Socialization of new teachers: Does induction matter?

Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 1592e1597

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Teaching and Teacher Education journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tate

Socialization of new teachers: Does induction matter?q Fadia Nasser-Abu Alhija a, *, Barbara Fresko b a b

Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel Beit Berl College, Israel

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 20 August 2009 Received in revised form 2 June 2010 Accepted 7 June 2010

The present paper focuses on new teachers’ satisfaction with their first year of teaching from the perspective of socialization. The relationship between satisfaction with socialization and teacher background, school environment, placement, and induction variables was examined. Data were collected from 243 Israeli beginning teachers by means of questionnaire. Results indicated that satisfaction during the induction year was moderately high. Hierarchical regression analysis showed five significant predictor variables: ecological support from mentor, help from the principal, assistance from other colleagues, workload, and having already completed teaching training. Support from mentors and school colleagues had the greatest impact on new teachers’ assimilation. Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Beginning teachers Teacher socialization Teacher induction

1. Introduction Teachers’ socialization refers to the process by which the individual becomes a participating member of the community of teachers (Zeichner & Gore, 1989). This process is characterized by the acquisition of knowledge, skills, values, and norms of both the teaching profession and the local school community. In other words, becoming a teacher involves professional development as well as organizational assimilation (Brunton, 2007). Successful socialization results in more competent teachers who are committed to remaining on the job (e.g., Hudson & Beutel, 2007; Wong, Britton, & Ganser, 2005). Research findings indicate that many new teachers leave the profession after only a few years, many of them because they failed to become sufficiently assimilated (Dewert, Babinski, & Jones, 2003; Johnson, 2004; Wong, 2004). In order to optimize the socialization process, induction programs have been widely implemented (e.g., Feiman-Nemser, Schwille, Carver, & Yusko, 1999; Ingersoll, 2007; Ingersoll & Smith, 2004; Wong, 2004). These programs vary across countries as well as within countries (Howe, 2006; Moskowitz & Stephens, 1997; Wayne, Young, & Fleischman, 2005; Wong et al., 2005). Variation expresses itself in duration, program components, funding sources, operation, target population, intensity, and comprehensiveness. For example, in Japan, Israel, and many U.S. states and Canadian provinces new teacher induction is one year, obligatory, systematic, and centrally operated, whereas in Hong

q An earlier version of this paper was presented at the ISATT biannual conference in Rovaniemi, Finland, July 2009. * Corresponding author. Tel.: þ972 36405889; fax: þ972 49998138. E-mail address: [email protected] (F. Nasser-Abu Alhija). 0742-051X/$ e see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2010.06.010

Kong SAR, existing programs are neither centrally organized nor mandated and in Germany and France new teachers participate in induction programs over a two year period. The differences among programs reflect different cultural, social, geopolitical, and economic contexts. However, all induction programs share a common goal and that is to provide new teachers with a gradual acculturation into the teaching profession (Howe, 2006; Stoel & Thant, 2002). The purpose of the present study is to examine the unique contribution of an induction program to predicting new teachers’ satisfaction with their socialization in the school. 1.1. Factors fostering socialization According to Achinstein, Ogawa, and Spieglman (2004), research has identified three factors that shape the socialization process: teacher background, local context, and state policy environment. Teacher background includes gender, race, and personal histories and can influence teacher socialization by forming teachers’ worldviews, affecting where they chose to work, and influencing their contact with students. Moreover, teachers’ prior experiences in educational frameworks are interrelated with their perceptions of teachers and teaching (e.g., Achinstein et al., 2004; Lortie, 1975). With respect to local context, socialization can be influenced by the professional culture of the school and/or community. New teachers’ professional beliefs, values, and practices can be greatly affected by the instructional and organizational culture of the professional community that they encounter at their workplace. Aspects of local context include school variables and teacher placement characteristics. In a recent study of new teachers in Chicago, Wechsler, Caspary, Humphrey and Matsko (2010) have concluded

F. Nasser-Abu Alhija, B. Fresko / Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 1592e1597

that the school context exerts the greatest influence on beginning teachers’ success. Empirical research into the socialization of preservice teachers has confirmed the importance of the school in teacher socialization. For example, in one study by Su (1992) it was found that student teaching, cooperating teachers, school pupils, and school teachers were more influential in shaping the educational beliefs and values of new teachers as compared to the teacher training curriculum, college faculty, family, and significant others. Another important school variable includes the school environment, which is shaped by principal leadership, an ethos of collaborative practice, and a supportive milieu that have been shown to facilitate teacher assimilation (e.g., Angelle, 2002; Johnson, 2004; Schonfeld, 2001; Su, 1992). Successful socialization has also been found to be facilitated by suitable placement of teachers in the school system (e.g., Ingersoll, 2003; Liu, 2005). Placement variables, such as in-field teaching, permanent-track positions, and sufficient number of hours in school, are more likely to promote assimilation by increasing the likelihood of the new teacher’s involvement in school. One of the effects of state policy environment on teachers’ socialization can be found in state curriculum and instructional policies that mandate how certain subjects are to be taught in the schools (Achinstein et al., 2004). New teachers are prone to adopt such instructional policies that specify curricular materials, pedagogy, and standards. In addition, state policies can deal directly with how teachers begin their careers and how they assimilate into the profession and thereby influence socialization. In many places state policy manifests itself in induction programs for new teachers. Such policies often determine the length of induction, funding of induction activities, definition of the target population, and the implications of participating in induction for licensing new teachers (Moskowitz & Stephens, 1997). 1.2. New teacher induction programs Induction programs are designed to deal directly with teacher socialization. Teacher induction programs offer assistance, guidance, and support to new teachers. Although the most common component of induction programs is mentoring (Ingersoll, 2007; Ingersoll & Smith, 2004; Wong, 2004), other components include orientation, workshops, distribution of written materials, classroom observation, and reduced workloads. Implementation of induction activities is often a joint venture of the school, the regional or national educational authorities, and academic teacher training institutions. The need for induction programs derives from the difficulties encountered by new teachers in their transition from being students of teaching to teachers of students (e.g., Kelchtermans & Ballet, 2002; Veenman, 1984). The induction phase of becoming a teacher has been depicted as a complex interaction of personal and situational factors through which new teachers negotiate professional and organizational socialization (Zeichner & Tabachnik, 1985). This phase in their professional development is not just about anxiety, stress, and frustration, rather it is an important learning stage in which they expand their content-specific repertoire of teaching strategies, acquire important practical knowledge related to students, curricula, workplace norms, and school policies, test their beliefs and ideas about teaching, and mold their professional identity (Feiman-Nemser et al., 1999; Kelchtermans & Ballet, 2002; Wayne et al., 2005). Although induction programs have become widespread around the world, their impact on teacher socialization is still not fully clear. Research has tended to concentrate on the impact of induction on teacher retention, as well as on mentoring as a critical element for developing effective instructional skills among new teachers (e.g., Fletcher & Barret, 2004; Ingersoll & Smith, 2004; Rippon & Martin, 2003; Villar & Strong, 2007). Structured, sustained, comprehensive,

1593

and seriously monitored programs have been found to be most effective (Wong et al., 2005). Beginning teachers who are given multiple supports are less likely to move to other schools and less likely to leave teaching (e.g., Johnson, Clift, & Klecka, 2002; Smith & Ingersoll, 2004). Moreover, data exist which show that induction programs can contribute to high levels of professional growth (e.g., Fletcher & Barret, 2004, Kelley, 2004). The present study, which focuses on the relationship between new teachers’ satisfaction with their socialization into the school and various induction, school context, and personal variables, will add to this body of knowledge. 2. Research context The study was part of a comprehensive evaluation study of the national teacher induction program in Israel. After a 4-year trial on a small scale, the Israeli induction program was gradually introduced over a period of several years and, since 2003, successful completion of the one-year program has been a prerequisite for obtaining a permanent teaching license. It was initiated as part of a general undertaking to increase the professional status of teachers as well as to reduce the “reality shock” of entry into the profession (Israeli Ministry of Education, 1999). The program is financed and operated by the Israeli Ministry of Education with the cooperation of the higher education institutions and the public school system. The program was originally intended for new teachers who had already completed pre-service training. In practice many education students begin teaching during their last year of training and simultaneously take part in the induction program. The three major components of the induction program are 1) individual mentoring by a colleague in the same school, 2) a weekly or bi-weekly workshop given by a teacher training department at one of the universities or colleges, and 3) formal evaluation of teaching for formative (professional development) and summative (licensing) purposes. Mentors are required to be veteran teachers who have experience teaching the same grade levels and subjects taught by the new teachers. Their task is to familiarize the new teachers with school norms and procedures, help them adapt to the school culture, assist them with instructional planning and classroom management issues, and provide feedback on their teaching based on observation of lessons. In theory, the school principal is expected to assign a suitable mentor to the new teacher. However, many new teachers have to recruit a mentor on their own. The induction workshops operate as reflective practice groups aimed at assisting new teachers in analyzing and thinking about their experiences on the job while connecting theory and practice, and at providing them with a supportive professional environment. Workshop leaders are staff members at a teacher training institution and workshop groups generally number 15 participants. The third component of the induction program is evaluation. Formative evaluation of new teachers’ performance is required in mid-January, while summative evaluation is conducted towards the end of the school year. This component was not included in the present study. The study focused on variables related to mentorship and the induction workshop, in view of the fact that these components embody the program’s main support frameworks for the new teachers and are explicitly intended to aid the socialization process. 3. Method In order to examine the relationships among the research variables a correlational design was employed, using hierarchical linear regression. The criterion variable was satisfaction from socialization at school and the predictor variables included personal, school context, and induction variables.

1594


3.1. Participants Participants in this study were beginning teachers, who were participating in the induction program. Complete data were obtained from a national sample of 243 new teachers who were randomly selected from 35 induction workshops. 3.2. Research instrument and variables Data were collected by means of a questionnaire which included six parts that are related to background and teacher training, employment during the first year of teaching, the mentoring experience, the induction workshop, the evaluation process, and their attitudes towards the induction program and their socialization into the school. Below is a description of the variables which are relevant to the present analysis. Satisfaction with socialization, the criterion variable, was measured by asking participants to rate their satisfaction with eight aspects of their school experience during their first year of teaching on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (low satisfaction) to 5 (high satisfaction). These aspects included satisfaction with teaching, duties other than teaching, sense of belonging, support received from colleagues, relations with pupils, relations with parents, general involvement at school, and how they were received by school administration. Principal axis factor analysis on the satisfaction with socialization data yielded one general factor accounting for 45.15% of the variance in the data. Internal consistency as measured by Cronbach’s a was .86. The predictor variables were grouped into four categories: personal variables, school variables, mentoring variables, and workshop variables.

distribution into the three domains are presented in the Appendix. The emotional domain relates to coping, encouragement and motivation; the pedagogical domain refers directly to the teaching activity and includes reference to application of instructional materials and methods; and the ecological pertains to adjustment to the school culture and assistance with non-instructional school tasks. It should be pointed out that the three domains identified here coincide with Vonk’s three dimensions of novice teachers’ professional development (Vonk, 1995). 3.2.4. Induction workshop variables Respondents were presented with the same 21 items mentioned above and asked to rate the contribution of the induction workshop to their professional development. The same three factors were obtained explaining 54.0% of the variance in the data. Cronbach’s a coefficients corresponding to the emotional, ecological, and pedagogical domains were .93, .90 and .88, respectively, and were almost identical to those obtained in relation to mentor contribution data. 3.3. Procedure The induction coordinator at each of the teacher training institutions administered the questionnaires to the new teachers in one of the workshop meetings which took place towards the end of the induction year. Questionnaires were completed and returned in a sealed envelope to the coordinator, who forwarded them on to the researchers. 4. Findings 4.1. Descriptive statistics

3.2.1. Personal variables Two variables were included in this category: gender (0 ¼ female and 1 ¼ male) and whether or not the new teachers had already completed teacher training. 3.2.2. School variables Seven variables were used to obtain information about placement of the new teachers and the school environment in which they were employed: school type (elementary/secondary), type of placement (permanent/temporary track), job responsibilities (teaching only/teaching and homeroom duties), when began to work (start of the school year/later), workload (as the percentage of a full-time job), having received help from the school principal, and having received help from colleagues at school. 3.2.3. Mentoring variables Participants reported how they were assigned a school mentor. Cases in which the principal selected the mentor were coded 1, and cases in which the new teacher had to find a mentor on his or her own were coded 0. New teachers were also asked about initiation of mentoring sessions. Cases in which both they and the mentor equally initiated meetings were coded 1, while cases in which the new teacher tended to initiate meetings were coded 0. (There were no instances reported in which mentors were the primary initiators of mentoring sessions.) In addition, participants were presented with 21 items on which they were asked to rate how mentoring contributed to their professional development on a scale from 1 (low contribution) to 5 (high contribution). Principle axis factor analysis with oblique rotation yielded three factors that corresponded to the emotional, pedagogical and ecological domains, accounting for 59.8% of the variance in the data. Cronbach’s a coefficients corresponding to the emotional, ecological, and pedagogical domains were .91, .90 and .88, respectively. These 21 items and their

Table 1 provides descriptive information about the sample of new teachers on each of the research variables. As can be seen from the table, teacher satisfaction during the induction year was moderately high, with a mean score of 3.81 on a 5-point scale. With respect to personal variables, most new teachers were female and had not yet completed their teacher training. Two types of variables related to the schools where the new teachers were employed. The first type included variables that describe placement characteristics while the second type referred to school environment as expressed by the treatment the new teachers received from the principal and others in the school. The data in Table 1 show that the new teachers in the sample were almost equally divided between elementary and secondary schools. Most had received permanent-track positions that involved teaching only and for the most part they were not working full time (on the average, 60% of a full-time job). Only 70% of the new teachers had begun teaching at the start of the school year in September while the others had been hired as late as December. Formally, new teachers are assigned a mentor as part of the induction program. However it is reasonable to expect that they will often receive assistance from others in the school. In fact, about half of the new teachers reported receiving help from the school principal and 75% of them received help from other teachers at school besides their mentor. Induction variables related to both the mentor and the induction workshop. Although, as noted above, the principal is supposed to select an experienced teacher to mentor the new teacher, in reality 54% of the new teachers had to find a mentor on their own. When asked who tended to initiate mentoring sessions, 40% of the new teachers reported that they tended to initiate mentoring sessions whereas the others indicated that mentoring sessions were equally initiated


4.2. Prediction of satisfaction

Table 1 Description of the research variables (means, standard deviations, frequencies). Variables

Values

Mean SD

Satisfaction with socialization in first year Personal Gender Completed teacher training

3.81

Induction: mentor Mentor selection Initiator of mentoring contact

%

0.76 243

Female Male Yes No

School (placement & environment) School type Elementary Secondary Type of placement Permanent track Temporary Job responsibilities Teaching only Teaching þ homeroom Workload (% job) 60.5 Beginning of work Start of school year After start of school year Received help Yes from principal No Received help from Yes other teachers No

N

23.4

Principal New teacher New teacher Mentor and new teacher equally

193 50 78 165

79.4 20.6 32.1 67.9

127 116 172 71 177 66 243 170 73 117 126 183 63

52.3 47.7 70.8 29.2 72.8 27.2 70.0 30.0 48.1 51.9 75.3 24.7

111 132 97 146

45.7 54.3 39.9 60.1

Emotional support Pedagogical support Ecological support

2.91 2.95 2.66

1.01 243 1.04 243 1.11 243

Induction: workshop Emotional support Pedagogical support Ecological support

3.19 2.14 2.46

1.08 243 0.94 243 1.10 243

1595

Hierarchical linear regression analysis was performed in order to determine the extent to which personal, school, mentor, and workshop variables predicted satisfaction with socialization in the first year of teaching. Table 2 presents the correlation matrix for the research variables on which the regression analysis was based. In general, low correlation coefficients were found between satisfaction and each of the predictor variables. The highest correlation was only .361 between satisfaction and ecological support received from mentors. The hierarchical regression results as shown in Table 3 indicate that 25.2% of the variance in satisfaction scores was accounted for by the predictor variables. Two blocks of variables (school and mentor) contributed significantly (p < .01) to predicting satisfaction. Of the two blocks, the mentor variables accounted for a larger proportion of the variance in satisfaction with socialization (14.4%), as compared to the school variables (9%). Inspection of the regression results per variable revealed that only five variables contributed significantly to predicting the variance in satisfaction: having already completed teaching training, workload, receiving help from the principal, being aided by other colleagues, and ecological support from the mentor. Regression analysis with only these five variables as predictors of satisfaction revealed that together they accounted for 22.9% of the variance. The most important variable for predicting satisfaction was mentor’s ecological support, with a unique contribution of 13.8%. Workload, help from principal, and help from others at school together accounted for 8.2% of the variance in satisfaction. Having completed teacher training had a very small unique contribution (1%). 5. Discussion

Note. Satisfaction and support scores are on 1e5 scale.

by the mentors and by themselves. New teachers rated the support they received from mentors and workshops as low to moderate. With respect to the mentors’ contribution, pedagogical and emotional support was rated higher than ecological support. With respect to the contribution of the induction workshop, ratings of the different dimensions were more varied, and emotional support was rated highest while pedagogical support was rated lowest.

A critical stage in the socialization of teachers occurs when they have to make the transition from being a student in a pre-service training program to being a teacher in a classroom of their own. This transition has been described using such terms as “reality shock” (Veenman, 1984) or “praxis shock” (Kelchtermans & Ballet, 2002), terms that highlight the emotional reactions of new teachers everywhere when they confront the realities and responsibilities of their job. Findings in this study indicate that, on the whole, the new teachers were moderately-satisfied to highly-satisfied with their experiences during the first year of teaching. This finding suggests

Table 2 Pearson correlation coefficients among research variables. Variable

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

1. Gender e 2. Completed teacher training .023 e 3. School type .186 .243 e 4. Type of placement .148 .093 .125 e 5. Job responsibilities e.036 .115 e.065 .067 e 6. Beginning of work e.067 e.124 e.069 e.270 e.219 e 7. Workload .126 .167 .114 .127 .448 e.281 e 8. Received help from principal .080 .043 .052 .003 .171 e.164 .077 9. Received help from other teachers e.015 e.076 e.045 e.032 .157 e.062 .016 10. Mentor selection .024 e.117 e.165 .026 .053 .084 .018 11. Initiator of mentoring contact e.001 e.088 e.079 .068 .007 .039 .030 12. Mentor’s emotional support .055 .067 .077 .048 .033 .023 .017 .006 .025 .022 .011 .039 .001 .059 13. Mentor’s pedagogical support 14. Mentor’s ecological support .090 .097 L.136 .120 .047 .000 .020 15. Workshop’s emotional support L.157 .082 .103 .003 .001 .230 .051 16. Workshop’s pedagogical support .004 .019 .025 .040 .020 .209 .050 17. Workshop’s ecological support .040 .101 .093 .097 .059 .198 091 18. Satisfaction with socialization in first year .034 .096 .012 .054 .132 .098 .224 Note: significant correlation coefficients at a ¼ .05 are written in bold.

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

e e.002 .208 e.022 .004 .021 .034 .066 .050 .011 .170

e e.031 .118 .041 .030 .001 .039 .066 .002 .121

e .022 e .097 .151 e .055 .178 .752 e .189 .220 .797 .635 e .066 .049 .344 .267 .262 e .132 .000 .312 .294 .281 .705 e .125 .003 .390 .337 .395 .752 .726 e .122 .145 .289 .245 .361 .160 .161 .165

1596


Table 3 Results of hierarchical regression analysis of satisfaction with socialization on mentor, workshop, school, and personal variables. Predictor variables

b

SE

Personal Gender Completed teacher training

0.162 0.116 0.172 0.100

b

R2 change

.087 .106*

School (placement & environment) School type 0.029 0.096 .019 Type of placement 0.034 0.105 .021 Job responsibilities 0.009 0.115 .006 Beginning of work 0.064 0.110 .039 Workload (% job) 0.602 0.225 .186** Received help from principal 0.252 0.093 .166** Received help from other teachers 0.202 0.105 .115* Induction: mentor Emotional support Pedagogical support Ecological support Mentor selection Initiator of mentoring contact

0.027 0.014 0.246 0.054 0.109

Induction: workshop Emotional support Pedagogical support Ecological support

0.068 0.070 0.029 0.076 0.024 0.070

0.088 0.066 0.071 0.096 0.094

.010

.090**

.036 .144** .020 .359*** .035 .070 .097 .036 .097

.008

R2 total ¼ .252 Note. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

that most of them are likely to succeed in the process of socialization of both becoming a teacher and becoming part of the school community. While teacher background and school context can be expected to contribute to the socialization of new teachers, induction programs are being implemented with the specific goal of easing entry into the teaching profession and facilitating adjustment to the school culture (e.g., Feiman-Nemser et al., 1999; Ingersoll, 2007; Ingersoll & Smith, 2004; Wong, 2004). Unlike the informal support new teachers may receive from school staff, induction programs are official and have the potential of furnishing support also in less supportive school environments. The question is to what extent do induction programs actually contribute to the socialization process of new teachers over and beyond the contribution of teacher background and school context variables. Looking first at teacher background variables, gender was found to be unrelated to satisfaction from socialization. However, new teachers who began teaching while still in pre-service training reported lower levels of satisfaction from their school experiences. It is reasonable to assume that these teachers had less time to become involved in school life. Moreover, as compared to new teachers who had completed their studies, they were likely torn between two identities, that of student and that of schoolteacher. Since professional socialization involves acquiring an identity, filling two roles concurrently seems to be confusing and counter-productive. The results suggest that entry into the teaching profession with the responsibilities of a full-fledged teacher should preferably be delayed until formal completion of pre-service training. Two types of school context variables were included in this study: school environment variables and placement variables. Both school environment variables, that is whether or not the principal and teachers had provided support and assistance to the new teachers, accounted for a significant amount of variance in satisfaction with socialization at school. Providing new teachers with help and guidance may be indicative of a collaborative school environment. As Johnson (2004) has pointed out, schools which do not assume that good teaching is an innate talent, purposefully and continuously engage new teachers in the culture and practices of

the school. School staffs that show a professional interest in their new teachers and help them deal with difficulties encountered in teaching send implicit messages to them that they are not alone and that their success in teaching is a shared effort. Therefore, it is not surprising that satisfaction with socialization into the school was found to be positively correlated with the help that new teachers received from principal and colleagues. The only placement variable significantly related to satisfaction was the teacher’s workload. A possible explanation of this finding might be that new teachers with greater workloads spend more time at school and have more chance to interact with colleagues, pupils, and parents. Greater time at school may mean greater involvement in school life and a greater likelihood of becoming assimilated. School type, job responsibilities, whether the job was permanent track or temporary, or when they had begun working were placement variables unrelated to new teachers’ satisfaction with socialization. The major components of the induction program examined here included mentoring and a reflective practice workshop for new teachers. According to program directives, mentoring was intended to provide mainly ecological and pedagogical support and workshop activities were supposed to provide mainly emotional support. Results deviated somewhat from these expectations, particularly with respect to ecological support from both mentors and workshops which was rated relatively low as compared to the other two domains. Hierarchical regression analysis, which included eight induction variables as well as all personal and school variables as predictors of satisfaction, revealed that ecological support from the induction mentor was the most important predictor. This finding together with the fact that mentors provide insufficient support in this domain has implications for the content of mentoring in an induction program. Not only do mentors have to provide emotional support and pedagogical guidance, but they also have an important mission to help new teachers assimilate in all facets of a specific school culture. As official representatives of the school, their task is to help them not only to become good teachers, but also to be active members of the school staff and the community of educators. Because of the importance of mentors to the socialization of new teachers, mentors should receive proper training that addresses all aspects of the mentorship, including their role as agents of socialization. Other induction variables, whether related to the mentor or to the workshop, had no significant contribution to satisfaction with socialization. The fact that workshop variables had no significant contribution in this study does not necessarily mean that the workshop component of the induction program is superfluous. Its contribution may be in areas of professional development not examined here, such as the development of reflective thinking, linking theory and practice, and professional sharing with peers. Some support for this contention can be found in the literature (e.g., Cady, 1998; Wood, 2007). Further research is needed in general to examine the differential impact of various induction program components on different aspects of new teacher professional development and retention in the school system. Such research can be used as a basis for planning and implementing effective induction programs for new teachers. In summary, although school and teacher background factors contribute to a satisfying socialization experience of new teachers, induction, specifically mentoring, also plays a role. Mentors as key players in induction as well as colleagues of the new teacher, have the greatest impact on new teachers’ assimilation. Besides providing pedagogical and personal assistance, they have an important role in new teachers’ adjustment to the school culture. Support from the principal and other colleagues, as well as more time spent in school, all augment the mentor’s contribution. In conclusion, there is evidence that induction programs can make a difference in terms of teachers’ socialization.


Easing entry into the teaching profession is a concern in most educational systems around the world and consequently induction programs have proliferated in recent years in an attempt to relieve the reality shock of new teachers. The purpose of the Israeli induction program, its core components, and duration are highly similar to induction programs in other countries. Therefore, although this study was conducted as part of an evaluation of a national program in one country, it is likely that the findings are applicable in other settings as well. Appendix Items measuring the mentor and workshop contribution to new teachers’ professional development and reliabilities by domain. Items

Cronbach’s

Cronbach’s

a mentor

a workshop

contribution

contribution

Emotional support Fostering my confidence as a teacher Providing emotional support when coping with frustration Coping with didactic problems which arise in class Creating a positive classroom environment Coping with pupils’ personal problems Coping with discipline problems Coping with time management Motivating me to persist in teaching Motivating pupils to learn

.91

.93

Pedagogical support Adapting teaching materials and methods to pupil’s needs Assessing pupils’ achievement Using instructional aids (computers, library, films) Mastering subject matter Preparing instructional materials (worksheets, games, assignments) that fit learners’ needs Becoming familiar with curriculum

.88

.88

Ecological support Becoming familiar with school norms and regulations Communicating with others in the school (principal, secretary, school counselor, nurse, maintenance staff) Becoming part of teamwork in school Organizing activities such as parent meetings, field trips and class parties Communicating with parents Carrying out additional tasks at school

.90

.90

References Achinstein, B., Ogawa, R. T., & Spieglman, A. (2004). Are we creating separate and unequal tracks of teachers? The effects of state policy, local conditions, and teacher characteristics on new teacher socialization. American Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 557e603. Angelle, P. S. (2002, April). Socialization experiences of beginning teachers in differentially effective schools. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Brunton, K. (2007, July). Beginning teachers and their reality of teaching: negotiating the micro-political world. Paper presented at the bi-annual conference of the Inter national Study Association on Teachers and Teaching (ISATT), Brock University, St. Catherines, Canada.

1597

Cady, J. M. (1998). Reflective practice groups in teacher induction: building professional community via experiential knowledge. Education, 118(3), 459e470. Dewert, M., Babinski, L. M., & Jones, B. D. (2003). Safe passages: providing on-line support to beginning teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4), 311e320. Feiman-Nemser, S., Schwille, S., Carver, C., & Yusko, B. (1999). A conceptual review of literature on new teacher induction. Washington, DC: National Partnership for Excellence and Accountability in Teaching. Fletcher, S. H., & Barret, A. (2004). Developing effective beginning teachers through mentor-based induction. Mentoring and Tutoring, 12(3), 321e333. Howe, R. E. (2006). Exemplary teacher induction: an international review. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 38(3), 287e297. Hudson, S., & Beutel, D. (2007, July). Teacher induction: what is really happening? Paper presented at the Australian Teacher Education Association conference, Wollongong, Australia. Ingersoll, R. M. (2003). Out-of-field teaching and the limits of teacher policy. Research report (R-03-5). Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington. Ingersoll, R. M. (2007, April). Research on new teachers from a national perspective. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. Ingersoll, R. M., & Smith, T. M. (2004). Do teacher induction and mentoring matter? National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 88(638), 28e40. Israeli Ministry of Education. (1999). Induction in teaching: Principles, guidelines, and a framework for action. Jerusalem: Author. (in Hebrew). Johnson, N. L., Clift, R. T., & Klecka, C. L. (2002, August). Novice teacher support project (NTSP): Following program participants. Paper presented to the Association of Teacher Educators, Williamsburg, VA. Johnson, S. M. (2004). Finders and keepers: Helping new teachers survive and thrive in our schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kelchtermans, G., & Ballet, K. (2002). The micropolitics of teacher induction: a narrative-biographical study on teacher socialization. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 105e120. Kelley, L. M. (2004). Why induction matters. Journal of Teacher Education, 55(5), 438e448. Liu, E. (2005, April). Hiring, job satisfaction, and the fit between new teachers and their schools. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada. Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Moskowitz, J., & Stephens, M. (1997). From students of teaching to teachers of students: Teacher induction around the Pacific Rim. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. Rippon, J., & Martin, M. (2003). Supporting induction: relationships count. Mentoring and Tutoring, 11(2), 211e226. Schonfeld, I. S. (2001). Stress in 1st-year women teachers: the context of social support and coping. Genetic, Social & General Psychology Monographs, 127(2), 133e168. Smith, T. M., & Ingersoll, R. M. (2004). What are the effects of induction and mentoring on beginning teacher turnover. American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 681e714. Stoel, C. F., & Thant, T. (2002). Teachers’ professional lives e A view from nine industrialized countries. Washington, DC: Council for Basic Education & The Milken Family Foundation. Su, J. Z. X. (1992). Sources of influence in pre-service teacher socialization. Journal of Education for Teaching, 18(3), 239e258. Veenman, S. (1984). Perceived problems of beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 54(2), 143e178. Villar, A., & Strong, M. (2007). Is mentoring worth the money? A benefitecost analysis and five year rate of return of a comprehensive mentoring program for beginning teachers. ERS Spectrum: Journal of Research and Information, 25(3), 1e17. Vonk, J. H. C. (1995, April 12e16). Conceptualizing novice teachers’ professional development: A base for supervisory interventions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, Atlanta, Georgia. Wayne, A., Young, P., & Fleischman, S. (2005). Improving teacher induction. Educational Leadership, 62(8), 76e78. Wechsler, M. E., Caspary, K., Humphrey, D. C., & Matsko, K. K. (2010). The effects of new teacher induction. Menlo Park, CA: U.S. SRI International. Wong, H. K. (2004). Induction programs that keep new teachers teaching and improving. National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 88(638), 41e58. Wong, H. K., Britton, T., & Ganser, T. (2005). What the world can teach us about new teacher induction. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(5), 379e384. Wood, D. R. (2007). Professional learning communities: teachers, knowledge, and knowing. Theory Into Practice, 46(40), 281e290. Zeichner, K., & Gore, J. (1989). Teacher socialization. In W. R. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education. New York: Macmillan. Zeichner, K., & Tabachnik, B. R. (1985). The development of teacher perspectives: social strategies and institutional control in the socialization of beginning teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching, 11(1), 1e25.