Abstract
Using a sample of 374 randomly selected first- and second-year teachers in three states, this study examines new teachers’ experiences of official mentoring during their first year. Descriptive analyses reveal that experienced mentors are generally present in the work lives of new teachers. However, new teachers often have inappropriate mentor-matches, and low percentages of new teachers are observed by or have conversations with their mentor about the core activities of teaching. Low proportions of new teachers in low-income schools and those in math, science, and technology have ideal matches and supports. The findings have implications for policymakers who look to mentoring as a strategy to improve public schools and retain new teachers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
In their analysis of the nationally representative SASS data, Smith and Ingersoll (2004) found that school poverty level was among the strongest predictors of likelihood of leaving teaching as opposed to staying.
Although their coefficients were not statistically significant, Smith and Ingersoll (2004) also found, for example, that math or science teachers were about 10% more likely than teachers of other subjects to leave teaching.
Throughout this analysis, findings about mentoring refer to new teachers’ self-reports of their experiences of the mentor assigned to them by their school or their district during their first year of teaching.
The national random sample of new teachers used in Smith and Ingersoll’s (2004) analysis of the 1999–2000 SASS data included teachers in regular public, charter, and private schools. The percentages presented above are for all beginning teachers. Twenty-seven percent of regular public school teachers left their schools (11 percent left teaching, and 16 percent moved to other schools). Thirty-seven percent of charter school teachers left their schools (24 percent left teaching, and 13 percent moved to other schools). Thirty-six percent of private school teachers left their schools (26 percent left teaching, and 10 percent moved to other schools).
For example, for more information on the New Teacher Center, visit www.newteachercenter.org.
This study is part of a 4-state survey study of a representative random sample of new teachers that also included California. We omit California in this analysis for three reasons: (1) demographic and other relevant characteristics about CA make it unusual (for example, California has greater than four times more public schools and greater than six times more public school students than Massachusetts); (2) concerns about potential bias in the CA sample resulting from low response rates in certain subgroups in CA (for example, in California, the group of responding schools included a much lower proportion of middle schools than the group of non-responding schools); (3) a swamping effect resulting from the sample weights used to correct for the study design. Because the responses of California teachers were given much greater weight than the teachers in the other three states, population estimates for the four states together look almost exactly like the estimates for CA alone.
Elementary, middle, and high schools differ in ways likely to impact professional culture such as organizational structure (Rowan 1990) and the ways in which new teachers interact with their experienced colleagues, both formally and informally. It is, therefore, important to ensure that the sample does not contain a disproportionate number of high schools, which might result from just sampling proportional to size.
The school response rates for each state were: 71 percent in Florida; 82 percent in Massachusetts; and 71 percent in Michigan.
Individual response rates in each of the three states are as follows: 63 percent in Florida; 67 percent in Massachusetts; and 69 percent in Michigan.
School-level data were obtained from the U.S. Department of Education’s Common Core of Data and from state departments of education. We consulted state databases to fill in gaps in the Common Core of Data.
Additional information on sampling and response is available from the authors.
Additional information on instrument development is available from the authors.
Notably, we found few significant differences between high school teachers and elementary/middle school teachers.
School economic status breakdowns follow those published in the “Education Watch State Summaries” by the Education Trust (2003). High-income schools are defined as schools where less than 15 percent of the students qualify for free or reduced-price lunch. Low-income schools are defined as schools where greater than 50 percent of the students qualify for free or reduced-price lunch.
These differences were not statistically significant.
The differences for same-school and same-subject mentor matches were not statistically significant. The very large difference for same-grade-level matches was statistically significant.
All differences were statistically significant except the difference in classroom observation and conversations about classroom instruction.
Differences in classroom observation and conversations about curriculum and lesson planning were statistically significant. Differences in conversations about classroom management and discipline and classroom instruction were not.
Notably, 100 percent of both groups—new teachers in high-income and low-income schools—should be reasonably expected to have at least three conversations with their mentors about these three substantive topics related to their teaching by the spring of their first year. Therefore, while the percentages in high-income schools are higher than those in low-income schools, arguably, they are also not high enough.
It is true that some schools experience large influxes of new teachers and, therefore, face shortages of experienced teachers able and willing to support the incoming beginners. Still, our qualitative study of new teachers (Johnson and The Project on the Next Generation of Teachers 2004) suggests that this new generation of teachers differs from the generation of teachers described by Lortie (1975) in his landmark sociological study. Lortie described teachers as preferring privacy and autonomy. While this new generation of teachers values their independence, they also want feedback on their teaching, opportunities for collaborative work, and classroom observations. The new teachers in our study said they wanted experienced teachers to help show them the way.
This difference, though large, is not statistically significant.
This term refers to the existing belief that all participants are acting in good faith (Meyer and Rowan 1978).
References
Adelman, N. E. (1991). Preservice training and continuing professional development of teachers. Washington, D.C: Policy Studies Associates.
Berry, B., Hopkins-Thompson, T., & Hoke, M. (2002). Assessing and supporting new teachers: Lessons from the Southeast. North Carolina: The Southeast Center for Teaching Quality at the University of North Carolina.
Breaux, A. L., & Wong, H. K. (2003). New teacher induction: How to train, support, and retain new teachers. Mountain View, CA: Harry K. Wong Publications, Inc.
Counts, Q. (2003). The Teacher Gap. Bethesda, MD.
Daloz, L. A. (1986). Effective teaching and mentoring: Realizing the transformational power of adult learning experiences. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Solving the dilemmas of teacher supply, demand, and standards: How we can ensure a competent, caring, and qualified teacher for every child. Washington, D.C.: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.
Dillman, D. A. (1991). The design and administration of mail surveys. Annual Review of Sociology, 17, 225–249.
Drago-Severson, E. (2004). Helping teachers learn: Principal leadership for adult growth and development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Education Trust. (2003). Education watch state summaries. Washington, D.C.: Education Trust.
Evertson, C., & Smithey, M. (2000). Mentoring effects on protégés’ classroom practice: An experimental field study. The Journal of Educational Research, 93(5), 294–304.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (1983). Learning to teach. In L. S. Shulman & G. Sykes (Eds.), Handbook of teaching and policy (pp. 150–170). New York: Longman.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (1996). Mentoring: A critical review. Washington, D.C.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 1013–1055. doi:10.1111/0161-4681.00141.
Feiman-Nemser, S., & Floden, R. E. (1986). The cultures of teaching. In M. C. Witrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 505–526). New York: Macmillan.
Feiman-Nemser, S., & Parker, M. (1993). Mentoring in context: A comparison of two U.S. programs for beginning teachers. International Journal of Educational Research, 19(8), 699–718. doi:10.1016/0883-0355(93)90010-H.
Feiman-Nemser, S., & Schwille, S. (2004, April). Tracing paths of influence in new teacher induction. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
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.
Geschwend, L., & Moir, E. (2007). Growing together: New and veteran teachers support each other through practices that target the needs of high school educators. Journal of Staff Development, 28(4), 20–24.
Gless, J., & Moir, E. (2001). Teacher quality squared. Journal of Staff Development, 22(1), 62.
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: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.
Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school: Prospects for the future. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Grissmer, D., & Kirby, S. N. (1997). Teacher turnover and teacher quality. Teachers College Record, 99(1), 45–56.
Holloway, J. H. (2001). The benefits of mentoring. Educational Leadership, 58(8), 85–86.
Huling-Austin, L. (1990). Teacher induction programs and internships. In W. R. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 535–548). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Humphrey, D. C., Adelman, N., Esch, C. E., Riehl, L. M., Shields, P. M., & Tiffany, J. (2000). Preparing and supporting new teachers: A literature review. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2000). Turnover among mathematics and science teachers in the U.S. National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499–534. doi:10.3102/00028312038003499.
Ingersoll, R. M., & Kralik, J. M. (2004). The impact of mentoring on teacher retention: What the research says. ECS Research Review. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
Ingersoll, R., & Smith, T. (2003). The wrong solution to the teacher shortage. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 30–33.
Johnson, S. M. (1990). Teachers at work: Achieving success in our schools. New York: BasicBooks.
Johnson, S. M., & Birkeland, S. E. (2003). Pursuing a “sense of success”: New teachers explain their career decisions. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 581–617. doi:10.3102/00028312040003581.
Johnson, S. M., & The Project on the Next Generation of Teachers. (2004). Finders and keepers: Helping new teachers survive and thrive in our schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kardos, S. M. (2001). New teachers in New Jersey schools and the professional cultures they experience: A pilot study. Unpublished Special Qualifying Paper, Harvard University Graduate School of Education, Cambridge, MA.
Kardos, S. M., & Johnson, S. M. (2007). On their own and presumed expert: New teachers’ experience with their colleagues. Teachers College Record, 109(9), 2083–2106.
Kardos, S. M., Johnson, S. M., Peske, H. G., Kauffman, D., & Liu, E. (2001). Counting on colleagues: New teachers encounter the professional cultures of their schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(2), 250–290. doi:10.1177/00131610121969316.
Kauffman, D., Johnson, S. M., Kardos, S. M., Liu, E., & Peske, H. G. (2002). “Lost at sea”: New teachers’ experiences with curriculum and assessment. Teachers College Record, 104(2), 273–300. doi:10.1111/1467-9620.00163.
Keiley, M. K. (1996). Affect regulation in adolescents: Do males and females manage their feeling differently?. Cambridge: Harvard University Graduate School of Education.
Levy, P. S., & Lemeshow, S. (1999). Sampling of populations: Methods and applications (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Light, R. J., Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (1990). By design: Planning research on higher education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Little, J. W. (1990a). The mentor phenomenon and the social organization of teaching. In C. Cazden (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 16, pp. 297–351). Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association.
Little, J. W. (1990b). The persistence of privacy: Autonomy and initiative in teachers’ professional relations. Teachers College Record, 91(4), 509–536.
Little, J. W., & McLaughlin, M. W. (Eds.). (1993). Teachers’ work: Individuals, colleagues, and contexts. New York: Teachers College Press.
Liu, E., & Kardos, S. M. (2002). Hiring and professional culture in New Jersey schools. Cambridge: Project on the Next Generation of Teachers at the Harvard Graduate School of Education.
Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
McCabe, M. (2006). State of the states, Quality counts at 10: A decade of standards-based education. Education Week, 25(17), 74.
McDonald, F. J. (1980). The problems of beginning teachers: A crisis in training. Vol. I. Study of induction programs for beginning teachers. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
McDonald, F. J., & Elias, P. (1983). The transition into teaching: The problems of beginning teachers and programs to solve them. Summary Report. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Services.
McLaughlin, M. W. (1993). What matters most in teachers’ workplace context? In J. W. Little & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), Teachers’ work: Individuals, colleagues, and contexts. New York: Teachers College Press.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. C. (1978). The structure of educational organizations. In M. Meyer and Associates (Eds.), Environments and organizations: Theoretical and empirical perspectives. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Moir, E., Gless, J., & Baron, W. (1999). A support program with heart: The Santa Cruz Project. In M. Scherer (Ed.), A better beginning: Supporting and mentoring new teachers. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Murnane, R. J., Singer, J. D., Willett, J. B., Kemple, J. J., & Olsen, R. J. (1991). Who will teach?: Policies that matter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (2003). No dream denied: A pledge to America’s children summary report. Washington, D.C.: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.
Powell, A. G., Farrar, E., & Cohen, D. K. (1985). The shopping mall high school: Winners and losers in the educational marketplace. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
Rea, L. M., & Parker, R. A. (1997). Designing and conducting survey research (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Rosenholtz, S. J. (1989). Teachers’ workplace: The social organization of schools. New York: Longman.
Rowan, B. (1990). Commitment and control: Alternative strategies for the organizational design of schools. In C. Cazden (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 16). Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association.
Rust, F. O. (1994). The first year of teaching: It’s not what they expected. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10(2), 205–217. doi:10.1016/0742-051X(94)90013-2.
Ryan, K. (Ed.). (1970). Don’t smile until Christmas: Accounts of the first year of teaching. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Ryan, K., Newman, K. K., Mager, G., Applegate, J., Lasley, T., Flora, R., et al. (1980). Biting the apple: Accounts of first year teachers. New York: Longman Inc.
Sizer, T. R. (1984). Horace’s compromise: The dilemma of the American high school. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
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), 681–714.
Stansbury, K., & Zimmerman, J. (2000). Lifelines to the classroom: Designing support for beginning teachers. San Francisco: WestEd.
Troen, V., & Boles, K. C. (2003). Who’s teaching your children? Why the teacher crisis is worse than you think and what can be done about it. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Useem, B. (2001, April). New teacher staffing and comprehensive school reform: Philadelphia’s experience. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
Veenman, S. (1984). Perceived problems of beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 54(2), 143–178.
Villani, S. (2002). Mentoring programs for new teachers: Models of induction and support. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Wideen, M., Mayer-Smith, J., & Moon, B. (1998). A critical analysis of the research on learning to teach: Making the case for an ecological perspective on inquiry. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 130–178.
Wilson, S., Darling-Hammond, L., & Berry, B. (2001). A case of successful teaching policy: Connecticut’s long-term efforts to improve teaching and learning. Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.
Youngs, P. (2002). State and district policy related to mentoring and new teacher induction in Connecticut. National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.
Zeichner, K. (1979). Teacher induction practices in the United States and Great Britain. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin, Department of Curriculum and Instruction.
Acknowledgments
Research for this paper was conducted under the auspices of the Project on the Next Generation of Teachers at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Funding was provided by the Spencer Foundation; however, the analysis and conclusions presented here are solely those of the authors.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kardos, S.M., Johnson, S.M. New teachers’ experiences of mentoring: The good, the bad, and the inequity. J Educ Change 11, 23–44 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-008-9096-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-008-9096-4