. E. (1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational life. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.
55.
KushmanJ. W. (1992). The organizational dynamics of teacher workplace commitment: A study of urban elementary and middle schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 28, 5–42. doi:10.1177/0013161X92028001002
56.
LaddH. F. (2011). Teachers’ perceptions of their working conditions: How predictive of planned and actual teacher movement?Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33, 235–261.
57.
LeithwoodK.JantziD.SteinbachR. (1999). Changing leadership for changing times. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
58.
LittleJ. W. (1990). The mentor phenomenon and the social organization of teaching. Review of Research in Education, 16, 297–351.
59.
LoebS.Darling-HammondL.LuczakJ. (2005). How teaching conditions predict teacher turnover in California Schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 80(3), 44–70.
60.
LuftJ. (2012). Subject-specific induction programs: Lessons from science. National Society for the Study of Education, 111, 417–442.
61.
MatskoK. K.HammernessK. (2014). Unpacking the “Urban” in urban teacher education: Making a case for context-specific preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 65, 128–144.
62.
McDonaldF. (1980). Study of induction programs for beginning teachers: Vol. 1: The problems of beginning teachers: A crisis in training. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
63.
MeyerJ. P.AllenN. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61–98.
64.
MeyerJ. P.StanleyD. J.HersovitchL.TopolnytskyL. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20–52.
65.
MoirE.BarlinD.GlessJ.MilesJ. (2009). New teacher mentoring: Hopes and promises for improving teacher effectiveness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
66.
National Center for Education Statistics. (1997, February). Teacher professionalization and teacher commitment: A multilevel analysis. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs/97069.pdf
67.
NelsonB. S.HammermanJ. K. (1996). Moving toward the creation of intellectual communities of students, teachers, and teacher educators. In McLaughlinM. W.ObermanI. (Eds.), Teacher learning: New policies, new practices (pp. 3–21). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
68.
ParkI. (2015). Teacher commitment and its effects on student achievement in American high schools. Educational Research and Evaluation, 11, 461–485.
69.
PayneS. C.HuffmanA. H. (2005). A longitudinal examination of the influence of mentoring on organizational commitment and turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 158–168.
70.
PfeffermanD.SkinnerC. J.HomesD. J.GoldsteinH.RasbashJ. (1998). Weighting for unequal selection models in multilevel models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 60, 23–40.
71.
PogodzinskiB.YoungsP.FrankK. A.BelmanD. (2012). Administrative climate and novices’ intent to remain teaching. Elementary School Journal, 113, 252–275.
72.
PolikoffM. S.DesimoneL. M.PorterA. C.HochbergE. D. (2015). Mentor policy and the quality of mentoring. Elementary School Journal, 116, 76–102.
73.
PrintyS. (2008). Leadership for teacher learning: A community of practice perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 187–226.
74.
RobinsJ. M. (2003). Semantics of causal DAG models and identification of direct and indirect effects. In GreenP.HjortN.RichardsonS. (Eds.), Highly structured stochastic systems (pp. 70–81). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
75.
RockoffJ. E. (2008). Does mentoring reduce turnover and improve skills of new employees? Evidence from teachers in New York City (Working Paper 13868). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
76.
RobinsJ. M.HernanM. A.BrumbackB. (2000). Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology. Epidemiology, 11, 550–560.
77.
RobinsonG. W. (1998, October). New teacher induction: A study of selection new teacher induction models and common practices. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Education Research Association, Chicago, IL.
78.
RosenholtzS. J. (1985). Effective schools: Interpreting the evidence. American Journal of Education, 93, 352–388.
79.
RosenholtzS. J.SimpsonC. (1990). Workplace conditions and rise and fall of teachers’ commitment. Sociology of Education, 63, 241–257.
80.
SargentT. C.HannumE. (2009). Doing more with less: Teacher professional learning communities in resource-constrained primary schools in rural China. Journal of Teacher Education, 60, 258–279.
81.
SebastianJ.AllensworthE. (2012). The influence of principal leadership on classroom instruction and student learning: A study of mediated pathways to learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48, 626–663.
82.
SelamatN.NordinN.AdnanA. A. (2013). Rekindle teachers’ organizational commitment: The effect of transformational leadership. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 90, 566–574.
83.
SerpellZ. (2000). Beginning teacher induction: A review of the literature. Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education.
84.
SmithT.IngersollR. (2004). What are the effects of induction and mentoring on beginning teacher turnover?American Educational Research Journal, 41, 681–714.
85.
StanulisR. N.FlodenR. E. (2009). Intensive mentoring as a way to help beginning teachers develop balanced induction. Journal of Teacher Education, 60, 112–122.
86.
StanulisR. N.LittleS.WibbensE. (2012). Intensive mentoring that contributes to change in beginning elementary teachers’ learning to lead classroom discussions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 32–42.
87.
SunJ. (2015). Conceptualizing the critical path linked by teacher commitment. Journal of Educational Administration, 53, 597–624.
88.
SupovitzJ.SirinidesP.MayH. (2010). How principals and peers influence teaching and learning. Education Administration Quarterly, 46, 31–55.
89.
TickleL. (2006). New teachers and the emotions of learning teaching. Cambridge Journal of Education, 21, 319–329.
90.
VeenmanS. (1984). The perceived problems of beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 54, 143–178.
91.
WangJ.OdellS. J.CliftR. T. (2010). Past, present, and future research on teacher induction. Plymouth, England: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
92.
WangJ.OdellS. J.SchwilleS. A. (2008). Effects of teacher induction on beginning teachers’ teaching: A critical review of the literature. Journal of Teacher Education, 59, 132–152.
93.
WatermanS.HeY. (2011). Effects of mentoring programs on new teacher retention: A literature review. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 19, 139–156.
94.
WongH. (2004). Induction programs that keep new teachers teaching and improving. NASSP Bulletin, 87(638), 5–27.
95.
WoodA. (2005). The importance of principals: Site administrators’ roles in novice teacher induction. American Secondary Education, 33(2), 39–62.
WynnS. R.CarboniL. W.PatallE. A. (2007). Beginning teachers’ perceptions of mentoring, climate, and leadership: Promoting retention through a learning communities’ perspective. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6, 209–229.
98.
YoungsP. (2002). State and district policy related to mentoring and new teacher induction in Connecticut. New York, NY: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.
99.
YoungsP.Holdgreve-ResendezR. T.QianH. (2011). The role of instructional program coherence in beginning teachers’ induction experience. Elementary School Journal, 111, 455–476.
100.
YoungsP.KingM. B. (2002). Principal leadership for professional development to build school capacity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38, 643–670.
