Citation
Exploration of the Relationships between Elementary Principals', Mentors', and Novice Teachers' Beliefs and Practices in a Teacher Induction Program

Material Information

Title:
Exploration of the Relationships between Elementary Principals', Mentors', and Novice Teachers' Beliefs and Practices in a Teacher Induction Program
Creator:
Russo, James
Place of Publication:
[Gainesville, Fla.]
Florida
Publisher:
University of Florida
Publication Date:
Language:
english
Physical Description:
1 online resource (140 p.)

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Doctorate ( Ed.D.)
Degree Grantor:
University of Florida
Degree Disciplines:
Educational Leadership
Educational Administration and Policy
Committee Chair:
Doud, James L.
Committee Members:
Behar-Horenstein, Linda S.
Clark, Phillip A.
Bondy, Elizabeth
Graduation Date:
8/9/2008

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Beginning teachers ( jstor )
Classrooms ( jstor )
Educational administration ( jstor )
Employee orientation ( jstor )
Mentors ( jstor )
School principals ( jstor )
Schools ( jstor )
Teacher administrator relationships ( jstor )
Teacher orientation ( jstor )
Teachers ( jstor )
Educational Administration and Policy -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
administrator, alternative, beginning, certification, elementary, induction, mentor, novice, support, teacher
Greater Orlando ( local )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent) ( marcgt )
born-digital ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation
Educational Leadership thesis, Ed.D.

Notes

Abstract:
The purpose of this study was to examine a district-wide teacher induction program and evaluate the relationship between the believed importance and actual delivery of mentors' and principals' responsibilities in support services, as evaluated by the administrators, mentors, and novice teachers. This study also reviewed the outcome of the teacher induction program through the perspective of traditionally and alternatively certificated novice teachers. This public elementary school study was a modified replication of previous research conducted in a West Central Florida school district. Electronic copies of a survey instrument measuring the beliefs and actual delivery of induction practices were distributed to public elementary school administrators, mentors and novice teachers in one county in Central Florida. In total, 461 administrators, mentors and novice teachers at 36 elementary schools were sent the instrument. Surveys were completed by 179 participants at 36 elementary schools, a 39% response rate. The majority of respondents were Caucasian (83%); female (85%)and held a bachelors (43%), master's degree (38%), educational specialist (11%), or doctoral degree (6%). Thirty percent (30%) of the respondents were administrators, 39% were mentors, 28% were novice teachers and 3% were novice teachers seeking alternative certification. Statistical analysis of the relationship between the believed importance and actual delivery of teacher induction services in a Central Florida county was conducted. The survey asked respondents to answer 10 items about the administrator's role, 10 items about the mentor's role, and 5 items about the shared responsibility of the principal and mentor. Administrators reported that 60% of their beliefs matched the actual delivery, mentors reported 72% of their beliefs matched the actual delivery and novice teachers reported 4% of their beliefs matched the actual delivery of induction service support. The results indicate that actual delivery of induction support to novice teachers most often did not match what they believed was important. The mean scores of the novice teachers seeking alternative certification differed significantly from mean scores of traditionally certificated novice teachers in their beliefs and actual delivery of induction support services, indicating the two groups of novice teachers should be considered mutually exclusive. ( en )
General Note:
In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note:
Includes vita.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description:
Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description:
This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Thesis:
Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Florida, 2008.
Local:
Adviser: Doud, James L.
Statement of Responsibility:
by James Russo.

Record Information

Source Institution:
UFRGP
Rights Management:
Copyright Russo, James. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Classification:
LD1780 2008 ( lcc )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text





table 4-31. Two (2) of the 10 beliefs were found to have a significant relationship. They were

items #6 (mentor 10-15 years older than novice) and #10 (provides guidelines for scheduling

observations and consultations). Items #1 (mentors assigned prior to preplanning), #2 (mentor in

the same or related field as novice), #3 (mentor with similar teaching style), #4 (mentor in close

proximity) #5 (mentor has necessary specialized expertise), #7 (provides frequent

observations/feedback), #8 (provides guidelines for observations/feedback) and #9 (provides

guidelines for scheduling observations) were found not to be significant.

The relationship of alternatively certificated novice teachers' ratings regarding the

importance and actual delivery of mentor responsibilities is shown in table 4-32. Item #16

(provides assistance with room organization) was found to have a significant negative

correlation. This indicates that the independent variables are moving in opposite directions, as

one increased the other decreased. The remaining items were found not to have significant

relationships. All items indicated that the rating of importance did not match the delivery of

induction services to alternatively certificated novice teachers.

The correlation of alternatively certificated novice teachers' ratings regarding the

importance and actual delivery of shared mentor and administrator responsibilities is shown in

table 4-33. Of the five items, #21 (provides training in "how best to handle classroom

disturbances") resulted in a significant negative correlation. This indicates that the independent

variables are moving in opposite directions, as one increased the other decreased. The remaining

items were found not to be significant. All items indicate that the rating of importance did not

match the delivery of induction services to alternatively certificated novice teachers.

Q 11. What are the differences between alternatively certificated and traditionally certificated
novice teachers' ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction
program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities?









APPENDIX

A LETTER OF INVITATION ........................................................... .. ............... 124

B QUESTIONN AIRE REVIEW PANEL ...............................................................................125

C TEACHER INDUCTION/SUPPORT PROGRAM SURVEY ........... .............. 126

L IST O F R E F E R E N C E S ............................ ...................................................... ..................... 135

B IO G R A PH IC A L SK E T C H ............................ .................................................. ................... 140












































8









Q5. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers' ratings regarding the delivery of
teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

The respondents were asked to rate 25 items using a 10-point Likert scale, with 10

representing complete satisfaction and 1 representing complete dissatisfaction the with the

delivery of an induction support service. The Cronbach's Alpha (reliability coefficient) was c =

.976, indicating a high level of agreement among mentor beliefs about the delivery of

administrators' responsibilities, their responsibilities, and shared administrative and mentor

responsibilities for teacher induction.

Table 4-16 reports how mentors rated the delivery of administrator responsibilities. The

means ranged from 5.81 to 8.06. The mentors reported moderate (6.46-7.19) delivery of items #1

(administrators assign mentors prior to preplanning), #3 (mentors were assigned with similar

teaching style), #6 (mentors should be 10-15 years older), #8 (administrators provide guidelines

for observations/feedback), #9 (administrators provide novices with weekly "walk-through"

feedback), and #10 (administrators provide guidelines for scheduling observations and

consultation). Items #2 (assigned mentors are in the same or related field as the novice), #4 (the

mentor is in close proximity to the novice), #5 (mentors assigned have the necessary specialized

expertise), and #7 (administrators provide frequent observations/feedback) were all rated at a

high level of delivery. Item #6 (mentor is 10-15 years older than novice) rated the lowest level of

delivery (5.81).

The mentors rated satisfaction with their own delivery of teacher induction support

services as shown in Table 4-17. The mentors' rated themselves as providing a high level

delivery of the following items: #13 (providing assistance locating books and materials), #14

(providing assistance in developing lesson plans in compliance with the Sunshine State









9. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers' ratings regarding the importance
and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and
mentor/principal responsibilities?

10. What is the level of agreement between alternatively certificated novice teachers' ratings
regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor
responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities?

11. What are the differences between alternatively certificated and traditionally certificated
novice teachers' ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction
program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities?

Delimitations

1. The data were collected from public schools. Results and conclusions do not necessarily
apply to non-public schools.

2. The study was limited to data gathered during the 2006-2007 school year. Conclusions
and generalizations made from this study may therefore not be able to be generalized to
other time periods.

3. The study focused on novice teachers and mentors from one Central Florida school
district.
Limitations of the Study

1. The study assumed that the induction process offered by this Central Florida school
district followed state guidelines.

2. The study assumed that all participants provided honest and accurate self-evaluation.

3. All administrators, first-year teachers and mentors involved in this Central Florida school
district's induction program were provided an opportunity to respond to this survey.

Significance of Study

"United States teacher education has historically been thin, uneven, poorly financed, and

recruitment is distressingly ad hoc" (Darling- Hammond, 1996, p. 194). Florida's beginning

teacher training programs are considered piecemeal and underdeveloped (Feimen-Nemser,

1999). Efforts to redesign teacher training ultimately requires rethinking teacher preparation and

professional development, not reformulating the status quo. Knowing this, a decade ago Darling-

Hammond (1996) set an audacious goal in the hope of challenging education professionals. She









ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I owe much of who I am today to my parents who helped me realize that I could achieve

anything I put my mind to. It was their role in my life that taught me if you sit and wait nothing

will fall in your lap.

Although she would not accept this compliment, my wife, Lesley, is the reason for my

success over the past 10 years. Her love and support has allowed me to realize and pursue my

dreams. She has encouraged me to chase those dreams, and this doctoral program was a huge

piece of that goal. I thank God for allowing Lesley and me to continue to be together on this

earth.

The birth of our son, Parker, has changed my life. I am thankful for each day that I spend

with him. Parker is too young to talk, but he has already taught me what is really important in

life. If you fight hard enough, you can achieve anything. Miracles are not granted, they are

achieved. Parker has caused me to be a different person today, and I am better for it.

I would like to acknowledge the University of Florida East Coast Cohort. This collective

group of people had a major impact on my personal success and taught me many lessons about

educational leadership. The special relationships I have made will last a lifetime. I would like to

thank Dr. Brandy Kamm, Dr. Drew Hawkins, and Dr. Carol Kindt for their continued support

and friendship. I could not have finished this dissertation without them.

My journey at the University of Florida began many years ago at a meeting with Dr. Doud.

From the first moment I met Dr. Doud, to our relationship today, he consistently challenges and

pushes me to grow professionally and personally. This is the reason Dr. Doud is my Chair and a

major reason this dissertation sits complete. I would like to deeply thank Dr. Doud for not only

helping me attain this goal of a doctorate but also for being an empathetic listener, a teacher, and

a motivator throughout my schooling at UF.









documentation of differentiated instruction. The abundance of paperwork and technical skill

required by teachers today is much more demanding. Novice teachers reported that

communication and having a mentor that they could openly talk to is the catalyst for day-to-day

questions. Novice teachers reported that having someone to "be there" was one of the most

important components of the teacher induction program. If novices are being assisted by a

nonjudgmental member of the organization, they can seek out the information necessary to meet

their individual needs. The timeliness and physical location of the mentor/mentee relationship

was the initial factor in a novice's success. The undertones of prior research and the results of

this study continue to emphasize the need for novice teachers to have support once they reach the

classroom.

The above information designed into a district-wide plan could be beneficial for this

Central Florida county's teacher training program, and help with the rigors of state mandates,

day-to-day job satisfaction, and the attrition of both traditional novice teachers and alternatively

certificated novice teachers.

Recommendations for Further Research

High attrition rates caused by teacher dissatisfaction with their career path in the first years

remain a major concern for educational leaders. Understanding the needs of novice teachers, and

how induction services can be effectively delivered through induction practices is necessary to

the retention of a stable faculty in a school district. All conclusions are based on voluntary

responses from elementary administrators, mentors and novice teachers in one Central Florida

county. Further study should be conducted to verify these results and to increase generalizability

to other districts. To control against social desirability bias, it is recommended that future

researchers use the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale.









survey and qualitative questioning, MacNab and Payne determined that past negative or positive

experiences reflected the novice teachers' current feelings. The nature of teachers' beliefs, their

antecedents and influences, and their effects on classroom practice are very revealing.

Brownlee et al. (1998) examined graduate students who recently completed a degree in

education. They found that novice teachers, who leave university training programs, depart with

beliefs that can be described as naive or informed. Nafve beliefs have no evidence of theoretical

knowledge and may lack understanding. Informed beliefs reflect a theoretical connection and

demonstrate understanding. Novice teachers who received theoretical classroom training, had an

on-the-job experience, and who utilized methods of reflection demonstrated an increased level of

informed beliefs. The authors determined that whether naive or informed, beliefs are a strong

predictor of teaching behavior, thus impacting student achievement.

Paj ares (1992) examined teachers' perception and reported that beliefs of the teacher will

indicate what type of program and support is important. Beliefs are strong predictors of human

behavior and are perceived as personal knowledge. Zepeda and Ponticell's (1998) study of

teachers' needs supported this pattern of thought, concluding that supervision is best when

teachers receive validation, empowerment, a visible presence, and coaching.

Novice teachers feel that validation is obtained through the feedback received from a

mentor or supervisor. Zepeda and Ponticell (1998) pointed out that positive feedback helped

teachers gain confidence while reaffirming their abilities. This interaction assists in the

validation of the teachers' self-confidence and beliefs about their role in the school system. The

"dog and pony show" (p. 5), in which the supervisor makes the evaluation based on a checklist

of boxes, was of little value and provided scant professional growth. Novice teachers felt more

personal gains were achieved when the only evaluation process was not structured around









for the practitioner to transfer theory into performance, sifting through educational jargon and

understanding expectations which result in concrete teaching in the classroom.

Critical reflection and feedback on practice give the novice teacher a chance in the latter

phase of induction to analyze success and failures. Reflection allows for self-learning during

which the novice can determine both the competencies to be gained and the strategies to acquire

those skills. Reflective supervision serves as a catalyst for novice teachers to have the courage to

look into their own classroom practices and change what is considered less effective (Brownlee,

Dart, Boulton-Lewis, & McCrindle, 1998; Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998). In turn, the novice teacher

begins to see how he can incorporate how he wants to teach rather than how he had to teach to

get through the year (Ballantyne & Hansford, 1995).

Mentors have reported that novice teachers often wanted to hide problems they were

having. Mentors used their own shortcomings to ease the novice teachers' stress levels. This aids

the teacher training process, allowing for a joint effort in which both the mentor and novice

teacher improve together (Johnson, 2001; Spindler & Biott, 2000). The mentors share in the

challenging timetables, sometimes shouldering much of the novice teachers' responsibility,

and-in many instances-increasing their time commitment an extensive number of hours. Most

mentors believed that novice teachers who initially showed limited skill can learn to improve

(Saunders & Pettinger, 1995). It is the mentor's role to provide the level of assistance the

beginning teacher requires. Novice teachers were more responsive to being provided appropriate

levels of assistance rather than being told what they needed to do (Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998).

Administrative Role

Principals can feel isolated-caught in the chain of command between students, teachers,

parents, and the district office. They can become overwhelmed by too many people clamoring

for their attention (Bolman & Deal, 1993). However, the need for principal support for novice









CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

This chapter presents a review of the professional literature and results of studies on

teacher recruitment and retention, alternative certification, and induction programs as they relate

to the teaching profession. Included in this review are the roles of a mentor and a description of

administrative roles to support beginning teachers and the importance of such support, along

with novice teacher's needs and perceptions of support and the importance of their beliefs, and

an overview of induction program research. A brief summary concludes the chapter.

Recruitment and Retention

A major goal for administrators and mentor teachers should be to help beginning teachers

remain in the profession (Johnson, 2001). Darling-Hammond (2003) added, "To reduce high

teacher turnover rates that impose heavy costs on schools, [education professionals] must ...

insist on effective teacher preparation and provide support for new teachers" (p. 1). Teacher

training programs produce more highly qualified teachers than should be necessary, yet

educators cannot keep them in the profession. Ingersoll (2002) reported that 14% of teachers

leave after one year, 24.4% leave after two years, 32.6% leave after three years, 40.4% leave

after four years, and almost half (50%) leave the profession after five years. Not only are first-

year teachers leaving the profession, but experienced teachers are also exiting in droves

(Coppenhaver & Schaper, 1999). Halford stated, "Nearly two million new teachers are projected

to enter U. S. schools in the next decade, and the challenge of supporting them effectively has

become a critical issue" (1998, p. 34). Turnover for teachers is 5% higher per year than non-

teaching occupations. In addition, Berry and Hirsch (2003) estimated a loss of thousands of

dollars per teacher who leaves the profession in the first few years. Most of the educators









Induction programs have become required for teachers who hold a temporary certificate or

seek eligibility for alternative certification. Such novice teachers are often deficient in experience

working with young people. They must learn to manage standards-based lessons, teach in ways

that reach diverse students, and adjust to the daily routines of school life (Berry et al., 2002;

Johnson & Birkeland, 2003). Investment in induction programs and practices need to be made

wisely if states wish to retain their workforce.

Induction Practices

Follow up support to teacher training-teacher inductions programs-are vital to novice

teachers' satisfaction of career selection and keeping new instructors from leaving the teaching

profession. A well-crafted induction program can improve teaching quality, increase retention

rates, and decrease the overall cost of recruiting, preparing, and developing new teachers

(Humphrey et al., 2000; Johnson & Birkeland, 2003; Littrel & Billingsley, 2004). Yet only 19%

of educators nationally reported participation in an induction program and a mentoring

relationship with another teacher during their first year of teaching. Of teachers who were

mentored at least once per week, 70% reported it improved their teaching significantly (NCES,

1998). The National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) Executive Summary (2000)

concluded that the attrition rate of new teachers who participated in an induction program was

15% within the first three years of teaching, compared with 26% for teachers who did not

participate in an induction program. Novice teachers who experienced induction activities

received help from mentors who assisted them with the multiple demands that teachers face.

Teachers are expected to know how to plan standards-based units and translate subject

matter knowledge into curriculum appropriate for students. Teachers are also expected to adapt

their curriculum toward diverse learners, such as students with special needs, limited English

proficiency, different learning styles, and a wide range of family and community circumstances.









Publication of students' test scores for stakeholders and evaluating administrators to see

(Johnson & Birkeland, 2003), increases the demand for teachers with increased levels of

knowledge. This demand for qualified teachers has been hindered by high attrition rates and

inconsistencies within teacher training programs. The problem is so severe that school districts

have begun recruiting individuals outside of teacher education programs.

Alternative Certification

American schoolchildren are never sent home because of the lack of qualified teachers.

School districts simply hire the next person down the list (Tetzeli, 1993). Fast-track or alternative

certification programs have become widespread as a way for people with bachelor degrees to

enter the profession without teacher training (Berry et al., 2002; Johnson & Birkeland, 2003;

Johnson, Birkeland, & Peske, 2005). The Southeast Center for Teaching Quality (2002)

confirmed that "many of the least prepared teachers begin their career in schools that house our

nation's most disadvantaged urban and rural students" (Berry et al., 2002, p. 3). Teach for

America (TFA) and other similar programs allow candidates with a four-year degree a quick

route into the classroom. Many of these alternative certification routes allow training to be

completed in one summer. Within the confines of their own four walls, these teachers are left to

succeed or fail (Finn & Madigan, 2001; Johnson & Birkeland, 2003; Johnson, Birkeland, &

Peske, 2005). Similar to this, Ingersoll and Kralik (2004) describe this educational practice as

one that "cannibalizes its young and in which the initiation of new teachers is akin to a sink or

swim, trial by fire, or boot-camp experience" (p. 2). To assist with training of both alternative

certification and traditionally certificated teachers, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) (2001)

has added funds.

The No Child Left Behind Act mandated that by the academic year 2005-2006 every

public school will have highly qualified teachers. Legislation provided monetary support, but did









of Florida passed legislation in 1982 that required and funded Florida's Beginning Teacher

Program, or Professional Orientation Program. Each district became responsible for

implementation of the program and for gaining annual endorsement by the Commissioner of

Education. The supporting staff was defined as a principal, peer teacher, and another professional

educator. Both formative and summative assessments should be conducted, using the

recommended Florida Performance Measurement System. Feimen-Nemser (1999) investigated

Florida's program and found that the training programs were piecemeal. She also discovered that

induction practices varied enormously stemming from Florida's decentralization.

Johnson (2001) believed that instructional practices cannot be grasped through pre-service

classes and student teaching. Support must continue throughout the first year and be part of an

ongoing process of development. The fact many teachers remain past the first years is a tribute

toward their desire to teach, not to the received support. Stansbury (2001) stated, "An induction

program aims at supporting beginning teachers who have completed their professional

preparation, using assessment strategies to inform support" (p. 1). Ponticell and Zepeda (1997)

added that planned induction activities with mentors, department chairs, and administrators

should be geared to help beginning teachers make the transition from student teacher to teacher

of students. These activities should help novice teachers make connections with information

sources and build a support network for problem-solving. Florida has mandated that all districts

have a specific plan of action. However, what constitutes a minimally acceptable program has

not been established (Baines et al., 2001).

Spindler and Biott (2000) suggested that support for novice teachers should include:

(a) obtainment of an induction tutor (mentor), (b) observation of beginning teacher instructional

practices, (c) observation of experienced teachers, (d) a formal review of the novice teacher's









accomplish this, they also expressed need for more fiscal and administrative support. Novice

teachers' most common theme was the need for understanding of record keeping required by the

district and school. They also emphasized the need for parent communication/classroom

management training, and observations with immediate feedback. Novice teachers seeking

alternative certification expressed a need for paperwork and classroom management training,

good communication and model teaching examples from mentor, and clear expectations and

emotional support from the mentor and administrator.









not specify how these programs should be implemented. To offer additional assistance, the

Elementary and Secondary Education Act allocated $2.85 billion to fund state teacher

development systems (Berry et al., 2002). Florida, along with many other states, has dedicated

more than $1 million to mentoring programs (Halford, 1999). These efforts demonstrate progress

toward financing teacher training and quality teaching, but the standards for what qualified

teachers need to know continues to rise.

Teacher Support

Halford (1999) identified increased support as an approach to alleviate the inadequate

training for novice teachers. This notion gained popularity with legislators resulting in the

mandate of district-created induction programs. Many novice teachers, however, find such

programs inadequate for reducing stress and bridging the gap between their university training

and their first jobs (Blair-Larsen & Bercik, 1992; Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Ponticell &

Zepeda, 1997).

Darling-Hammond (1995) believes the continuous change in course mandates, curriculum

guidelines, and standardized tests could not produce greater student learning and understanding

without investing in teacher support. State universities have currently followed this line of

thinking in Florida by mandating internship programs, or on-the-job training, to create a

seamless transition for novice teachers. If this pre-service support continued after graduation,

teachers could gain access to pedagogical information about the nature of learning and student

development. Novice teachers would be enabled to connect theory with classroom practice.

However, once novice teachers reach the classroom and support is removed, they find that time

constraints often clash with idealistic concepts learned in the pre-service practice environment.









elementary teachers seeking alternate certification in this Central Florida county at the time of

this survey. The alternative certificated teachers agreed with traditionally certificated novice

teacher beliefs about the importance of induction services except in two areas. Alternatively

certificated novice teachers reported that they believed weekly "walk-throughs" and guidelines

for scheduling observations and consultations were highly important, whereas traditionally

certificated novice teachers believed these services were on the lower end of moderately

important. The level of expectation and/or need for feedback may be higher for alternative

certificated teachers. The results could also imply that alterative certification is an area of

beginning teacher training that is overlooked. Mentors of novice teachers seeking alternative

certification are the only paid mentors in the district, yet the participants reported they were

significantly less satisfied with the feedback they received than traditionally certificated teachers

with unpaid mentors. This should be addressed by district and school-level administrators

because the needs of alternatively certificated teachers are not adequately being satisfied. In

addition, novice teachers seeking alternate certification are put through a state approved novice

teacher program that is designed to meet the special non-certificated needs of novice teachers.

Results of this study indicate that there are truly two unique groups of beginning teachers that

should be treated as mutually exclusive. Alternatively certificated teachers expressed a need for

additional training once they reach the classroom preferably through a relationship built with

their administrator and on campus mentor. One alternatively certificated teacher commented, "It

is important that all novice teachers are assigned mentors who follow through and understand

their teacher training obligation and expectation."

The NCLB act has initiated the age of accountability, which has forced districts to track the

data of individual students, provide stringent guidelines for lesson planning, and increase the









researcher received direct feedback about the clarity of the survey (Shaughnessy, Zechmeister &

Zechmeister, 2000; Dillman, 2007). The researcher utilized recommendations of the panel for

wording changes where appropriate in the instrument.

Castorina's survey produced high reliability coefficients that matched with showing high

internal consistency. Cronbach's alpha (reliability coefficient) was used to measure the

relationship of each indicator. If the relationship is high, the researcher can claim reliability.

Alpha coefficient ranges can be scaled as high (greater than + .75), moderate (+ .50 to + .74), and

low (less than + .25 to + .49). Reliability is the level of accuracy or consistency of data as

reported from an instrument over a period of time, therefore showing test stability where similar

results are reported for similar data (Norusis, 1994; Tuckman, 1999). Reliability ensures that if

the researcher conducted this study again, similar results should occur and the item responses

should be consistent across constructs (Creswell, 1994).

In this study, multiple questions were used to control for consistency of reporting attitudes.

Anytime a questionnaire requires self-reporting an issue of "showing one's self in the best light"

(Tuckman, 1999, p. 256) or social desirability bias can emerge. Self-serving bias, a threat to

internal validity, "is more likely to occur when one rates one's own behavior than when one rates

other's behavior" (Nauta & Kluwer, 2004, p. 464). To control for this bias, the research about

quality induction programs and how the data will be analyzed was not revealed to the

participants. The survey also allowed each group (administrator, mentor, or novice teacher) to

report how they felt the other groups delivered services.

A survey was used to provide access to what is inside a person's head. This questionnaire

allowed the investigator to measure what someone knows (knowledge or information), what

someone likes and dislikes (values and preferences), and what someone thinks (attitudes and









Table 4-45. Overall, What Do Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' Feel is the Most
Valuable Component of the Teacher Induction Program?
Novice teachers seeking alternative certification
common themes Tally marks
Strong mentor relationship (patient, approachable) 3
Classroom management 1
Never assigned a mentor 1

Table 4-46. What Aspects of the Teacher Induction/Support Program Would Administrators
Most Like to See Changed, Adapted or Improved?
Administrators' common themes Tally marks
District-wide continuity (checklists, mentor training) 10
Stipends for all mentors creating formal induction for all novice
teachers 8
Dollars to support the induction program (substitutes to observe
other teachers, meet with mentor) 7
Training in curriculum, understanding data, differentiated
instruction 3

Table 4-47. What Aspects of the Teacher Induction/Support Program Would Mentors Most Like
to See Changed, Adapted, or Improved?
Mentors' common themes Tally marks
Consistency (program guidelines and partner selection process) 17
Mentor assigned before preplanning 10
More frequent mentor/mentee meetings and observations 9
Money to support the program (paid mentors, sub days) 8

Table 4-48. What Aspects of the Teacher Induction/Support Program Would Novice teachers
Most Like to See Changed, Adapted, or Improved?
Novices' common themes Tally marks
More interaction, feedback, and follow-through from mentors 11
Preplanning meeting 5
Help with bookkeeping and record keeping 4
Mentor in same school and area of expertise 3

Table 4-49. What Aspects of the Teacher Induction/Support Program Would Alternatively
Certificated Novice Teachers Most Like to See Changed, Adapted or Improved?
Novice teachers seeking alternative certification common themes Tally marks
Communication 3
Handling of paperwork (assessment, educational plans lesson 3
plans)









BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

James Vincent Russo was born in 1974 in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, to Kathy and Jim

Russo. James has one older sister, Jeanmarie, and grew up in Fort Lauderdale, graduating from

Taravella High School in 1992. He earned a B.A. in psychology from the University of Central

Florida in 1996, an M.A. in elementary education from the University of Central Florida in 1999,

and an Ed.S. in educational leadership from the University of Florida in 2002.

Upon graduation in December of 1999 with his M.A. in elementary education, James was

hired by Seminole County Public Schools (SCPS) as a teacher. During his tenure with SCPS,

James assumed the role as a primary and intermediate teacher, administrative middle school

dean, and assistant principal. James has been an elementary school assistant principal with SCPS

for the past 3 years.

After completing his Ed.D. program, James plans to continue to work for SCPS as an

assistant principal. James has been married to Lesley Russo for seven years. They have one son:

Parker, age 11 months.









beginning teachers (Blair-Larsen & Bercik, 1992; Carter & Francis, 2001; Littrell & Billingsley,

1994; Ponticell & Zepeda, 1997). Without support deemed effective by teachers and mentors,

many beginning teachers will never fully develop their craft. Those teachers who do return for a

second-year are unlikely to grow professionally (The Southeast Center for Teaching Quality,

2003). Training is incomplete when it ceases once a teacher accepts an academic position. New

teachers, including those who complete teacher education programs, need continuous support

throughout their first years of teaching (Berry et al., 2002; Carter & Francis, 2001; Johnson &

Birkeland, 2003).

Proper funding is necessary to sustain induction support for novice teachers. The

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) provides funds for districts to develop

induction programs that assist teachers in their formative years. Millions of dollars have been

allocated for these programs, yet results are disappointing. The James B. Hunt Institute for

Educational Leadership and Policy (2004) and Berry and Hirsch (2003) estimated that an

investment between an $8,000 and $11,500 per beginning teacher is lost when a teacher leaves

the profession. The exodus has resulted in a continuing need for more teachers, monetary

investments consistently squandered, and districts resorting to placing personnel into positions

for which they have not received formal educational training. High attrition rates and the

difficulty of recruiting qualified candidates equate to more than 82% of urban districts in the

U. S. allowing people to teach without normal teaching certification (Tetzeli, 1993). New

alternative certification routes are now being investigated. Carlos Ponce, the former Chief

Human Resource Officer for Chicago public schools, reported that the small number of qualified

candidates in the United States caused Chicago to begin recruiting overseas (Archer, 1999).









CHAPTER 4
RESULTS

Upon competition of data collection, the data were analyzed to determine the effectiveness

of a district-wide teacher induction program by assessing the congruence of mentors' and

principals' perceptions about their roles in delivery of support services, as evaluated by the

administrator, mentor, and novice teacher. Data also revealed the success level of actual delivery

of induction support services through the perspective of the novice teacher. Differences between

alterative certification teachers and traditional certification teachers were examined. Open ended

responses were analyzed for common themes.

Response Rate

Surveys were completed by 179 participants at 36 elementary schools for a 39% (179 of

461) response rate and a completion rate of 76% (146 of 195) when the online survey was

viewed (Table 4-1).

Demographic Information

Demographic data is summarized and reported in Table 4-2. The 179 participants included

153 females and 21 males; 5 respondents did not answer the questions about gender or

race/ethnicity. On the survey 18 male participants described themselves as White; 0 as Black; 2

as Hispanic and 1 as Multi-racial. The hundred fifty-three (153) females included 130 Whites, 11

Blacks, 10 Hispanics, 10 Multi-racial and 1 Other. Five participants did not respond to the

question about race/ethnicity. Participant ages ranged from 21 to 63. Seventy-seven (77) of the

participants held a bachelors degree; 68 a masters degree; 19 an educational specialist degree and

11 a doctoral degree. Four participants did not answer the question about their highest level of

education. Responses of professional status are reported in Table 4-3. Respondents included 50

administrators (30%); 64 mentors (38%); 47 beginning teachers (28%), and 5 novice teachers









APPENDIX B
QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW PANEL


Dr. Geraldine Wright
Elementary Executive Director
Educational Support Center
Seminole County Public Schools
400 E. Lake Mary Blvd.
Sanford, FL 32773-7127
geraldinewright@scps.kl2.fl.us
407-320-0000

Dr. Anna-Marie Cote
Executive Director
Educational Support Center
Seminole County Public Schools
400 E. Lake Mary Blvd.
Sanford, FL 32773-7127
Annmarie_cote@scps.kl2.fl.us
407-320-0000

Ms. Debbie Warner
Elementary Reading Admin.
Educational Support Center
Seminole County Public Schools
400 E. Lake Mary Blvd.
Sanford, FL 32773-7127
Debbiewamer@scps.kl2.fl.us
407-320-0000

Mr. Hugh Harris
Director of Curriculum
Educational Support Center
Seminole County Public Schools
400 E. Lake Mary Blvd.
Sanford, FL 32773-7127
Hughharris@scps.kl2.fl.us
407-320-0000


Ms. Beverly Perrault
Elementary Executive Director
Educational Support Center
Seminole County Public Schools
400 E. Lake Mary Blvd.
Sanford, FL 32773-7127
Beverly Perrault@scps.kl2.fl.us
407-320-0000

Ms. Crill Head
Title 1 Director
Educational Support Center
Seminole County Public Schools
400 E. Lake Mary Blvd.
Sanford, FL 32773-7127
Crillhead@scps.kl2.fl.us
407-320-0000

Ms. Jane Lane
Director of Community Involvement
Educational Support Center
Seminole County Public Schools
400 E. Lake Mary Blvd.
Sanford, FL 32773-7127
Janelane@scps.kl2.fl.us
407-320-0000









Table 4-16. Mean Scores of Mentors' (Part III A) Rating of the Delivery of Administrator
Responsibilities (N=50)
Delivery items Mean Std. deviation
1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning 6.46 3.07
2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice 7.86 2.37
3 Mentor with similar teaching style 6.67 2.23
4 Mentor in close proximity 7.64 2.23
5 Mentor has necessary specialized expertise 8.06 1.98
6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice 5.81 2.88
7 Provides frequent observations/feedback 7.40 2.21
8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback 7.19 2.45
9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers 6.76 2.55
10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and 7.12 2.60
consultations

Table 4-17. Mean Scores of Mentors' (Part III B) Rating of the Delivery of Their Own
Responsibilities (N=50)
Delivery items Mean Std. deviation
11 Greets novice at preplanning 7.06 3.22
12 Expedites orientation/preplanning activities 7.04 3.13
13 Provides assistance locating books/materials 7.73 2.70
14 Provides assistance in developing lesson plans in compliance 7.60 2.62
with Sunshine State Standards
15 Provides training for parent communication 7.10 2.79
16 Provides assistance with room organization 7.00 2.71
17 Provides training on record keeping 7.23 2.64
18 Provides examples of measurement tools 7.63 2.52
19 Provides assistance with implementation of appropriate tools 7.67 2.26
for tracking/defining pupil progress
20 Provides assistance in establishing efficient classroom 7.60 2.56
routines/rules

Table 4-18. Mean Scores of Mentors' (Part III C) Rating of Delivery of Shared Responsibility
(N= 50)
Std.
Belief items Mean deviation
21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom 7.29 2.42
disturbances"
22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative 7.48 2.23
feedback)
23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make 7.33 2.20
observations of other teachers
24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely 7.98 2.30
responses
25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training 7.46 2.33
opportunities/development









quality teacher induction program. This supports prior research that the items included in the

survey represented essential components of a quality teacher induction program (Baines et al.,

2001; Ballantyne & Hansford, 1995; Carter & Frances, 2001; Castorina, 2003; Chisena, 2002;

Furtwengler, 1995; Haugaard, 2005; Johnson, 2001; Pettinger, 1995; Ponticell & Zepeda, 1997;

Saunders & Singh & Billingsley, 1998; Spindler & Biott, 2000). The believed importance of

teacher induction services provided by administrators, mentors and those services whose delivery

was shared were consistently rated with higher mean scores than was actually delivered for those

services. Administrators reported less than half (12 of 25) of the services which they believed

were important, were actually delivered at the same level of importance. Mentors reported that

72% of items they believed were important to teacher induction matched their actual delivery.

Mentors also reported that 12 of the 15 (80%) items that they solely delivered or shared with

building administrators matched the level of believed importance. Novice teachers reported high

satisfaction with four of the items actually delivered by administrators and none of the items

delivered by mentors. The study shows that none of the mentor responsibilities or shared

administrator and mentor responsibilities believed level of importance, as rated by novice

teachers, matched the actual delivery of the induction service. Novice teachers rated only one

service delivered by administrators matched their rating of importance.

Alternatively certificated teachers reported only two induction services delivered by

administrators matched their rating of importance. Through analysis of independent t-tests,

novice teachers who were seeking alternative certification reported significant differences in

their believed level of importance from traditionally certificated novice teachers. The deliveries

of quality induction services were also found to have significant differences, thus justifying that









Table 4-8. Mean Scores of Mentors' (Part II B) Beliefs about Own Responsibilities (N=52)
Belief items Mean Std. deviation
11 Greets novice at preplanning 8.77 1.92
12 Expedites orientation/preplanning activities 8.54 2.00
13 Provides assistance locating books/materials 8.81 1.79
14 Provides assistance in developing lesson plans in 9.06 1.35
compliance with Sunshine State Standards
15 Provides training for parent communication 8.73 1.51
16 Provides assistance with room organization 8.12 1.90
17 Provides training on record keeping 9.00 1.24
18 Provides examples of measurement tools 9.02 1.48
19 Provides assistance with implementation of appropriate 8.98 1.42
tools for tracking/defining pupil progress
20 Provides assistance in establishing efficient classroom 8.96 1.53
routines/rules

Table 4-9. Mean Scores of Mentors' (Part II C) Beliefs about Shared Responsibilities (N=52)
Belief items Mean Std. deviation
21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom 8.69 1.46
disturbances"
22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental 8.60 1.52
(formative feedback)
23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make 8.71 1.87
observations of other teachers
24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, 9.29 1.05
appropriate/timely responses
25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training 8.54 1.80
opportunities/development

Table 4-10. Mean Scores of Novices' (Part II A) Beliefs about Administrator Responsibilities
(N=40)
Belief items Mean Std. deviation
1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning 8.15 1.83
2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice 8.85 1.44
3 Mentor with similar teaching style 7.08 2.02
4 Mentor in close proximity 8.30 1.56
5 Mentor has necessary specialized expertise 7.98 1.82
6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice 3.88 2.42
7 Provides frequent observations/feedback 7.68 1.99
8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback 7.54 2.30
9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers 5.80 2.73
10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and 6.68 2.36
consultations









Table 4-11. Mean Scores of Novices' (Part II B) Beliefs about Mentor Responsibility (N=40)
Belief items Mean Std. deviation
11 Greets novice at preplanning 7.82 1.86
12 Expedites orientation/preplanning activities 7.71 1.64
13 Provides assistance locating books/materials 7.97 1.79
14 Provides assistance in developing lesson plans in 8.53 1.39
compliance with Sunshine State Standards
15 Provides training for parent communication 7.61 2.27
16 Provides assistance with room organization 6.53 2.63
17 Provides training on record keeping 7.97 1.94
18 Provides examples of measurement tools 8.37 1.51
19 Provides assistance with implementation of appropriate 8.71 1.27
tools for tracking/defining pupil progress
20 Provides assistance in establishing efficient classroom 7.89 2.29
routines/rules

Table 4-12. Mean Scores of Novices' (Part II C) Beliefs about Shared Responsibility (N=40)
Std.
Belief items Mean deviation
21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom 8.28 1.57
disturbances"
22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative 8.00 1.84
feedback)
23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make 7.62 2.31
observations of other teachers
24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely 9.08 1.16
responses
25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training 8.31 1.72
opportunities/development

Table 4-13. Mean Scores of Administrators' (Part III A) Rating of the Delivery of Their Own
Responsibilities (N=40)
Delivery items Mean Std. deviation
1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning 6.40 2.16
2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice 7.73 1.87
3 Mentor with similar teaching style 6.53 1.77
4 Mentor in close proximity 7.28 2.15
5 Mentor has necessary specialized expertise 7.41 1.87
6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice 5.92 2.02
7 Provides frequent observations/feedback 6.93 2.21
8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback 6.60 2.37
9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers 6.33 2.49
10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and 6.82 2.65
consultations
































2008 James Vincent Russo









Birkeland, & Peske, 2005). Without proper support, many novice teachers become frustrated

semi-skilled labor, demonstrating little more than the ability to use a few simple routines and

tricks of the trade (Darling-Hammond, 1999; Johnson, Birkeland, Peske, & Munger, 2005). To

help prevent such occurrences, administrators must gain understanding of an effective teacher

induction process.

Support of novice teachers from school-based administrators and mentors often determines

if novice teachers stay in the profession (Farkas, Johnson & Foleno, 2000; Johnson & Birkeland,

2003). Although most school districts utilize some type of induction program, the educational

field continues to experience high attrition due to the lack of support and the inability to

positively influence novice teachers' on-the-job stressors. Castorina (2003) reported the lack of

high quality induction practices resulted in a school district losing nearly 100% of its novice

teachers. Thus, it is not only important that districts deliver training and support, but that the

support and training meet the needs of the participants. Clarity of supporting roles assists in the

development of teacher induction programs, enabling teachers to experience greater job

satisfaction and allowing administrator and mentor roles to be defined (Johnson & Birkeland,

2003; Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Ponticell & Zepeda, 1997).

The disassociation of induction practices from pre-service training-and the inability for

mentors and administrators to relieve novice teachers' stressors once they arrive in the field-

makes instructional positions unattractive, which causes further attrition. This mass departure

has resulted in a growing number of novice teachers entering classrooms with temporary

certifications (NCES, 2000) and looking for support in their formative years.

To combat the high quality teacher shortage, teachers must be trained effectively,

supported when they enter the profession, and ways found to increase their retention. Quality









Johnson, S., Birkeland, S., Kardos, S., Kauffman, D., Liu, E., & Peske, H. (2001, July/August).
Retaining the next generation of teachers: The importance of school-based support.
Harvard Education Letter. Retrieved July 17, 2006, from
http://www.edletter.org/past/issues/2001-ja/support.shtml

Johnson, S., & Birkeland, S. (2003). Pursuing a sense of success: New teachers explain their
career decisions. American Educational Research Journal 40, 581-617.

Johnson, S., Birkeland, S., & Peske, H. (2005). Life in the fast track: How states seek to balance
incentives and quality in alternative teacher certification programs. Educational Policy,
19(1), 63-89.

Johnson, S., Birkeland, S., Peske, H., & Munger, M. (2005). A difficult balance: Incentives and
quality control in alternative certification programs. Project on the Next Generation of
Teachers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education.

Littrell, P., & Billingsley, B. (1994). The effects of principal support on special and general
educators' stress, job satisfaction, school commitment, health, and intent to stay in
teaching. Remedial & Special Education, 15, 297-311.

MacNab, D., & Payne, F. (2003). Beliefs, attitudes and practices in mathematics teaching:
Perceptions of Scottish primary school student teachers. Journal ofEducation for
Tea-iilng. 29(1), 55-68.

Nauta, A., & Kluwer, E. (2004). The use of questionnaires in conflict research. International
Negotiation, 9, 457-470

NCES. (1998). Fast response survey system: Teacher survey on professional development and
training. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education.

NCES. (2000). Executive summary, teacher preparation and professional development: 2000
(FRSS Publication No. 2001088). Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education.

Norusis, M. J. (1994). SPSS advanced statistics 6.1. Chicago: SPSS.

Pajares, M. (1992). Teachers' beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct.
Review ofEducational Research, 62, 307-332.

Ponticell, J., & Zepeda, S. (1997). First-year teachers at risk: A study of induction at three high
schools. High School Journal, 81(1), 8-22.

Saunders, S., & Pettinger, K. (1995). Prospective mentors' views on partnership in secondary
teacher training. British Educational Research Journal, 21, 199-219.

Shaughnessy, J., Zechmeister, E., & Zechmeister, J. (2000). Research methods in psychology.
Boston: McGraw Hill.

































To my wife, Lesley, and our son, Parker









Table 4-41. Reported Means for T-Test for Independent Groups Regarding the Actual Delivery
of Administrator, Mentor, and Shared Responsibilities
Std. Std. Error
Novice teachers Mean Deviation Mean
Item 1 Traditional 7.03 2.96 0.50
Alternative 4.40 2.61 1.17
Item 2 Traditional 8.40 2.39 0.40
Alternative 9.20 1.30 0.58
Item 3 Traditional 7.47 2.48 0.42
Alternative 3.60 2.88 1.29
Item 4 Traditional 7.46 2.88 0.49
Alternative 7.80 3.35 1.50
Item 5 Traditional 8.09 2.38 0.40
Alternative 8.60 1.67 0.75
Item 6 Traditional 7.50 2.64 0.45
Alternative 7.60 3.91 1.75
Item 7 Traditional 6.85 3.20 0.56
Alternative 3.80 2.68 1.20
Item 8 Traditional 6.55 3.34 0.58
Alternative 3.80 2.68 1.20
Item 9 Traditional 5.55 3.15 0.55
Alternative 3.80 2.68 1.20
Item 10 Traditional 6.27 3.32 0.58
Alternative 3.80 2.68 1.20
Item 11 Traditional 6.94 2.98 0.50
Alternative 4.80 3.11 1.39
Item 12 Traditional 7.00 2.87 0.49
Alternative 3.40 2.30 1.03
Item 13 Traditional 7.17 3.14 0.53
Alternative 4.00 2.74 1.22
Item 14 Traditional 7.09 2.93 0.50
Alternative 1.80 1.30 0.58
Item 15 Traditional 6.44 3.14 0.54
Alternative 4.60 2.19 0.98
Item 16 Traditional 5.97 3.29 0.56
Alternative 2.40 1.95 0.87
Item 17 Traditional 6.66 3.34 0.57
Alternative 4.40 2.51 1.12
Item 18 Traditional 7.14 3.09 0.52
Alternative 4.80 2.77 1.24
Item 19 Traditional 7.20 3.15 0.53
Alternative 2.40 1.95 0.87









Table 4-21. Mean Scores of Novice Teachers' (Part III C) Rating of Delivery of Shared
Responsibilities (N=40)
Std.
Delivery items Mean deviation
21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom 6.45 3.25
disturbances"
22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative 6.18 3.38
feedback)
23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make 6.08 3.19
observations of other teachers
24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely 7.23 3.26
responses
25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training 7.03 3.10
opportunities/development

Table 4-22. Correlation of Administrators' Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II A) and the
Actual Delivery (Part III A) of Their Responsibilities (N=42)
Spearman
Correlation Sig.
1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning 0.15 0.17
2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice 0.27 0.05*
3 Mentor with similar teaching style 0.21 0.10
4 Mentor in close proximity 0.06 0.36
5 Mentor has necessary specialized expertise 0.32 0.03*
6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice 0.13 0.23
7 Provides frequent observations/feedback 0.20 0.12
8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback 0.33 0.02*
9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers 0.45 0.00**
10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and 0.40 0.01**
consultations
*= significance < .05
**= significance < .01









PART II


Importance Ratings


Rate the importance of support services that a teacher induction/support
program might provide to novice teachers. For each item indicate how important
that service is to you. Ten (10) is the highest importance level you can give an
item. One (1) is the lowest importance level you can give an item.




A. Teacher Induction/Support Program Beliefs.


Lowest Importance <


1 2
e E


> Highest Importance

7 8 9 10
eC C C


1. Mentors assigned prior to preplanning:

2. Mentor in the same or related field as
novice:

3. Mentor with similar teaching style:


4. Mentor in close proximity:


C C E c E C C C C c


5. Mentor has necessary specialized expertise C
(example: ESE, similar grade level, science
lab):

6. Mentor 10-15 years older than novice: [


7. Provides frequent observations/feedback: C

8. Provides guidelines for C
observations/feedback:


6r6r6r6rrr

6r6r6r6rrr









leaving the profession come from schools difficult to staff. Teacher turnover is almost 7% higher

in low income public schools (Ingersoll, 2001a). As a result, poor children are far more likely to

be taught by inexperienced, under prepared, and non-certificated teachers (Berry & Hirsch,

2003).

The American Federation of Teachers (AFT) reported a significant shortage of quality

teachers (Tetzeli, 1993). Only 28% of teachers currently in the field agreed they would enter

teaching if they had the choice again (Gruber, Wiley, Broughman, Strizek, & Burian-Fitzgerald,

2002). Al Shanker, former AFT president, believed public education combated the increased

student populations by hiring the next able body down the list (Tetzeli, 1993). Finding quality

teachers in the United States has become so difficult that American school districts have begun

to search beyond the borders to find quality teachers (Archer, 2001). The Houston Independent

School district is one of many U. S. school districts that travel overseas to hire teachers (Archer,

1999). The Houston school district in 1999 claimed that it found more of the teachers that it

needed in Moscow than it found in Texas during the last three years. Although the National

Education Association voiced that this is the wrong direction for education to head in order to

achieve excellence, Congress has already made it easier for foreign teachers to get temporary

visas (Archer, 1999).

The continued public focus on educational excellence has made keeping quality teachers in

the classroom a priority among policymakers. As a result, two broad approaches have been

identified: (a) increasing teacher salaries and (b) addressing inadequate support for novices

(Halford, 1999). Support for both approaches is gaining increased popularity with legislators and

county-created teacher induction programs.









teachers rather than reinforce reflective practice that results in creating professional connections.

Carter and Francis (2001) were suspicious of mentoring that lacked essential workplace

connections. "When workplace learning is grounded in a constructivist epistemology, it has the

capacity to generate a dynamic, interactive learning process that has the potential to challenge, if

not transform, the status quo" (p. 251).

A mentor acts as a gateway to a novice teacher's job satisfaction. A novice teacher who

interacted with his mentor on a regular basis viewed the school professional climate more

favorably. Within the workplace, the mentor should be viewed as a critical friend rather than a

superior. However, Carter and Francis (2001) emphasized that "the separation of mentor and

supervisor roles is less critical than the degree of personal compatibility between beginning

teacher and mentor" (p. 258). Greater success was reported when a formal mentor was assigned

to a novice teacher who shared commonalities with them. Spindler and Biott's (2000) on-the-job

training research, also reported that formal meetings can have less effect than informal contact.

Beginning teachers resent being the object rather than the partner in the process (Zepeda &

Ponticell, 1998). "Mentoring should be regarded as a strategy to provide professional and

personal support to beginning teachers outside the school's line management structure" (Carter

& Francis, 2001, p. 254). It is important for the mentors in a district level program to be aware of

their roles and to accentuate daily guidance, along with summative and formative evaluations.

Ballantyne and Hansford (1995) further defined the mentors' multi-dimensional approach

in describing a mentor as a buddy. They reported that mentors should provide novice teachers

with what they require to be successful in varying degrees. These areas are personal support,

task-related assistance and advice, problem-related assistance and advice, critical reflection, and

feedback on practice. Personal support encompasses Carter and Francis' (2001) characteristics of









Gordon, R. (1997). How novice teachers can succeed with adolescents. Educational Leadership,
54(7), 56-58.

Gruber, K., Wiley, S., Broughman, S., Strizek, G., & Burian-Fitzgerald, M. (2002). Schools and
staffing survey, 1999-2000: Overview of the data for public, private, public charter, and
Bureau of Indian Affairs elementary and secondary schools. NCES 2002-313.
Washington, DC: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education
Statistics.

Halford, J. (1998). Easing the way for new teachers. Educational Leadership, 55(5), 33-36.

Halford, J. (1999). Policies to support new teachers. Educational Leadership, 56(8), 85.

Haugaard, J. (2005). Critical elements of beginning teacher induction: An analysis of support
contributing to professional development. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Florida,
2005.)

Humphrey, D., Adelman, N., Esch, C., Riehl, L., Shields, P., & Tiffany, J. (2000, September).
Preparing and supporting new teachers: A literature review. Menlo Park, CA: SRI
International.

Hussar, W. J. (1999). Predicting the needfor newly hired teachers in the United States to 2008-
09. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.

Ingersoll, R. (2001a). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis.
American Educational Research Journal, 38, 499-534.

Ingersoll, R. (200 lb). The realities of out-of-field teaching. Educational Leadership, 58(8), 42-
45.

Ingersoll, R. (2002, June). The teacher shortage: A case of wrong diagnosis and wrong
prescription. NASSP Bulletin, 86, 16-31.

Ingersoll, R. (2003). The teacher shortage: Myth or reality? Educational Horizons, 81(3), 146-
152.

Ingersoll, R., & Kralik, J. (2004). The impact of mentoring on teacher retention: What the
research says. Research Review: Teaching Quality, 1-23.

Ingersoll, R., & Smith, T. (2003). The wrong solution to the teacher shortage. Educational
Leadership, 60(8), 30-33.

James B. Hunt, Jr. Institute for Educational Leadership and Policy. (2004, November). School
leadership supporting teacher retention. Prepared for the Hunt Institute by the Southeast
Center for Teaching Quality.

Johnson, H. (2001). Administrators and mentors: Keys in the success of beginning teachers.
Journal ofInstructional Psychology, 28(1), 44-49.


137









the success of novice teacher participants in a teacher induction program. Prior research

indicated that the 10-15 years age difference between mentor and mentee would be rated low

(Ponticell & Zepeda, 1997; Carter & Francis, 2001; Stansbury, 2001; Castorina, 2003). However,

this item was left in the survey to protect against acquiescence response bias (Tuckman, 1999),

which is true throughout the study.

Part II B results show that administrators rated all 10 items regarding mentor

responsibilities for teacher induction services as highly important (mean scores ranged from 7.79

to 9.12). Responses suggest that administrators view the mentors' most important role as the

transfer of information about building and district procedures. These results concurred with

research identifying efficient classroom routines/rules or classroom management as among the

highest needs of a novice teacher in a high quality teacher induction program (Banes et al., 2001;

Castorina; 2003; Haugaard, 2005).

Part II C of the survey found administrators reporting all 5 items of shared responsibility as

highly important to effective teacher induction. These results support prior research that

classroom management and communication between the mentor, mentee and administration is

vital to the retention and successful empowerment of a novice teacher (Banes et al., 2001;

Castorina; 2003; Haugaard, 2005; Littrell & Billinsley, 1994; Stansbury, 2001; Zepeda &

Ponticell, 1998).

Combined with the high level of alpha reliability (c= .894), principals accepted 24 of 25

components (Part II A, Part II B & Part II C) as important components of a quality teacher

induction program.









Administrators reported there was not a significant relationship between 10 of the 25

paired items. Results show the items that were found not to be significant indicate the null

hypothesis was true (no relationship).

Similar to the findings of Johnson (2001), these results show that administrators concur

that the items in the survey are elements of a quality induction program and that they understand

their role in delivery of these services. They did not believe, however, that delivery of 8 items

matched the level of perceived importance. Administrators were not highly satisfied with either

their own delivery or the delivery of mentors support for novice teachers in many key support

services that are part of a quality teacher induction program. The 8 items indicate a low level of

delivery for necessary induction support such as classroom management, feedback from mentors

and administrators, instrumental support, and systematic pairing of mentors and mentees

(Ballantyne & Hansford, 1995; Brownlee et al. 1998; Carter & Francis, 2001; Castorina, 2003;

Haugaard, 2005; Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998).

Research Question 8: What is the Level of Agreement among Mentor Teachers' Rating
Regarding the Importance and Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Services,
Mentor Responsibilities, and the Mentor/Principal Responsibilities?

Mentors rated the importance and the actual delivery of administrators' responsibilities

(Part II A & Part III B), their own responsibilities (Part II B & Part III B) and responsibilities that

they share with administrators (Part II C & Part III C) related to a Central Florida county teacher

induction program. Analysis of this data indicated existence of a significant correlation

(Spearman Correlation) between 18 of the 25 paired items. Beliefs and perceptions indicate the

type of program and support is vital to novice teacher training (Brownlee et al., 1998; MacNab &

Payne, 2003; Pajares, 1992).

Significant relationships indicate that the mentors level of believed importance correlates

with the actual delivery of the induction service. Correlation between the believed importance









assist in how to align curriculum with the standards and that the mentor should be a peer or

supervisor that is approachable and provides immediate feedback (Brownlee et al., 1998;

Castorina, 2003; Haugaard, 2005; Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Singh & Billingsley, 1998;

Spindler & Biott, 2000; Stansbury, 2001, Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998).

Research Question 4: What is the Level of Agreement among Administrators' Ratings
Regarding the Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor
Responsibilities, and Mentor/Principal Responsibilities?

Administrators rated 25 survey items for the actual delivery of their own responsibilities

(Part III A), mentor responsibilities (Part III B) and responsibilities that they share with mentors

(Part III C) related to a quality teacher induction program. Agreement among administrators was

demonstrated through an analysis of mean scores and a high alpha reliability (ca=.980). Part III A

shows administrators were highly satisfied with the assignment of mentor in the same or related

field as the novice teacher (7.73). The mean scores of administrators' ratings of mentor

responsibilities (Part III B) show none of the teacher induction services were being delivered at

more than a moderate level of satisfaction (6.54-7.26). The means reflected in Part III C indicate

that administrators rated 2 of 5 items as delivered with a high level of satisfaction (7.63 and

7.83). Although early questions in this study reveal (with the exclusion of assigning mentors with

similar teaching style and a mentor who is 10-15 years older than novice) that administrators

believed these items were highly important to a quality teacher induction program, only 3 of the

23 items were perceived as being delivered at the same high level.

Administrators were found not to be highly satisfied with the delivery of 23 of the 25

teacher induction practices in this Central Florida county. The highest level of satisfaction

reported was the shared administrator and mentor responsibility of welcoming questions and

giving nonjudgmental, appropriate and timely responses (7.83). Previous research found this a









Table 4-14. Mean Scores of Administrators' (Part III B) Rating of the Delivery of Mentors'
Responsibilities (N=40)


Delivery items
11 Greets novice at preplanning
12 Expedites orientation/preplanning activities
13 Provides assistance locating books/materials
14 Provides assistance in developing lesson plans in
compliance with Sunshine State Standards
15 Provides training for parent communication
16 Provides assistance with room organization
17 Provides training on record keeping
18 Provides examples of measurement tools
19 Provides assistance with implementation of appropriate
tools for tracking/defining pupil progress
20 Provides assistance in establishing efficient classroom
routines/rules


Mean
6.95
6.95
7.21
7.26

6.72
6.54
6.95
6.87
7.03

7.26


Std. deviation
2.42
2.32
2.22
2.25

2.36
2.14
2.11
2.38
2.32

2.49


Table 4-15. Mean Scores of Administrators' (Part III C) Rating of Delivery of Shared
Responsibility (N=40)


Delivery items
21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom
disturbances"
22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative
feedback)
23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make
observations of other teachers
24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely
responses
25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training
opportunities/development


Mean
7.25

6.93

7.10


7.83

7.63


Std.
deviation
2.28

2.27


2.13

2.17

2.39









key component of teacher induction (Brownlee et al., 1998; Castorina, 2003; Haugaard, 2005;

Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Singh & Billingsley, 1998; Spindler & Biott, 2000; Stansbury, 2001,

Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998), and aligned with the high importance administrators place in this

area. The mean scores of delivery were consistently lower than administrators reported their

rated importance of quality teacher induction services earlier in this study.

Research Question 5: What is the Level of Agreement among Mentor Teachers' Ratings
Regarding the Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor
Responsibilities, and Mentor/Principal Responsibilities?

Mentors rated 25 survey items assessing the actual delivery of administrator

responsibilities (Part III A), their responsibilities (Part III B) and responsibilities that they share

with administrators (Part III C) in relation to a quality teacher induction program in a Central

Florida county. Agreement among mentors was demonstrated through an analysis of mean scores

and a high alpha reliability (ca=.976).

Mentors reported that administrators delivered 3 of 10 items at a high level of satisfaction

(Part III A). The remaining 7 items were reported as being delivered with a moderate satisfaction

level (5.81-7.40).

Mentors reported that they are highly satisfied with the delivery of 50% (5 of 10) of their

responsibilities in a quality induction program (Part III B). Room organization (7.00) received

the lowest score on its actual delivery. Part III C indicated that mentors viewed 1 of 5 items as

having a high level of delivery. Mentors' agreed they were highly satisfied with the delivery of

welcoming questions and gives nonjudgmental appropriate and timely responses (7.98) in this

domain.

Although mentors believed that all of the items (excluding administrative responsibilities

of weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers, assigning a mentor with similar teaching style,









Table 4-41. Continued


Novice teachers
Traditional
Alternative
Traditional
Alternative
Traditional
Alternative
Traditional
Alternative
Traditional
Alternative
Traditional
Alternative


Mean
6.44
2.20
6.89
3.40
6.63
3.00
6.26
4.80
7.51
5.20
7.29
5.20


Std.
Deviation
3.29
1.64
3.09
2.88
3.25
2.74
3.14
3.63
3.09
4.09
3.09
2.77


Std. Error
Mean
0.56
0.73
0.52
1.29
0.55
1.22
0.53
1.62
0.52
1.83
0.52
1.24


Table 4-42. Overall, What Do Administrators Feel is the Most Valuable Component of the
Teacher Induction Program?
Administrators' common themes Tally marks
Mentor relationship (confidence, dialogue, support and follow- 23
through)
Mentor in close proximity and grade level 4
Frequent observations 4
Classroom management/parent interaction 2

Table 4-43. Overall, What Do Mentors Feel is the Most Valuable Component of the Teacher
Induction Program?
Mentors' common themes Tally marks
Mentors relationship (support, dialogue, frequent interaction) 29
Someone to answer questions 8
Bookkeeping, materials, record keeping, progress monitoring 3
Classroom management 3

Table 4-44. Overall, What Do Novice Teachers Feel is the Most Valuable Component of the
Teacher Induction Program?
Novice teachers' common themes Tally marks
Someone to "be there" 20
Similar expertise and proximity 4
Time to observe others/classroom management 4
Testing, scheduling, bookkeeping 3


Item 20

Item 21

Item 22

Item 23

Item 24

Item 25









(Singh & Billingsley, 1998). The principal's role, as related to beginning teachers, will be

discussed later in this review.

In Florida schools, mentors have an important role in the induction process that expands

the definition even further. An induction mentor or peer teacher, as termed by a Central Florida

county, aids in the supervision of teachers who have a bachelor's degree, but do not have a

teaching certificate from a Florida university or a university that is recognized by Florida. This

school district also assigns mentors at the school level for all novice teachers. However, the

mentors' roles were not defined. Florida Department of Education (FDOE) guidelines for

selecting mentors require that they meet one of the following three criteria. First, a mentor can be

selected because he/she has a Professional Service Contract (PSC) and has completed a clinical

education program. Second, a mentor may be selected if he/she has a PSC and also has

completed a FDOE course in Florida Performance Management System (FPMS), a state

approved evaluation system. Third, a teacher can be selected by possessing a PSC and training as

a supervisor of interns. All three methods of selection must be accompanied by a principal's

recommendation. In addition, mentors are given a $1,200 yearly stipend if they are aiding a

novice teacher in obtaining alternative certification.

It is important for the mentor pairing to be a cohesive match. Carter and Francis (2001)

emphasized the importance of the mentor and mentee developing commonalities beyond a

stipend or the receipt of a certification. Forming a relationship beyond basic day-to-day routines

is termed a multi-dimensional mentor. A mentor who merely gives information is functioning as

a transmitter of teacher professional learning, which Carter and Francis's (2001) research defined

as a "uni-dimensional approach" (p. 250). Ballantyne and Hansford (1995) and Ponticell and

Zepeda (1997) both state that uni-dimensional mentoring can constrain the learning of beginning









Johnson, Birkeland, and Peske (2005) studied the decentralized and centralized programs

of three states. Each state represented a different level of centralization or decentralization. The

centralized programs were able to pull from a larger pool of candidates with higher credentials.

They were also able to offer a wider variety of certifications. However, these candidates were

not, and could not be, guaranteed jobs. The decentralized or local programs had a higher success

rate of filling jobs, but they had limitations on the areas of expertise in each subject they could

offer. Gaps in training were reported in all of the programs. Quality was treated as an

afterthought rather than a process. The research implied that the best solution was for the state

and local agencies to work together. A selectively decentralized model could allow for both state

and local agencies to do what they do best. Additional research suggested that not only should

the agencies work together, but that the length and quality of training programs continue to be an

issue.

Johnson, Birkeland, Peske, and Munger (2005) studied a sample of 13 alternative

certification program sites in four states. They found additional evidence that fast-track program

incentives brought many professionals into teaching that would not have otherwise had the

opportunity in enter the field. The difficultly for program administrators was an inability to

deliver the promised quality of training. The teaching candidates reported major gaps in their

training, lack of knowledge of how to teach their subject, mismatched student teaching

placements with untrained mentors, and inadequate follow-up support once they began teaching.

Induction Programs

Furtwengler (1995) conducted an analysis of state induction programs. Of the 34 states that

were determined to have policies for beginning-teacher induction, common trends in each state

included the use of support teams, provision of teacher mentors, development of training

programs for participants, and determination of evaluation decisions for certification. The state









Florida County School District. Participants were given the option to not respond to any

questions they did not want to answer.

All administrators held current Florida educational leadership certificates and were trained

about the induction process. Mentor teachers held current Florida teacher certification, a

professional service contract (tenure), and were provided opportunities to receive district level

training and support as needed. Preplanning training was mandatory for all district employees.

All teachers who participated in the district's induction program received support provided by

the school district. If traditionally certificated, novice teachers held a Florida teaching certificate;

a Florida temporary teaching certificate was held by those participants who were alternatively

certificated. For alternative certification teachers, successful completion of the district teacher

induction program is necessary to receive a five-year professional teaching certificate. All

participants held at least a bachelors degree; however, some have degrees in fields other than

education.

All participants received the Internet survey questionnaire through both the U. S. Mail and

their school district email accounts. Open-ended questions provided space for comments and

encouraged subjects to develop their thoughts on the survey items. All participants responded to

the same survey: 29 items that concerned both beliefs about teacher induction and delivery of

teacher induction services.

Procedure for Data Collection

Prior to the collection of data, all essential paperwork was submitted and approved by the

University of Florida Institutional Review Board (UFIRB) to conduct the research. The

researcher also submitted necessary information to the Central Florida school district for

approval of the study.









9. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers' ratings regarding the
importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities,
and mentor/principal responsibilities?

10. What is the level of agreement between alternatively certificated novice teachers'
ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services,
mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities?

11. What are the differences between alternatively certificated and traditional certificated
novice teachers' ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction
program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities?

Summary of Findings

The focus of this study was on the appraisal of teacher induction services provided to a

Central Florida county's elementary novice teachers. Teacher induction has been defined as

support necessary to complete novice teachers' instructional training, facilitate a change from

student teacher to teacher of students, and build a support network for problem-solving (Baines

et al., 2001; Johnson, 2001; Stansbury, 2001). For the purpose of this study principals and

administrators refer to building principals or assistant principals assigned to teacher induction

tasks, mentors refer to an experienced teacher assigned to provide support to the novice teacher,

and novice refers to a first year elementary school teacher.

Research Question 1: What is the Level of Agreement among Administrators' Ratings
Regarding the Importance of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor
Responsibilities, and Mentor/Principal Responsibilities?

The first 25 items presented in the survey asked the administrators' to rate personal beliefs

about their own responsibilities (Part II A), mentor responsibilities (Part II B) and responsibilities

they shared with mentors (Part II C) related to teacher induction services. In Part II A,

administrators viewed 8 of 10 items as highly important, 1 as moderately important (mentor with

similar teaching style) and 1 (an age difference of 10-15 years between mentor and mentee) of

low importance, thus signifying agreement that the services are necessary for novice teachers

success. Administrators agreed that 9 of the 10 administrative support items were important to









certificated teachers and traditionally certificated novice teachers. The alternatively certificated

novice teachers' level of support needs either exceed those of a traditionally certificated teacher,

or the mentor support received is not sufficient. Alternatively certificated novice teachers

participate in a state approved mentor program in which their mentors receive additional pay and

are provided substitutes so they can meet and perform FPMS evaluations. These results should

inform this Central Florida county, of areas in which potential changes in mentor responsibilities

might improve delivery of their teacher induction program.

The t-test for independent groups of novice teachers' and alternatively certificated novice

teachers' ratings regarding the actual delivery of shared administrator and mentor responsibilities

revealed a significant difference for 2 of the 5 items (Table 4-40). Satisfaction ratings for items

21 and 22 were found to be significantly different between the two groups of novice teachers.

Traditionally certificated teachers rated both items with moderate satisfaction (6.63 and 6.26),

whereas alternatively certificated teachers rated these same items with low satisfaction (3.00 and

4.80) respectively (Table 4-41). These responses are surprising because this Central Florida

county's decentralized program has set guidelines for mentoring novice teachers seeking

alternative certification that provide each mentor with a stipend ($1200), and provide substitute

pay so they can meet mandatory formative and summative assessments that must be completed.

These results support Johnson & Birkeland's (2003) study of alternative certification training

models that found little follow-up once the alternatively certificated teacher reached the

classroom. Many of these teachers felt they were not qualified to teach their content area, and did

not receive the necessary support.

Conclusions

Data from this study showed that administrators, mentors and novice teachers reported a

high level of agreement in their beliefs about the importance of the identified components of a









and assigning mentors 10-15 years older than the novice) were highly important to the success of

a quality induction program, only 9 of the 22 items were actually delivered at the same high

level. Thus, mentors may be aware of the types of services necessary for novice teachers, but are

not highly satisfied with the actual delivery of those services. Mentors reported the most

satisfaction with services they were solely responsible for delivering.

Administrators, mentors and novice teachers all believed that welcoming questions and

giving nonjudgmental, appropriate and timely responses was the most important service to a

quality teacher induction program (9.10 or higher), which matched the mentors high level of

satisfaction of its delivery (7.98). Openness, approachability, friendliness, interest in

development and finding comfort to reduce stress characterizes an effective mentor (Carter &

Francis, 2001).

Research Question 6: What is the Level of Agreement among Novice Teachers' Rating
Regarding the Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor
Responsibilities, and Mentor/Principal Responsibilities?

Novice teachers rated 25 survey items assessing the actual delivery of administrators'

responsibilities (Part III A), mentor responsibilities (Part III B) and the responsibilities that

administrators and mentors share (Part III C) in a teacher induction program in this Central

Florida county. Agreement among novice teachers was demonstrated through an analysis of

mean scores and a high alpha reliability (ca=.978).

Novice teachers were highly satisfied with the delivery of 4 of 10 items for which

administrators are responsible (Part III A). Administrators were reported by the novice teachers

to assign mentors in the same or related field as the novice (8.50) and assign a mentor with the

necessary specialized expertise (8.15), at the highest level of satisfaction. The novice teachers

reported they were moderately satisfied with the remaining 6 items. Part III B asked novice









Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education

AN EXPLORATION OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ELEMENTARY PRINCIPALS',
MENTORS', AND NOVICE TEACHERS' BELIEFS AND PRACTICES IN A TEACHER
INDUCTION PROGRAM

By

James Vincent Russo

August 2008

Chair: James L. Doud
Major: Educational Leadership

The purpose of this study was to examine a district-wide teacher induction program and

evaluate the relationship between the believed importance and actual delivery of mentors' and

principals' responsibilities in support services, as evaluated by the administrators, mentors, and

novice teachers. This study also reviewed the outcome of the teacher induction program through

the perspective of traditionally and alternatively certificated novice teachers.

This public elementary school study was a modified replication of previous research

conducted in a West Central Florida school district. Electronic copies of a survey instrument

measuring the beliefs and actual delivery of induction practices were distributed to public

elementary school administrators, mentors and novice teachers in one county in Central Florida.

In total, 461 administrators, mentors and novice teachers at 36 elementary schools were sent the

instrument. Surveys were completed by 179 participants at 36 elementary schools, a 39%

response rate.

The majority of respondents were Caucasian (83%); female (85%) and held a bachelors

(43%), master's degree (38%), educational specialist (11%), or doctoral degree (6%). Thirty









4-34 T Tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively
Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Ratings Regarding the Importance of
A dm inistrator R responsibilities ....................................................................... ..................87

4-35 T Tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively
Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Ratings Regarding the Importance of Mentor
R e sp o n sib ilitie s .......................................................................... .8 8

4-36 T Tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively
Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Ratings Regarding the Importance of Shared
R espon sibilities... ................................................................................... 89

4-37 Reported Means for T-Test for Independent Groups Regarding the Importance ...............90

4-37 C continued ................... ........................................................ ................. 9 1

4-38 T tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively
Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Ratings Regarding the Actual Delivery of
A dm inistrators R esponsibilities................................................................... .....................92

4-39 T Tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively
Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Ratings Regarding the Actual Delivery of Mentor
R espon sibilities... ...................................................................................93

4-40 T Tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively
Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Ratings Regarding the Actual Delivery of Shared
R espon sibilities... ...................................................................................94

4-41 Reported Means for T-Test for Independent Groups Regarding the Actual Delivery of
Administrator, M entor and Shared Rsponsibilities ..................................... .................95

4-4 1 C continued ................... ........................................................ ................. 96

4-42 Overall, What Do Administrators Feel is the Most Valuable Component of the
Teacher Induction Program ?............................................................................. 96

4-43 Overall, What Do Mentors Feel is the Most Valuable Component of the Teacher
Induction Program ? ........................................................ ............ 96

4-44 Overall, What Do Novice Teachers Feel is the Most Valuable Component of the
Teacher Induction Program ?............................................................................. 96

4-45 Overall, What Do Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' Feel is the Most
Valuable Component of the Teacher Induction Program? .....................................................97

4-46 What Aspects of the Teacher Induction/Support Program Would Administrators Most
Like to See Changed, A adapted or Im proved? .........................................................................97









A t-test for independent groups was used to analyze the data for differences in means. This

research question examined two groups: Novice teachers who were seeking alternative

certification and novice teachers who received their degree within the field in which they

currently teach. Table 4-34 shows the results of the independent samples t-test for novice

teachers' and alternatively certificated novice teachers' ratings regarding the importance of

delivery of administrator responsibilities for teacher induction. Of the 10 items, two were found

to have significantly different means. Items #9 (administrators conduct weekly "walk-through"

for novice teachers) and #10 (administrators provide guidelines for scheduling observations and

consultations) were found to be significant at p<.05.

Table 4-35 shows the results of the t-test for independent samples of novice teachers' and

alternatively certificated novice teachers' ratings regarding the importance of mentor

responsibilities in teacher induction. Of the 10 items, only #14 (mentor provides assistance in

developing lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards) was found to be

significant (p< .01).

Table 4-36 shows the results of the independent samples t-test of novice teachers' and

alternatively certificated novice teachers' ratings regarding the importance of shared

responsibilities for teacher induction. None of the items was found to be significant.

The independent samples t-test of novice teachers' and alternatively certificated novice

teachers' ratings regarding the actual delivery of administrator responsibilities for teacher

induction is reported in table 4-38. Two (2) of 10 items, #3 (administrative assignment of

mentors with similar teaching style) and #7 (administrators provide frequent

observations/feedback) were found to be significant at p<.01 and p<.05 respectively.









administrators believe that their role and that of the mentors' are both instrumental to beginning

teachers as related to items 21-25.

Q2. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers' ratings regarding the
importance of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and
mentor/principal responsibilities?

The mentors were asked to rate 25 items using a 10-point Likert scale, with 10

representing the highest perceived importance, and 1 representing the lowest perceived

importance. The Cronbach's Alpha (reliability coefficient) was a = .910, indicating a high level

of agreement among mentor beliefs about the importance of administrator responsibilities, their

own responsibilities, and shared principal and mentor responsibilities for teacher induction.

Mentors reported means ranging from 3.92 to 9.27 regarding their beliefs about

administrators' responsibilities (Table 4-7). Item #6, belief that the mentor should be 10 to 15

years older than the novice, was rated low indicating this age difference was not believed to be

important. Items #3 and #9 were rated as moderate, indicating mentors did not feel strongly that

teaching styles should be similar or that administrators needed to have a weekly "walk-through."

Item #2, (mentors should work in the same or a related field as the novice) was rated as having

the highest importance (9.27).

Rating their own responsibilities for teacher induction, mentors felt that they were all

highly important (Table 4-8). Means ranged from 8.54 to 9.06. Providing assistance in

developing lesson plans in compliance with the Sunshine State Standards (#14) was deemed the

most important item (9.06).

Table 4-9 reports mentor beliefs about the responsibilities they share with administrators.

Means ranged from 8.54 to 9.29, indicating that mentors believed all areas of responsibilities

shared with administrators were important.









CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Soaring teacher attrition rates combined with the changing growth of the student

population pose a staggering challenge to schools in the U.S. To combat high teacher attrition

and retain educators, support has expanded for teacher training programs (Halford, 1999),

additional money has been allocated for teacher training (Berry, Hopkins-Thompson, & Hoke,

2002), and the focus of such training has shifted to include alternative certification routes

(Johnson, Birkeland, & Peske, 2005). These efforts have been put in place to answer the claims

that educational retention and teacher training are disjointed (Darling-Hammond, 1996). Many

states and localities have launched induction programs to combat attrition and provide

instructional support for novices (Archer, 1999).

Although formalized induction programs have taken shape in Florida school districts,

many of these programs fail to assess or meet the needs of novice teachers. Thus, attrition rates

as high as 50% within the first five years are still being reported (Halford, 1998; Ingersoll &

Kralik, 2004; Ingersoll & Smith, 2003). In a study conducted in one Florida school district,

Castorina (2003) concluded that the majority of novice teachers left their position because they

felt induction services did not match their expectations. The attrition rate of teachers is highly

correlated with their need for emotional support and encouragement along with formative

appraisal of progress from their mentors and principals. Teachers who receive high levels of

substantial assistance and perceive that their expectations are being met are more likely to

experience greater job satisfaction and school commitment (Johnson & Birkeland, 2003; Littrell

& Billingsley, 1994; Ponticell & Zepeda, 1997).

Induction programs help novice teachers connect their university or pre-service training

with their first instructional assignment, while delivering an experience that meets the needs of









9. Weekly "walk-through" for novice
teachers:

10. Provides guidelines for scheduling
observations and consultations:


B. Mentor Responsibilities Beliefs.


Lowest Importance <-


> Highest Importance


4 5 6 7 8 9 10
C EC C C C C


11. Greets novice at preplanning:

12. Expedites orientation/preplanning
activities:

13. Provides assistance locating
books/materials:

14. Provides assistance in developing lesson
plans in compliance with Sunshine State
Standards:

15. Provides training for parent
communication:

16. Provides assistance with room
organization:

17. Provides training on record keeping:

18. Provides examples of measurement
tools(tests, assists in determining the
appropriate tools for various skills):


19. Provides assistance with implementation C
of appropriate tools for tracking/defining
pupil progress:










APPENDIX A
LETTER OF INVITATION

University of Florida PO Box 117049
College of Education Gainesville, FL 32611-7049
Department of Educational Leadership (352)392-2391
Policy and Foundations (352)846-0131

April 15, 2007

Dear Colleague:

My name is James Russo and I am a doctoral candidate at the University of Florida. I am conducting a
study on the relationships between K-5 administrators', mentors' and first year teachers' beliefs and
practices in a teacher induction/support program. I expect that the results of this research will provide
direction for improving beginning teacher support in elementary schools.

I request your participation in this research project. The superintendent of your district has endorsed the
study. I would appreciate it if you would take a few minutes to answer questions on the online survey.
You will be asked to complete the survey on the enclosed web address with the password below. The
survey will take about 15-20 minutes. Your privacy will be protected and your identity will be kept
confidential to the extent provided by law. You do not have to answer any question you do not wish to
answer. The completed survey will be submitted to a secure server at the University of Florida.

To take the online survey, you must select "I agree" on the website, agreeing that you have read this letter
of invitation and agree to the consent. You may print a copy of this letter for your records by pressing the
control button and the letter p.

The results of the survey will be provided to you at your request. There is no anticipated risk,
compensation, nor benefit for participating in the study. Your participation is strictly voluntary and you
are free to withdraw your participation at any time without penalty.

Should you have questions about your rights as a research participant, contact the Institutional Review
Board (IRB) office at (352) 392-9433 or irb2@ufl.edu. If you need additional information or have
questions about the survey please contact me at (407) 252-0879 or my faculty advisor, Dr. James Doud, at
(352) 392-2391, ext. 275.

The survey website address is listed below:

Website: http://grove.ufl.edu/~jvrusso/index.php


Thank you very much for your participation in this study.

Sincerely,


James V. Russo
Principal Investigator










Table 4-38. T tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively
Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Ratings Regarding the Actual Delivery of
Administrators Responsibilities
Levene's Sig. 95%
Test t- (2- Confidence
Sig. value DF tailed) Error Interval


1 Mentors assigned
prior to preplanning
2 Mentor in the same or
related field as novice
3 Mentor with similar
teaching style
4 Mentor in close
proximity
5 Mentor has necessary
specialized expertise
6 Mentor 10-15 years
older than novice
7 Provides frequent
observations/feedback
8 Provides guidelines
for
observations/feedback
9 Weekly "walk-
through" for novice
teachers
10 Provides guidelines
for scheduling
observation and
consultations
*= significance < .05
**= significance < .01


0.60 Equal
Unequal
0.30 Equal
Unequal
0.91 Equal
Unequal
1.00 Equal
Unequal
0.48 Equal
Unequal
0.35 Equal
Unequal
0.58 Equal
Unequal
0.43 Equal
Unequal

0.60 Equal
Unequal

0.40 Equal
Unequal


1.88
2.07
-0.73
-1.13
3.20
2.85
-0.24
-0.22
-0.46
-0.61
-0.07
-0.06
2.02
2.30
1.75
2.06


1.17 36
1.32 6

1.58 36
1.86 6


0.07
0.09
0.47
0.29
0.00*
0.04
0.81
0.84
0.65
0.57
0.94
0.96
0.05*
0.06
0.09
0.08

0.25
0.24

0.12
0.11


1.40
1.27
1.10
0.71
1.21
1.36
1.40
1.57
1.11
0.85
1.34
1.81
1.51
1.32
1.57
1.33


Upper Lower
-0.20 5.46
-0.53 5.79
-3.03 1.43
-2.42 0.82
1.42 6.32
0.36 7.38
-3.18 2.50
-4.42 3.73
-2.76 1.73
-2.55 1.52
-2.82 2.62
-4.89 4.69
-0.02 6.11
-0.21 6.30
-0.44 5.93
-0.51 6.00


1.49 -1.28
1.32 -1.51

1.56 -0.69
1.33 -0.78


4.77
5.00

5.64
5.73









Table 4-19. Mean Scores of Novice Teachers' (Part III A) Rating of Delivery of Administrator
Responsibilities (N=40)
Delivery items Mean Std. deviation
1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning 6.70 3.01
2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice 8.50 2.29
3 Mentor with similar teaching style 6.97 2.81
4 Mentor in close proximity 7.50 2.90
5 Mentor has necessary specialized expertise 8.15 2.29
6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice 7.51 2.77
7 Provides frequent observations/feedback 6.45 3.28
8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback 6.18 3.36
9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers 5.32 3.12
10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and 5.95 3.32
consultations

Table 4-20. Mean Scores of Novice Teachers' (Part III B) Rating of the Delivery of Mentor
Responsibilities (N=40)
Delivery items Mean Std. deviation
11 Greets novice at preplanning 6.68 3.04
12 Expedites orientation/preplanning activities 6.55 3.03
13 Provides assistance locating books/materials 6.78 3.24
14 Provides assistance in developing lesson plans in 6.41 3.29
compliance with Sunshine State Standards
15 Provides training for parent communication 6.21 3.08
16 Provides assistance with room organization 5.51 3.36
17 Provides training on record keeping 6.38 3.31
18 Provides examples of measurement tools 6.85 3.12
19 Provides assistance with implementation of appropriate 6.60 3.41
tools for tracking/defining pupil progress
20 Provides assistance in establishing efficient classroom 5.90 3.42
routines/rules









CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The purpose of this study was to examine a district-wide teacher induction program and

evaluate the relationship between the believed importance and actual delivery of mentors' and

principals' responsibilities in support services, as evaluated by the administrators, mentors, and

novice teachers. This study also reviewed the outcome of the teacher induction program through

the perspective of traditionally and alternatively certificated novice teachers. The research

specifically addressed the following 11 questions:

1. What is the level of agreement among administrators' ratings regarding the importance
of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

2. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers' ratings regarding the
importance of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and
mentor/principal responsibilities?

3. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers' ratings regarding the
importance of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and
mentor/principal responsibilities?

4. What is the level of agreement among administrators' ratings regarding the delivery of
teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

5. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers' ratings regarding the delivery
of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

6. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers' ratings regarding the delivery
of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

7. What is the level of agreement among administrators' ratings regarding the importance
and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and
mentor/principal responsibilities?

8. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers' ratings regarding the
importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities,
and mentor/principal responsibilities?









pursuing alternative certification (3%). The latter figure represents 100% of the teachers

pursuing an alternative elementary certification in this Central Florida County School District

(Table 4-3).

Research Questions

Q 1. What is the level of agreement among administrators' ratings regarding the
importance of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and
mentor/principal responsibilities?

Administrators were asked to rate 25 items using a 10-point Likert scale, with 10

representing the highest perceived importance, and 1 representing the lowest perceived

importance. The Cronbach's Alpha (reliability coefficient) was a = .894, indicating a high level

of agreement among administrator beliefs about the importance of their own responsibilities,

mentor responsibilities and shared principal/mentor responsibilities for teacher induction.

The mean score of administrators' beliefs about their own responsibilities ranged from

3.86 to 8.78 (Table 4-4). The belief that the mentor should be 10 to 15 years older than the

mentee was rated lowest at 3.86. Item #7 (the belief that the administrators' should provide

frequent observations/feedback) and item #2 (the belief that the mentor should be in the same or

related field as the novice) were rated highest at 8.78 and 8.76 respectively.

Table 4-5 presents the mean scores of administrators' beliefs about the importance of

mentor responsibilities for teacher induction toward novices. The mean scores ranged from 7.79

to 9.12. All areas were considered highly important by elementary school administrators. Areas

which encompass lesson planning (#14), tracking of student progress (#19) and classroom

management (#20) were rated as the most important.

The mean range of scores of administrators' beliefs about shared principal/mentor

responsibilities toward novice teachers (Table 4-6) ranged from 8.48 to 9.10. This indicates that









sample of situations or performances it measures is representative of the set from which the

sample was drawn" (Tuckman, 1999, p. 202).

Spearman's p was used to measure the correlation of beliefs of the administrators, mentors,

and novices in relation to their practices. When dealing with two ordinal variables that are

greater than 10, the Spearman rank-order correlation is the most appropriate to use. According to

Tuckman (1999), "Spearman's p is a test used to compare two sets of ranks to determine their

degree of equivalence" (p. 314). Spearman's p results were displayed as a range between -1 and

+1, thus measuring direction and strength of a correlation. Spearman's p will also report an alpha

reliability coefficient. This is the alpha significance level that is used to reject the null hypothesis

at 0.05. The confidence level for rejection of the null hypothesis is 95%, meaning there is a 5%

chance to falsely reject the null.

An independent samples t-test was used to compare the two types of novice teachers that

took part in this study. This test "compares the two means to determine the probability that the

difference between them reflects a real difference between the groups of subjects rather than a

chance variation" (Tuckman, 1999, p. 300). When using an independent t-test, an assumption is

made that the variances are relatively similar. The Levene test was used to determine if the

variances were equal or unequal. If the variance was determined to be unequal, the necessary

statistical adjustments were made, and equal variances were not assumed. Responses to open-

ended questions were analyzed inductively to identify common themes. A tally system was used

to record the number of times a theme occurred









is no significant difference in the beliefs of either group of novice teachers regarding shared

administrator/mentor responsibilities.

The t-test for independent groups of novice teachers' and alternatively certificated novice

teachers' ratings regarding the actual delivery of administrator responsibilities revealed a

significant difference for 2 of the 10 items (Table 4-38). Traditionally certificated teachers rated

items 3 and 7, found in Table 4-41, with moderate satisfaction (7.47 and 6.85), while

alternatively certificated teachers rated actual delivery of these items as resulting in low

satisfaction (3.60 and 3.80). The t-test results of item 3 indicate that alternatively certificated

novice teachers found dissatisfaction with not receiving a mentor that they can relate to more

often than did traditionally certificated teachers. Item 7 indicates that, although alternatively

certificated novice teachers are required to receive formative and summative assessments in the

form of FPMS, they had low satisfaction with the frequency of such observations. The need for

mentor interaction was found to be a greater issue for alternatively certificated teachers. This can

cause issues with job satisfaction, and may be indicative of poor pairing of mentor with mentee

and/or administrators not fully understanding their role when working with alternatively

certificated teachers (Carter & Francis, 2001, Castorina, 2003; Doud & Keller, 1998; Johnson,

2001, Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Singh & Billingsley, 1998; Urzua, 1999; Zepeda & Ponticell,

1998).

The t-test for independent groups of novice teachers' and alternatively certificated novice

teachers' ratings regarding the actual delivery of mentor responsibilities revealed a significant

difference for 6 of the 10 items (4-39). The means of alternatively certificated teachers indicate

low satisfaction, whereas traditionally certificated teachers were moderately satisfied (4-41).

These results suggest inconsistencies between the delivery of mentor support for alternatively










TABLE OF CONTENTS


A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S ..............................................................................................................4

L IST O F T A B L E S .............................................................................................

L IST O F T E R M S ......... .............. ........................................ ...........................13

ABSTRAC T ................................................. ............... 14

CHAPTER

1 IN T R O D U C T IO N ......................................................................................................16

Induction Practices ..................................................................... ........ 18
A alternative C certification ................................... .................... .... 19
Teacher Support ................................................. 20
State ent of the Problem ..................................................................................................21
P u rp o se o f th e S tu dy ...................................................................................................2 2
R e search Q u e stio n s............................................................................................................ 2 2
D elim itatio n s ................................................................................2 3
L im itatio n s o f th e S tu dy .........................................................................................................2 3
S ig n ifican ce o f S tu d y ........................................................................................................ 2 3

2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ................................................ .........27

Introdu action ................... ...................2...................7..........
R ecruitm ent and R detention ............................................................................................... 27
A lternativ e C certification .............................................................................. 30
Indu action P program s ........................................................................32
B beginning T teacher Support .............................................................................................. 35
Mentor's Perceptions of Their Roles ................................ ....................... .....35
A dm inistrative R ole.......................................................40
Novice Teachers' Needs and Perceptions............................................ 44
N ovice Teachers' B eliefs and Practices ....................................................... 45
S u m m ary ................... ...................4...................7..........

3 D E SIGN OF THE STU D Y ..............................................................49

M e th o d o lo g y ...........................................................................................................................5 0
P o p u latio n ......................................................................................................................... 5 1
Procedure for D ata C collection ............................................................52
In stru m entation ......... ................................................................53
D ata A n aly sis ................................................................................................. ...............5 5

4 R E S U L T S ......................................................................................................................... 5 7



6









teachers to rate their level of satisfaction with the actual delivery of mentor responsibilities. The

novice teachers report they were not highly satisfied with the delivery of any induction services

provided by a mentor in this Central Florida county. The 10 items were all rated with a moderate

level of satisfaction (5.51-6.85). Novice teachers also reported they were not highly satisfied

with delivery of any of the quality teacher induction services shared by administrators and

mentors (Part III C).

The results indicate that novice teachers were highly satisfied with delivery of just 4 of the

25 items even though they reported earlier in this study (Part II A-C) they believed that 21 of the

items were highly important to a quality teacher induction program. One (1) of the 4 items

(mentors 10-15 years older than novice) was rated as being delivered at a high level, yet was

view by administrators, mentors, novices and prior researchers as not an important part of a

teacher induction program (Littrell & Bilingsley, 1994; Brownlee et al., 1998; Singh &

Billingsley, 1998; Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998; Stansbury, 2001, Castorina, 2003). This indicates

that a common practice of this Central Florida county induction program may not be necessary to

meet the needs of beginning teachers.

The three items that novice teachers were highly satisfied with, administrators assigning

mentors in the same or related field as the novice, mentor having the necessary specialized

expertise, and mentor being assigned in close proximity, were all rated by novices as being

highly important to their training. Novices also believed that mentor responsibilities and shared

administrator/mentor responsibilities reported in Part II B and C (excluding provides assistance

with room organization) were highly important, yet none of these items were delivered with a

high level of satisfaction. The standard deviations in these two sections were larger than other

areas (3.03 to 3.42), which may indicate some inconsistencies in the delivery of teacher









Table 4-1. Response Return Rate
Sent Viewed Surveys returned All questions answered Response rate
461 195 179 146* 179/461= 39%
* Participants were invited to skip any questions they did not want to answer

Table 4-2. Demographic Information (Part I) (N=179)
Sex White Black Hispanic Mult Other NR Bachelors Masters Ed. Doc NR
S.
Male 21 18 0 2 1 0 5 14 2 0
Female 153 130 11 10 1 1 72 53 17 11
No
report 5 5 4
NR= not reported

Table 4-3. Response Rate of Position Status (Part I) (N=179)


Administrators Mentors Novice teachers


Novice teachers
seeking alternative
certification


NR= not reported


Table 4-4. Mean Scores of Administrators' Beliefs (Part II A) about Own Responsibility (N=42)


Belief items
Mentors assigned prior to preplanning
Mentor in the same or related field as novice
Mentor with similar teaching style
Mentor in close proximity
Mentor has necessary specialized expertise
Mentor 10-15 years older than novice
Provides frequent observations/feedback
Provides guidelines for observations/feedback
Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers
Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and
consultations


Mean
8.02
8.76
6.07
8.00
8.64
3.86
8.78
8.60
8.33
8.32


Std. deviation
1.93
1.49
1.64
1.45
1.43
2.04
1.13
1.25
1.51
1.35









agreement among novice teachers regarding the elements of a quality teacher induction program.

Novice teachers reported 6 of 10 items about administrators' responsibilities (Part II A) in a

quality teacher induction program as highly important. Three (3) were rated moderately

important, and 1 was rated as having low importance. Elementary novice teachers believed the

most important items were having a mentor in the same or related field as novice (8.85), having a

mentor in close proximity (8.30), and having mentors assigned prior to preplanning (8.15).

Responses to Part II B indicate that novice teachers agreed that 9 of 10 items regarding

their beliefs about mentor responsibilities for teacher induction were highly important with mean

scores ranging from 7.54-8.85. Novice teachers believed that mentors who provide assistance

with implementation of appropriate tools for teaching/defining pupil progress and who provide

assistance in developing lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards were of

greatest value.

All items regarding responsibilities shared between administrators and mentors were rated

as highly important by the novice teachers. Principals and mentors who welcome questions/give

nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses to the novices received the highest mean score

from novices (Part II C).

Novice teachers agree that 24 of the 25 items related to quality teacher induction program

were highly or moderately important. These results indicate to district and school personnel what

first year teachers in this Central Florida county believe are important to their success. Beliefs

are strong predictors of human behavior and perceived as personal knowledge (Pajares, 1992).

Novice teachers, mentors and administrators all agreed that highly important elements in

teacher support from a mentor include: teaching in a related field (content area), working in close

proximity, assignment made before preplanning, ability to identify the proper resources and









Purpose of the Study


The purpose of this study was to examine a district-wide teacher induction program and

evaluate the relationship between the believed importance and actual delivery of mentors' and

principals' responsibilities in support services, as evaluated by the principals, mentors, and

novice teachers. This study also reviewed the outcome of the teacher induction program through

the perspective of traditionally and alternatively certificated novice teachers. Eleven research

questions examined these issues.

Research Questions

1. What is the level of agreement among administrators' ratings regarding the importance of
teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

2. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers' ratings regarding the importance
of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

3. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers' ratings regarding the importance
of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

4. What is the level of agreement among administrators' ratings regarding the delivery of
teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

5. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers' ratings regarding the delivery of
teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

6. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers' ratings regarding the delivery of
teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

7. What is the level of agreement among administrators' ratings regarding the importance
and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and
mentor/principal responsibilities?

8. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers' ratings regarding the importance
and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and
mentor/principal responsibilities?









responses to long-term challenges bring to light and question the effectiveness of current support

practices (Johnson et al., 2001).

Alternative Certification

Alternative Certification conflicts with the push for high quality teaching. "Within this

context, state policy makers and program directors face the challenge of designing and

implementing appealing, fast-track preparation programs that will also ensure teacher quality"

(Johnson, Birkeland, & Peske, 2005, p. 72). Persons who seek temporary certification in Florida

only have to meet minimum state requirements. Requirements for a three-year teacher

certification are only a bachelor's degree with a 2.5 GPA and to pass a background check. Once

they are in the classroom teaching children, they must pass the National Teacher Exam, Florida

Professional Education Test and the College Level Academic Skills Test (Baines, McDowell, &

Foulk, 2001). Alternatively certificated teachers in Florida are granted complete control over a

child's education, but they are not required to have any previous classroom training. They are not

only employed and elevated to a full instructor, but they receive full benefits and the same status

as teachers with often twice their educational training. These teachers are expected to teach and

to have as much knowledge as traditionally certificated teachers after as little as a two-week

crash course.

Finn and Madigan (2001) reported some Florida educational leaders feel minimum

requirements should be removed entirely. They suggested that we lose a huge number of

nontraditional teacher candidates because of our "hoops and hurdles and red tape" (p. 29). The

tightening of teacher requirements and training does not necessarily mean higher achievement

for students. Many school districts have begun to widen the pathways into the profession by

experimenting with private alternative certification programs. Johnson, Birkeland, and Peske

(2005) reported on fast-track programs which are completed in one summer. Candidates in these









Q9. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers' ratings regarding the
importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities,
and mentor/principal responsibilities?

The correlation of novice teachers' in their ratings regarding the importance and actual

delivery of administrators' responsibilities for teacher induction is shown in Table 4-28. Of the

10 questions, only one-#2: Mentor in the same or related field as novice teacher-was found to

have a significant relationship. A significant correlation was not found in items #1 (mentors

assigned prior to preplanning), #3 (mentors with similar teaching style), #4 (mentors in close

proximity), #5 (mentors has necessary specialized expertise), #6 (mentors 10-15 years older than

novices), #7 (provides frequent observations/feedback) #8 (provides guidelines for

observations/feedback), #9 (weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers), and #10 (provides

guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations).

The correlation of novice teachers' ratings regarding the importance and actual delivery of

mentor responsibilities is shown in table 4-29. Although 9 of 10 items in this domain were

viewed as highly important induction practices by novice teachers (item #16 was viewed as

moderately important), none were found to have a significant relationship.

Table 4-30 shows the correlation of novice teachers' rating regarding the importance and

the actual delivery of teacher induction responsibilities shared by administrators and mentors. All

five items were reported as highly important by novice teachers; however none were found to

have a significant relationship to the actual delivery.

Q10. What is the level of agreement between alternatively certificated novice teachers'
ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services,
mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities?

The correlation of alternatively certified novice teachers' ratings regarding the importance

and actual delivery of administrators' responsibilities for teacher induction services is shown in









beliefs) (Tuckman, 1999). The survey design enabled the researcher to generalize from a sample

to a population so that an inference can be made about the population (Babbie, 1990). Survey

research is designed to be analyzed in a manner that requires a comparison. When relationships

are not being analyzed between variables, the reason for the results cannot be determined

(Tuckman, 1999).

Data Analysis

Demographic information was added to the original survey to identify alternatively

certificated teachers and to further describe the participants. The survey was reformatted for

online implementation. Descriptive statistics were used to uncover characteristics of the sample

populations. Questions 1-6 were analyzed for means and commonalities between like groups.

Questions 7-10 were compared using Spearman's p. Questions 7- 10 were also evaluated for

their significance levels (one-tailed). Significance is another measure for reliability.

"Significance testing compares the means relative to the degrees of variation among scores in

each group to determine the probability that the calculated differences between the means reflect

real differences between subject groups and not chance occurrences" (Tuckman, 1999, p. 282). If

the null hypothesis, which states there is no correlation between rank pairs is rejected, then the

alternate hypothesis is favored. This means the ranked pairs are positively (or negatively) related.

Question 11 compared beginning teachers who were traditionally and alternatively certificated

using an independent samples t-test. The Levene's Test of Variance was used when necessary to

make a needed adjustment when an equal variance could not be assumed between two

independent samples. Content validity was ensured through the research review in which

conformation of the themes were represented in each question. "A test has content validity if the









support of teachers will assist in the reduction of attrition and further attract new recruits to the

educational arena (Johnson, Birkeland, Kardos, Kauffman, Liu & Peske, 2001). Continued

investment in teachers seeking alternative certification solidifies the need for school districts to

understand the type of support that needs to be provided. This study provides insight to help

school districts understand the types of support that are necessary to create a successful teacher

induction program.

This study adds to the research of Castorina (2003) by examining differences between

first-year alternatively certificated, and first-year traditionally certificated teachers' beliefs about

the delivery and importance of teacher support services. It also expands the size of the

populations, while focusing only on the uniqueness of public elementary schools. The study

presents evidence of the support services that are needed as well as evidence of the effectiveness

of support services already provided. The study concludes with analysis of three open-ended

responses that help expand knowledge and explanation of important district and school level

issues that the survey may not address. Results of the study will inform elementary school

principals and district level personnel about how teacher induction programs, and their roles in

them, can be improved.









teaching style), #4 (mentors are assigned with close proximity to their mentees), #6 (mentors 10-

15 years older than novices) and #7 (administrators provide frequent observations and feedback)

were not found to have a significant relationship.

Table 4-23, shows the comparison of administrators' rating of importance to the delivery

of mentor responsibilities for teacher induction. Significance was found for seven of the 10 items

including items #11 (greets novice at preplanning), #12 (expedites orientation/preplanning

activities), #13 (provides assistance location books/materials), #14 (provides assistance in

developing lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards), #15 (provides training for

parent communication), #16 (provides assistance with room organization) and #18 (mentors

provide examples of measurement tools). Items #17 (mentors provide training on record

keeping), #19 (mentors provide assistance with the implementation of appropriate tools for

tracking and defined pupil progress) and # 20 (mentors provides assistance in establishing

efficient classroom routines and rules) were found not to be significantly correlated.

The correlation between administrators' rating of importance and the delivery of shared

mentor and administrator responsibilities toward teacher induction training is shown in Table 4-

24. Although all five items were rated as highly important by administrators, three showed a

significant correlation. They were items #21 (provides training in how to best handle classroom

disturbances), #24 (welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses), and

#25 (keeps novice teachers up to date on training opportunities/development). Items #22,

(provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental formative feedback) and #23 (provides

opportunities for the novice teacher to make observations of other teachers) were found not to be

significantly correlated.









I would also like to thank my committee, Dr. Clark, Dr. Behar-Horenstein, Dr. Bondy and

Dr. Gratto. The input of these professors was vital throughout the dissertation process and during

my final evaluation.









27. What aspects of the teacher induction/support program would you most like to see changed,
adapted or improved?


28. List the three most important things you need from a teacher induction/support program.






29. Use the space below to make additional comments or suggestions, including any aspects that
you feel were not covered in the survey that you would like to see addressed for future teacher
induction/support programs.


ii'


ii'









CHAPTER 3
DESIGN OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study was to examine a district-wide teacher induction program and

evaluate the relationship between the believed importance and actual delivery of mentors' and

principals' responsibilities in support services, as evaluated by the administrator, mentor, and

novice teacher. This study also reviewed the outcome of the teacher induction program through

the perspective of traditionally and alternatively certificated novice teacher.

Data was obtained from K-5 novice teachers, mentors and principals using an electronic

survey. The survey was based on the following research questions.

1. What is the level of agreement among administrators' ratings regarding the importance of
teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

2. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers' ratings regarding the importance
of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

3. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers' ratings regarding the importance
of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

4. What is the level of agreement among administrators' ratings regarding the delivery of
teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

5. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers' ratings regarding the delivery of
teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

6. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers' ratings regarding the delivery of
teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

7. What is the level of agreement among administrators' ratings regarding the importance
and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and
mentor/principal responsibilities?









Table 4-50. List the Three Most Important Things Administrators Need From a Teacher
Induction/Support Program.
Administrators' common themes Tally


marks


Consistency of implementation/district level support (checklist of 16
what should be covered)
Dollars to support mentors and sub days 10
Skilled mentors (trained and willing) 8

Table 4-51. List the Three Most Important Things Mentors Need From a Teacher
Induction/Support Program.
Mentors' common themes Tally marks
Support from mentors-observations/feedback (immediate and 21
consistent)
Procedures, planning, assessment, and record keeping 9
Dollars to support program (stipends, sub days) 8
Administrative support 8

Table 4-52. List the Three Most Important Things Novice Teachers Need From a Teacher
Induction/Support Program.
Novices' common themes Tally marks
Understanding of grade book, planning, recordkeeping, and 17
materials
Parent communication/classroom management 12
Observation with immediate feedback 10

Table 4-53. List the Three Most Important Things Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers
Need From a Teacher Induction/Support Program.
Novice teachers seeking alternative certification common themes Tally marks
Paperwork and classroom management training 4
Good communication and model teaching examples from mentor 3
Clear expectations and emotional support from mentor and 2
administration









Table 4-39 shows the results of the independent samples t-test for novice teachers' and

alternatively certificated novice teachers' ratings regarding the actual delivery of mentor

responsibilities for teacher induction. Six of 10 items were found to be significant. Items #13

(provides assistance with the location of books/materials) and #16 (provides assistance with

room organization) were significant at p< .05. Items #12 (expedites orientation/preplanning

activities), #14 (provides assistance in developing lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine

State Standards), #19 (provides assistance with implementation of appropriate tools for

teaching/defining pupil progression), and #20 (provides assistance in establishing efficient

classroom routines/rules) were found significant at p <.01.

The independent samples t-test of novice teachers' and alternatively certificated novice

teachers' ratings regarding the actual delivery of administrator and mentor teacher induction

services is reported in table 4-40. Items # 21 (provides training in "how best to handle"

classroom disturbances) and #22 (provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental

[formative] feedback), were both found to be significant at p< .05.

Short Answer Responses

Participants were asked to answer 3 open-ended questions at the conclusion of the survey.

The responses were separated into four groups: administrators, mentors, novice teachers and

novice teachers seeking alternative certification. The most common themes for item #26: "What

do you feel is the most valuable component of the teacher induction program?" are summarized

for (a) administrators (Table 4-42), (b) mentors (Table 4-43), (c) novice teachers (Table 4-44)

and (d) novice teachers seeking alternative certification (Table 4-45). The importance of having a

strong mentor relationship (someone to be there) with the novice teacher exceeded the combined

importance of the other themes for administrators, mentors, novice teachers and novice teachers









Table 4-27. Correlation of Mentors' Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II C) and the
Actual Delivery (Part III C) of Shared Responsibilities (N=52)


Belief items
21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom
disturbances"
22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental
(formative feedback)
23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make
observations of other teachers
24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental,
appropriate/timely responses
25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training
opportunities/development
*= significance <.05
**= significance < .01


Spearman
Correlation
0.41


Sig.
0.00**


0.15 0.16

0.30 0.02*

0.40 0.00**

0.48 0.00**


Table 4-28. Correlation of Novice Teachers' Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II A) and
the Actual Delivery (Part III A) of Administrators' Responsibilities (N=40)
Spearman


Belief items
1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning
2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice
3 Mentor with similar teaching style
4 Mentor in close proximity
5 Mentor has necessary specialized expertise
6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice
7 Provides frequent observations/feedback
8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback
9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers
10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and
consultations
*= significance < .05
**= significance < .01


Correlation Sig.


0.24
0.42
0.12
-0.05
0.07
-0.12
-0.15
-0.02
-0.08
-0.11


0.07
0.00*
0.24
0.39
0.33
0.23
0.19
0.45
0.31
0.26









20. Provides assistance in establishing C C C C C C C C C C
efficient classroom routines/rules:




C. Mentor/Principal Responsibilities Beliefs.



Lowest Importance <------------------------> Highest Importance


6 7 8 9 10
C C C C C


21. Provides training in "how best to handle
classroom disturbances":

22. Provides frequent observations with
nonjudgmental (formative) feedback:

23. Provides opportunities for the novice
teacher to make observations of other
teachers (makes arrangements, covers class,
provides substitute):

24. Welcomes questions/gives
nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely
responses:

25. Keeps novice teachers up to date on
training opportunities/development:


PART III


Delivery of Service

Rate the delivery of support services that your teacher induction/support
program provides to novice teachers. Considering your experience, rate your
level of satisfaction with the delivery of the support services in your
school/district. Ten (10) is completely satisfied with the delivery of the item, and
one (1) indicates you are completely dissatisfied with the way that item is being
delivered in the teacher induction program.


E E Ec c c C E E c









Further examination of the perceptions/beliefs and value of the delivery of induction
services to novice teachers seeking alternative certification should be conducted using a
larger population of elementary school teachers.

Decentralized control of teacher induction should be examined to determine a need for
consistent guidelines and training for invested members.

A study should be designed and conducted to explore ways to improve actual delivery of
all aspects of teacher induction services.

An exploration should be conducted to examine the correlation between mentoring of
novice teachers and the impact it has on standardized tests scores.

The following research possibilities exist with regard to continued study of relationships

between elementary principals', mentors' and novice teachers' beliefs and practices in a teacher

induction program.

Conduct a qualitative study to identify and understand the obstacles that prevent
administrators and mentors from delivering quality teacher induction support.

Examine a larger population of novice teachers seeking alternate certification to compare
with traditionally certificated teachers.

Conduct a similar study with middle school and high school administrators, mentors and
novice teachers to see if the teacher induction issues might differ at these levels.

Examination of the beliefs of induction service needs of novice teachers using a larger
population of elementary school teachers

Summary

This study was conducted as a follow-up to earlier research completed by Susan Castorina

in 2003. The results agree with her findings. Teacher induction services are most often not in

alignment with novice teachers' beliefs.

Follow-up support to teacher training-teacher inductions programs-are instrumental to

novice teachers' initial satisfaction of career selection and to prevent new instructors from

leaving the teaching profession. A well-crafted induction program can improve teaching quality,

increase retention rates, and decrease the overall cost of recruiting, preparing, and developing









(e) student assessment, (f) reading instruction, (g) district policies and procedures, (h) lesson

planning and preparation for instruction, (i) instructional techniques, and (j) parent

communication methods. These teachers also reported that the four most valuable ways of

delivering these support topics were: (a) teaching coaches, (b) release time for professional

development activities, (c) observation feedback from mentors or administrators, and (d) teacher

mentors. Haugaard concluded that the participants were satisfied with the induction-support topic

assistance or training received. However, only 63% of the novice teachers reported receiving

assistance from a teaching coach. A teaching coach or mentor was reported as the most valued

resource for a novice teacher. In addition, almost a quarter of the respondents did not receive

support with classroom management, which was the top-rated support topic.

The Schools and Staffing Survey 1999-2000 (Gruber et al., 2002), shows that support of

Florida's new teachers is ahead of the U. S. average in all areas except for extra classroom

assistance, where Florida fell 2% below the national average. In relation to the national average,

Florida's common planning time is 9% above, seminar time for beginning teachers is 18%

above, regular supportive communication is 9% above, and mentor time is 5% above. Yet only

38% of Florida teachers felt their mentors were helping significantly. This data indicate novice

teachers are being allotted time, but they may not be getting the support they need. This could be

explained by Singh and Billingsley's (1998) research that found that time must not be the only

ingredient, but that support must also include discussion, assistance with instruction, and help

with discipline.

Novice Teachers' Beliefs and Practices

MacNab and Payne (2003) reported that school experiences dictated novice teachers'

beliefs about instruction. Seventy-one percent (71%) of beginning or alternatively certificated

teachers responded to questions about their beliefs about teaching mathematics. Through a









seeking alternative certification. One alternative certification teacher reported she never met her

mentor, while another reported she co-taught with her mentor for the year.

Administrators, mentors, novice teachers and novice teachers seeking alternative

certification responses' to open-ended question #27: "What aspects of the teacher

induction/support program would you most like to see changed, adapted, or improved?" These

responses were tallied, and the most frequent themes are reported in Tables 4-46, 4-47, 4-48, and

4-49 respectively. Administrators' responses reflect a concern for program consistency and fiscal

support. Mentors reported a need for clarification of teacher induction guidelines and how the

selection process of mentor/mentee relationships was conducted. Also expressed was the

mentors' need for early assignment, more frequent meetings with mentees, and an increased

fiscal support to provide them with more time to meet with their mentee. Novice teachers'

responses were primarily focused on their need for more interaction with feedback and follow-

through from mentors. Novice teachers seeking alternative certification reported that

communication and the handling of paperwork (assessment, educational plans, lesson plans)

were their primary concerns.

Question #28 requested administrators, mentors and novice teachers to "List what they

believed were the 3 most important things they need from a teacher induction/support program."

Responses from each group are reported in Tables 4-50, 4-51, 4-52 and 4-53. Although several

common themes were mentioned between each group, there was not an agreed upon top choice.

Administrators reported their need for district level support, consistency and a common checklist

of what training areas should be covered, fiscal support for mentors to provide substitute days

and for the mentors to be trained. Mentors reported their greatest need was to make sure they

were being consistent with observations and in giving immediate and meaningful feedback. To









Table 4-31. Correlation of Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' Ratings Regarding the
Importance (Part II A) and the Actual Delivery (Part III A) of Administrator
Responsibilities (N=5)


Belief items
1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning
2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice
3 Mentor with similar teaching style
4 Mentor in close proximity
5 Mentor has necessary specialized expertise
6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice
7 Provides frequent observations/feedback
8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback
9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers
10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and
consultations
*= significance < .05
**= significance < .01


Spearman
Correlation
-0.16
0.79
-0.79
-0.15
0.29
0.80
-0.30
-0.30
-0.75
1.00


Table 4-32. Correlation of Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' Ratings Regarding the
Importance (Part II B) and the Actual Delivery (Part III B) of Mentor Responsibilities
(N=5)


Belief items
11 Greets novice at preplanning
12 Expedites orientation/preplanning activities
13 Provides assistance locating books/materials
14 Provides assistance in developing lesson plans in
compliance with Sunshine State Standards
15 Provides training for parent communication
16 Provides assistance with room organization
17 Provides training on record keeping
18 Provides examples of measurement tools
19 Provides assistance with implementation of appropriate
tools for tracking/defining pupil progress
20 Provides assistance in establishing efficient classroom
routines/rules
significance < .05
= significance < .01


Spearman
Correlation
-0.05
-0.79
-0.79
-0.79


-0.69
-0.80
-0.54
-0.13
0.75


-0.74 0.08


Sig.
0.40
0.06
0.06
0.40
0.32
0.05*
0.32
0.32
0.07
0.00**


Sig.
0.47
0.06
0.06
0.06

0.10
0.05*
0.17
0.42
0.07









Table 4-29. Correlation of Novice Teachers' Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II B) and
the Actual Delivery (Part III B) of Mentor Responsibilities (N=40)
Spearman


Belief items
11 Greets novice at preplanning
12 Expedites orientation/preplanning activities
13 Provides assistance locating books/materials
14 Provides assistance in developing lesson plans in
compliance with Sunshine State Standards
15 Provides training for parent communication
16 Provides assistance with room organization
17 Provides training on record keeping
18 Provides examples of measurement tools
19 Provides assistance with implementation of appropriate
tools for tracking/defining pupil progress
20 Provides assistance in establishing efficient classroom
routines/rules
significance < .05
= significance < .01


Correlation Sig.
0.01 0.48
0.09 0.29
0.10 0.27
-0.08 0.31


0.07
0.24
-0.01
0.19
0.17


0.34
0.08
0.48
0.13
0.15


0.09 0.30


Table 4-30. Correlation of Novice Teachers' Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II C) and
the Actual Delivery (Part III C) of Shared Responsibilities (N=40)
Spearman
Belief items Correlation Sig.
21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom -0.09 0.29
disturbances"
22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental -0.15 0.18
(formative feedback)
23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make -0.10 0.27
observations of other teachers
24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, 0.18 0.13
appropriate/timely responses
25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training 0.14 0.19
opportunities/development
*= significance < .05
**= significance < .01









induction services. Additional stress, lowerjob satisfaction, and school commitment can be

affected when the needs of novice teachers are not aligned with induction services (Littrell &

Billingsley, 1994; Singh & Billingsley, 1998; Carter and Frances, 2001; Stansbury, 2001;

MacNab & Payne, 2003). Research indicates the importance for teacher induction practitioners

to be cognizant and consistent with application of their personal beliefs so that they are more

enabled to meet the needs of novice teachers (Ballantyne et al., 1998; Littrell & Billingsley,

1994).

Research Question 7: What is the Level of Agreement among Administrators' Ratings
Regarding the Importance and Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Service, Mentor
Responsibilities, and Mentor/Principal Responsibilities?

Administrators rated 25 paired survey items describing the importance and actual delivery

of their responsibilities (Part II A & Part III A), mentor responsibilities (Part II B & Part III B)

and shared administrator and mentor responsibilities (Part II C & Part III C) related to a Central

Florida teacher induction program. Analysis of this data indicated a significant correlation

between 15 of the 25 paired items. Such correlation between the believed importance and actual

delivery indicated a homogeneous relationship between what is important and what services are

being received. Beliefs and perceptions indicate what type of program and support is vital to

novice teacher training (Brownlee et al., 1998; MacNab & Payne, 2003; Pajares, 1992).

Part II B and Part III B results indicated a positive significant relationship (Spearman

Correlation) was found for administrators' ratings regarding the importance and the actual

delivery of seven (7) mentor responsibilities (Table 4-23).

Part II C and Part III C results indicted a positive significant relationship (Spearman

Correlation) for three (3) shared administrator and mentor responsibilities. Administrators

believed that all of the significant items were highly important to a quality teacher induction

program.









mandated guidelines and "two yearly performances" (p. 5). The evaluation process for teachers

should be empowering and simulate instructional growth. Assistance they receive should help

the novice teachers take control of their own knowledge, skills, and ability to improve. Teachers

who received encouragement to reflect on their own classroom practice felt a sense of power and

awareness. This was achieved with the aid of properly used assessment techniques.

Although teachers viewed instrumental support as important, their testimonials favored

receiving more informational support (Littrell & Billingsley, 1994). It is therefore important for

the mentor, as well as the principal, to evaluate the support that novice teachers require and use

an instrumental approach to obtain information. Unfortunately, mentors often do not provide the

support that teachers believe they should receive and feel is so important.

Zepeda and Ponticell (1998) made a strong connection with supervisors who took time to

complete frequent summative and formative observations and coached the novice along the way.

One respondent in their study stated:

[My supervisor] was there for me and helped me through any problems that I had. I was
successful because I felt [my supervisor] was on my side to assist me with concerns ....
interested in what I was accomplishing and eagerly involved in what students were
accomplishing .... then provided evidence of my and my students' success. (p. 4)

This formative approach satisfies the need for a novice teacher to receive a visible presence

while encompassing the necessity for teachers to receive coaching. The mentor or supervisor

works alongside the novice teacher to provide assistance that is particular to his/her classroom

situation.

Summary

Research indicates that, without support in their beginning years, novice teachers will not

fully develop and will continue to leave the profession. Once the teacher reaches the classroom,

vital sources of support should come from administrators and support personnel in the form a










Table 4-36. T Tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively
Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Ratings Regarding the Importance of Shared
Responsibilities
Levene's 95%
Test Sig. 2- Confidence
Sig. t-value DF tailed Error Interval
Upp Low


21 Provides
training in "how
best to handle"
classroom
disturbances
22 Provides
frequent
observations
with
nonjudgmental
(formative
feedback)
23 Provides
opportunities
for the novice
teacher to make
observations of
other teachers
24 Welcomes
questions/gives
nonjudgmental
appropriate/
timely
responses
25 Keeps novice
teachers up to
date on training
opportunities/
development
*= significance < .05
**= significance < .01


0.41


0.71


Equal
Unequal


Equal
Unequal


0.79 Equal
Unequal




0.09 Equal
Unequal




0.70 Equal
Unequal


er er
-1.42 37 0.16 0.74 -2.56 0.45


-1.64
-1.32
-1.10


0.15
0.20
0.32


-0.39
-0.39


-1.09 37
-1.87 11


-0.96
-0.76


0.64
0.87
1.04


-2.63
-2.91
-3.87


0.53
0.62
1.58


0.70 1.12 -2.71 1.83
0.71 1.12 -3.29 2.41





0.28 0.55 -1.72 0.52
0.09 0.32 -1.31 0.11


0.34
0.48


0.82
1.04


-2.46
-3.52


0.88
1.94










Table 4-40. T Tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively
Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Ratings Regarding the Actual Delivery of


Shared Responsibilities
Levene's
Test
Sig.


21 Provides training
in "how best to
handle" classroom
disturbances
22 Provides frequent
observations with
nonjudgmental
(formative
feedback)
23 Provides
opportunities for
the novice teacher
to make
observations of
other teachers
24 Welcomes
questions/gives
nonjudgmental
appropriate/timel
y responses
25 Keeps novice
teachers up to
date on training
opportunities/dev
elopment
*= significance < .05
**= significance < .01


Sig.
(2-
t-value DF tailed)


1.00 Equal
Unequal


0.67 Equal
Unequal



0.59 Equal
Unequal




0.31 Equal
Unequal



0.73 Equal
Unequal


2.37 38
2.51 5


2.37
2.70


0.02*
0.05


0.02*
0.04


0.95 38 0.35
0.85 5 0.43


1.51 38
1.22 5



1.43 38
1.55 6


0.14
0.28



0.16
0.18


95%
Confidence
Error Interval
Uppe Low
r er
1.47 0.51 6.46
1.39 -0.01 6.98


1.53
1.34


0.54
0.31


6.72
6.95


1.53 -1.63 4.55
1.71 -2.97 5.88


1.53
1.90



1.46
1.35


-0.79
-2.68



-0.88
-1.28


5.42
7.30



5.05
5.45









Q4. What is the level of agreement among administrators' ratings regarding the delivery of
teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal
responsibilities?

The respondents were asked to rate 25 items using a 10-point Likert scale, with 10

representing complete satisfaction with the delivery of induction support service, and 1

representing complete dissatisfaction the with the delivery of induction support service. The

Cronbach's Alpha (reliability coefficient) was = .980, indicating a high level of agreement

among administrator beliefs about the delivery of administrator responsibilities, mentor

responsibilities, and shared administrator and mentor responsibilities for teacher induction.

Tables 4-13 and 4-14 summarize the mean scores of administrators' ratings for the delivery

of their own and mentor responsibilities for teacher induction. Administrators only rated item #2

(mentor in the same or related field as novice) as being delivered at a high level (7.73). The

remaining items in regards to their own delivery of teacher induction services were rated as

moderate, with means ranging from 5.92 to 7.41. Item #6, placing a novice teacher with a mentor

10-15 years older, held the lowest administrative importance for delivery of service.

Administrators' reported the delivery of mentor teacher induction responsibilities as moderate,

with means ranging from 6.54 to 7.26.

Table 4-15 shows how administrators rated the delivery of shared administrator and

mentor responsibilities for teacher induction. Items #24 (welcomes questions and gives

nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses) and item #25 (keeps novice teachers up to date on

training opportunities/development) were reported to be delivered at a high level. The other 3

items in this domain were reported as delivered in the moderate range.









C. Delivery of Mentor/Principal Responsibilities Services: Communication.


completely dissatisfied <--------------------------> completely satisfied
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
21. Provides training in "how best to handle EC EC C C C C C C
classroom disturbances":

22. Provides frequent observations with C C C C C C C C C C
nonjudgmental (formative) feedback:

23. Provides opportunities for the novice EC EC C C C C C C
teacher to make observations of other
teachers (makes arrangements, covers class,
provides substitute):

24. Welcomes questions/gives C C C C C C C C C C
nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely
responses:

25. Keeps novice teachers up to date on C C C C C C C C C C
training opportunities/development:


PART IV


Open Ended Response


Please answer the following questions





26. Overall, what do you feel is the most valuable component of the teacher induction program?


ii'











B. Delivery of Mentor Responsibilities Services..


completely dissatisfied <--------------------------> completely satisfied


11. Greets novice at preplanning:

12. Expedites orientation/preplanning
activities:

13. Provides assistance locating
books/materials:

14. Provides assistance in developing lesson
plans in compliance with Sunshine State
Standards:


1 2
C C


7 8 9 10
EC C C


66r6r6r6rrr


ee Er r Er cerr


66r6r6r6rrr


15. Provides training for parent C
communication:

16. Provides assistance with room C
organization:

17. Provides training on record keeping: C

18. Provides examples of measurement C
tools(tests, assists in determining the
appropriate tools for various skills):

19. Provides assistance with implementation C
of appropriate tools for tracking/defining
pupil progress:

20. Provides assistance in establishing C
efficient classroom routines/rules:









Table 4-37. Continued
Novice teachers Mean Std. Dev Std. Error
Item 20 Traditional 7.88 2.37 0.41
Alternative 8.00 1.87 0.84
Item 21 Traditional 8.15 1.58 0.27
Alternative 9.20 1.30 0.58
Item 22 Traditional 7.85 1.76 0.30
Alternative 9.00 2.24 1.00
Item 23 Traditional 7.56 2.34 0.40
Alternative 8.00 2.35 1.05
Item 24 Traditional 9.00 1.21 0.21
Alternative 9.60 0.55 0.24
Item 25 Traditional 8.21 1.65 0.28
Alternative 9.00 2.24 1.00









The findings of this study indicated there was a positive significant relationship (Spearman

Correlation) between 2 of the 25 paired items. Of the remaining items, 7 of 8 were rated as

highly important and one (assigning mentor with similar teaching style) as moderately important;

none were found to be significant. These results indicate inconsistencies between the rated

importance and the actual delivery of the administrator's role in an induction program for

alternatively certificated teachers.

Part II B and Part III B did not report a positive significant relationship (Spearman

Correlation) for any of the items related to alternatively certificated novice teachers' beliefs

regarding the importance and the actual delivery of mentor responsibilities in a teacher induction

program. Although alternatively certificated teachers believed that all but one of the items were

highly important to a quality teacher induction program, none were found to have a significant

relationship. These results indicate that the beliefs of alternatively certificated teachers do not

match the delivery of support during their first year of teaching. Provides assistance with room

organization (-.80), was found to have a significantly negative relationship, which indicates that

although alternatively certificated novice teachers felt this was important, the delivery lacked

consistency and resulted in a low level of satisfaction.

Responses to Part II C and Part III C found no positive significant relationship for any of

the items related to alternatively certificated novice teachers' ratings of the importance and the

actual delivery of shared mentor/administrator responsibilities in a teacher induction program.

All items were believed to be highly important to a quality teacher induction program. One item,

provides training in how best to handle classroom disturbance (-.92), reported a negative

relationship, which indicates that the high level importance correlated to a low level of

satisfaction for the actual delivery of this induction service.









Q8. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers' ratings regarding the
importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities,
and mentor/principal responsibilities?

The first section of research question eight, examines the correlation between mentors'

rating of importance about administrators responsibilities for teacher induction services, and the

mentors' perception of the delivery of such services. Although the mentors rated each of these

items highly, table 4-25 reports a significant relationship between 5 of 10 items. Significance

was found for items # 2 (mentor in the same or related field as novice), #3 (mentor with similar

teacher style), #4 (mentor in close proximity), #6 (mentor 10-15 years older than novice), and

#10 (provides guidelines for scheduling observations and consultations). Items #1(mentors

assigned prior to preplanning), #5 (a mentor should have the necessary specialized expertise), #7

(administrators provide frequent observations and feedback), #8 (administrators provide

guidelines for observations and feedback) and #9 (administrators conduct a weekly "walk-

through" for novice teachers) were found not to be significant.

Mentors' rating of the importance and delivery of their responsibilities for teacher

induction showed significance in 9 of 10 items (Table 4-26). Item #11 (the mentor greets the

novice teacher at preplanning) while viewed as important, was not found to correlate with its

actual practice.

Mentors' ratings regarding the importance and actual delivery of teacher induction

responsibilities shared with administrators were found to be significant in 4 of 5 belief items

(Table 4-27). Item #22 (provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental [formative]

feedback), was rated as highly important, yet did not correlate with the delivery of this induction

practice.









through" for novices) and #10 (administrators provide guidelines for scheduling observation and

consultation) were also viewed as moderately delivered with mean scores of 5.32 and 5.95

respectively.

The mean scores of novice teachers' rating of delivery of mentor responsibilities for

teacher induction (Table 4-20), ranged from 5.51 to 6.85. In this domain, all of the areas were

viewed as being moderately delivered by the mentors. The standard deviations exceeded 3.0,

indicating a larger variation in mentor support received by each novice teacher than reported in

previous domains.

Table 4-21 shows the results of novice teachers' rating of the delivery of shared

administrator and mentor responsibilities for teacher induction services. The teachers rated all

areas as moderately delivered by their administrator and mentors, with means ranging from 6.08

to 7.23. The standard deviations also exceeded 3.0, which indicated a variation in the level of

support received on each elementary school campus.

Q7. What is the level of agreement among administrators' ratings regarding the
importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities,
and mentor/principal responsibilities?

The first section of research question seven evaluates the correlation between

administrators' ratings regarding their perceived importance of induction activities, and the

actual delivery of their responsibilities. Of the 10 items shown in Table 4-22, five were found to

have a significant relationship: items #2 (mentors should be in the same or related field), #5

(mentors should have the necessary specialized expertise), #8 (administrators provide guidelines

for observation and feedback), #9 (administrators conducted a weekly "walk-through" for novice

teachers), and #10 (administrators provide guidelines for scheduling observation and

consultations). Items #1 (mentors assigned prior to preplanning), #3 (mentors with similar









new teachers (Johnson & Birkeland, 2003; Littrel & Billingsley, 2004; Humphrey et al., 2000).

As a teacher's role becomes more demanding and attrition rates continue to rise, issues of

beginning teacher support for elementary teachers become more critical. The perceived job

satisfaction and well-being of a teacher has a high correlation with whether they remain in the

field. To attract and retain high quality teachers in education, a broader study and analysis of

teacher induction services is warranted. An investment in novice teacher training increases

performance and thus impacts the success of school districts and the students they serve.









Table 4-34. T Tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively
Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Ratings Regarding the Importance of
Administrator Responsibilities


Levene's
Test
Sig.


1 Mentors assigned prior
to preplanning

2 Mentor in the same or
related field as novice
3 Mentor with similar
teaching style
4 Mentor in close
proximity
5 Mentor has necessary
specialized expertise
6 Mentor 10-15 years
older than novice
7 Provides frequent
observations/feedback
8 Provides guidelines
for
observations/feedback
9 Weekly "walk-
through" for novice
teachers
10 Provides guidelines
for scheduling
observation and
consultations
*= significance < .05
**= significance < .01


0.10 Equal
Unequal


t-
value

-0.06
-0.05


Sig.
(2-
DF tailed)


0.95
0.96


Error

0.89
0.97


95%
Confidence
Interval
Upper Lower
-1.85 1.75
-2.55 2.44


0.53 Equal -0.91 38 0.37 0.69 -2.03 0.77
Unequal -0.97 5 0.37 0.65 -2.26 1.00
0.08 Equal 0.56 38 0.58 0.97 -1.43 2.51
Unequal 0.39 4 0.72 1.40 -3.20 4.28
0.55 Equal 0.76 38 0.45 0.75 -0.94 2.09
Unequal 0.64 5 0.55 0.90 -1.77 2.92
0.10 Equal -0.55 38 0.58 0.88 -2.26 1.29
Unequal -0.50 5 0.64 0.98 -3.01 2.04

0.10 Equal 1.27 38 0.21 1.15 -0.87 3.78
Unequal 1.83 8 0.11 0.80 -0.40 3.32
0.82 Equal -1.11 38 0.27 0.95 -2.98 0.87
Unequal -1.02 5 0.35 1.03 -3.72 1.61
0.56 Equal -1.32 37 0.19 1.09 -3.66 0.77
Unequal -1.62 6 0.16 0.89 -3.62 0.72

0.34 Equal -2.00 38 0.05* 1.26 -5.06 0.03
Unequal -2.12 5 0.08 1.18 -5.49 0.46

0.03 Equal -2.77 38 0.01 1.04 -4.99 -0.78
Unequal -5.37 15 0.00* 0.54 -4.03 -1.74









Table 4-39. T Tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively
Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Ratings Regarding the Actual Delivery of
Mentor Responsibilities
Levene's Sig. 95%
Test t- (2- Confidence
Sig. value DF tailed) Error Interval


11 Greets novice at
preplanning
12 Expedites
orientation/preplanning
activities
13 Provides assistance
locating
books/materials
14 Provides assistance in
developing lesson plans
in compliance with
Sunshine State
Standards
15 Provides training for
parent communication
16 Provides assistance
with room organization
17 Provides training on
record keeping
18 Provides examples of
measurement tools
19 Provides assistance
with implementation of
appropriate tools for
teaching/defining pupil
progression
20 Provides assistance in
establishing efficient
classroom
routines/rules
*= significance < .05
**= significance < .01


0.82 Equal
Unequal
0.45 Equal
Unequal

0.48 Equal
Unequal

0.13 Equal
Unequal



0.20 Equal
Unequal
0.15 Equal
Unequal
0.13 Equal
Unequal
0.69 Equal
Unequal
0.30 Equal
Unequal



0.11 Equal


1.50
1.45
2.67
3.16

2.14
2.38

3.95
6.87



1.26
1.65
2.35
3.44
1.45
1.80
1.60
1.74
3.30
4.70


0.14
0.21
0.01*
0.02

0.04*
0.06

0.00*
0.00



0.22
0.15
0.02*
0.01
0.16
0.12
0.12
0.14
0.00*
0.00


2.81 37 0.01*


1.43
1.48
1.35
1.14


Upper Lower
-0.76 5.04
-1.64 5.93
0.88 6.32
0.81 6.39


1.48 0.17
1.33 -0.15


1.34
0.77



1.46
1.12
1.52
1.04
1.56
1.26
1.46
1.35
1.46
1.02


2.57
3.60



-1.12
-0.83
0.49
1.17
-0.90
-0.79
-0.62
-1.02
1.85
2.41


1.51 1.18 7.30


Unequal 4.58 10 0.00 0.93 2.17 6.31


6.17
6.49

8.00
6.98



4.81
4.51
6.65
5.97
5.42
5.30
5.30
5.71
7.75
7.19









percent (30%) of the respondents were administrators, 39% were mentors, 28% were novice

teachers and 3% were novice teachers seeking alternative certification.

Statistical analysis of the relationship between the believed importance and actual delivery

of teacher induction services in a Central Florida county was conducted. The survey asked

respondents to answer 10 items about the administrator's role, 10 items about the mentor's role,

and 5 items about the shared responsibility of the principal and mentor. Administrators reported

that 60% of their beliefs matched the actual delivery, mentors reported 72% of their beliefs

matched the actual delivery and novice teachers reported 4% of their beliefs matched the actual

delivery of induction service support. The results indicate that actual delivery of induction

support to novice teachers most often did not match what they believed was important. The mean

scores of the novice teachers seeking alternative certification differed significantly from mean

scores of traditionally certificated novice teachers in their beliefs and actual delivery of induction

support services, indicating the two groups of novice teachers should be considered mutually

exclusive.









important induction support topics included: (a) motivating students, (b) student discipline,

(c) establishing professional relationships with other teachers, (d) establishing effective

communication with parents, and (e) communication about student progress with parents. The

majority of the teachers reported that they were not provided assistance in these important areas.

In addition, neither principals nor university staff were viewed as an integral source of

assistance.

Beginning Teacher Support

Mentor's Perceptions of Their Roles

Support provided to beginning teachers is important to the quality of their short and long-

term professional success. Carter and Francis (2001) suggested, "Mentoring is one such form of

professional support that has received widespread attention in the literature and which has been

implemented in a number of teacher education and induction programs during the past two

decades" (p. 249). Mentoring is often used to deal with issues of skill, classroom development,

and the articulation of school norms.

Researchers sometimes believe the term mentor is an ambiguous synonym for teacher

tutor, professional tutor, or host teacher. Saunders and Pettinger (1995) described a mentor as

someone who contributes and plays a role in the training, supervision, or assessment of a student

teacher. Spindler and Biott (2000) continued the ambiguity by using a more global definition that

a mentor is anyone who is involved with the development of a beginning teacher, but an

"Induction Tutor" is the member who is tagged with the responsibility of coordinating guidance

and support. Thus, it is increasingly important for programs that aid beginning teachers to clearly

define roles of the mentoring teacher. When the principal communicates clear expectations for

the beginning teacher and the mentor, teachers experience a greater professional commitment









Table 4-25. Correlation of Mentors' Ratings regarding the Importance (Part II A) and the Actual
Delivery (Part III A) of Administrators' Responsibilities (N=52)


Belief items
1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning
2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice
3 Mentor with similar teaching style
4 Mentor in close proximity
5 Mentor has necessary specialized expertise
6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice
7 Provides frequent observations/feedback
8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback
9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers
10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and
consultations
*= significance < .05
**= significance < .01


Spearman
Correlation
0.16
0.38
0.37
0.31
0.19
0.34
0.19
0.07
0.17
0.26


Sig.
0.13
0.00**
0.00**
0.02*
0.10
0.01**
0.09
0.32
0.12
0.04*


Table 4-26. Correlation of Mentors' Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II B) and the
Actual Delivery (Part III B) of Their Own Responsibilities (N=52)
Spearman
Correlation Sig.


11 Greets novice at preplanning
12 Expedites orientation/preplanning activities
13 Provides assistance locating books/materials
14 Provides assistance in developing lesson plans in
compliance with Sunshine State Standards
15 Provides training for parent communication
16 Provides assistance with room organization
17 Provides training on record keeping
18 Provides examples of measurement tools
19 Provides assistance with implementation of appropriate
tools for tracking/defining
pupil progress
20 Provides assistance in establishing efficient classroom
routines/rules
significance < .05
= significance < .01


0.14 0.17
0.26 0.04*
0.37 0.01**
0.37 0.01**


0.30
0.32
0.25
0.27
0.26


0.02*
0.01**
0.04*
0.03*
0.04*


0.31 0.02*




Full Text

PAGE 1

AN EXPLORATION OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ELEMENTARY PRINCIPALS, MENTORS, AND NOVICE TEACHERS B ELIEFS AND PRACTICES IN A TEACHER INDUCTION PROGRAM By JAMES VINCENT RUSSO A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2008 1

PAGE 2

2008 James Vincent Russo 2

PAGE 3

3To my wife, Lesley, and our son, Parker

PAGE 4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I owe much of who I am today to my parents who helped me realize that I could achieve anything I put my mind to. It was their role in my life that taught me if you sit and wait nothing will fall in your lap. Although she would not accept this compliment, my wife, Lesley, is the reason for my success over the past 10 years. Her love and sup port has allowed me to realize and pursue my dreams. She has encouraged me to chase those dreams, and this doctoral program was a huge piece of that goal. I thank God for allowing Lesley and me to continue to be together on this earth. The birth of our son, Parker, has changed my lif e. I am thankful for each day that I spend with him. Parker is too young to talk, but he ha s already taught me what is really important in life. If you fight hard enough, you can achieve anything. Miracles are not granted, they are achieved. Parker has caused me to be a diffe rent person today, and I am better for it. I would like to acknowledge the Un iversity of Florida East Coast Cohort. This collective group of people had a major impact on my personal success and taught me many lessons about educational leadership. The special relationships I have made will last a lifetime. I would like to thank Dr. Brandy Kamm, Dr. Drew Hawkins, a nd Dr. Carol Kindt for their continued support and friendship. I could not have finish ed this dissertation without them. My journey at the University of Florida be gan many years ago at a meeting with Dr. Doud. From the first moment I met Dr. Doud, to our re lationship today, he consistently challenges and pushes me to grow professionally and personally. This is the reason Dr. Doud is my Chair and a major reason this dissertation s its complete. I would like to deeply thank Dr. Doud for not only helping me attain this goal of a doctorate but also for being an empathetic listener, a teacher, and a motivator throughout my schooling at UF. 4

PAGE 5

I would also like to thank my committee, Dr. Clark, Dr. Be har-Horenstein, Dr. Bondy and Dr. Gratto. The input of these professors was vital throughout the dissert ation process and during my final evaluation. 5

PAGE 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...............................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................. ..........9 LIST OF TERMS...........................................................................................................................13 ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................................14 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. .16 Induction Practices..................................................................................................................18 Alternative Certification...................................................................................................... ...19 Teacher Support................................................................................................................ ......20 Statement of the Problem....................................................................................................... .21 Purpose of the Study........................................................................................................... ....22 Research Questions............................................................................................................. ....22 Delimitations...........................................................................................................................23 Limitations of the Study....................................................................................................... ..23 Significance of Study..............................................................................................................23 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE........................................................................................27 Introduction................................................................................................................... ..........27 Recruitment and Retention.....................................................................................................2 7 Alternative Certification..................................................................................................30 Induction Programs.........................................................................................................32 Beginning Teacher Support....................................................................................................35 Mentors Perceptions of Their Roles...............................................................................35 Administrative Role.........................................................................................................40 Novice Teachers Need s and Perceptions...............................................................................44 Novice Teachers Beliefs and Practices.................................................................................45 Summary.................................................................................................................................47 3 DESIGN OF THE STUDY....................................................................................................49 Methodology...........................................................................................................................50 Population..................................................................................................................... ..........51 Procedure for Data Collection................................................................................................52 Instrumentation................................................................................................................ .......53 Data Analysis..........................................................................................................................55 4 RESULTS...................................................................................................................... .........57 6

PAGE 7

Response Rate.................................................................................................................. .......57 Demographic Information......................................................................................................57 Research Questions............................................................................................................. ....58 Short Answer Responses........................................................................................................70 5 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................99 Summary of Findings...........................................................................................................1 00 Research Question 1: What is the Leve l of Agreement among Administrators Ratings Regarding the Importance of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor/Principal Responsibilities?.............................100 Research Question 2: What is the Leve l of Agreement among Mentor Teachers Ratings Regarding the Importance of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor/Principal Responsibilities?.............................102 Research Question 3: What is the Leve l of Agreement among Novice Teachers Ratings Regarding the Importance of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor/Principal Responsibilities?.............................102 Research Question 4: What is the Leve l of Agreement among Administrators Ratings Regarding the Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor /Principal Responsibilities?..........................................104 Research Question 5: What is the Leve l of Agreement among Mentor Teachers Ratings Regarding the Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor /Principal Responsibilities?..........................................105 Research Question 6: What is the Leve l of Agreement among Novice Teachers Rating Regarding the Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor /Principal Responsibilities?..........................................106 Research Question 7: What is the Leve l of Agreement among Administrators Ratings Regarding the Importance and Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Service, Mentor Responsibilities, an d Mentor/Principal Responsibilities?...............108 Research Question 8: What is the Leve l of Agreement among Mentor Teachers Rating Regarding the Importance and Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsibi lities, and the Mentor/Pri ncipal Responsibilities?.......109 Research Question 9: What is the Leve l of Agreement among Novice Teachers Rating Regarding the Importance and Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsi bilities, and Mentor/Princ ipal Responsibilities?.............110 Research Question 10: What is the Leve l of Agreement between Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers Ratings Re garding the Importance and Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Services Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor/Principal Responsibilities?............................................................................111 Research Question 11: What are the Differe nces between Alternatively Certificated and Traditionally Certificated Novi ce Teachers Rating Regarding the Importance and Delievery of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor /Principal Responsibilities?..........................................113 Conclusions...........................................................................................................................116 Implications................................................................................................................... .......118 Recommendations for Further Research..............................................................................121 Summary...............................................................................................................................122 7

PAGE 8

APPENDIX A LETTER OF INVITATION.................................................................................................124 B QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW PANEL................................................................................125 C TEACHER INDUCTION/SUP PORT PROGRAM SURVEY............................................126 LIST OF REFERENCES.............................................................................................................135 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.......................................................................................................140 8

PAGE 9

LIST OF TABLES Table 4-1 Response Return Rate................................................................................................... .......73 4-2 Demographic Information (Part I) (N=179)........................................................................73 4-3 Response Rate of Position Status (Part I) (N=179).............................................................73 4-4 Mean Scores of Admi nistrators' Beliefs (Part II A) about Own Responsibility (N=42).....73 4-5 Mean Scores of Ad ministrators' Beliefs (Part II B) about Mentor Responsibility (N=42).....................................................................................................................................74 4-6 Mean Scores of Ad ministrators'(Part II C) Beliefs about Shared Responsibility (N=42).....................................................................................................................................74 4-7 Mean Scores of Mentors (Part II A) Beliefs about Administ rators Responsibilities (N=52).....................................................................................................................................74 4-8 Mean Scores of Mentors (Part II B) Beliefs about Own Responsibilities (N=52).............75 4-9 Mean Scores of Mentors (Part II C) Beliefs about Shared Responsibilities (N=52).........75 4-10 Mean Scores of Novices (Part II A) Beliefs about Administ rator Responsibilities (N=40).....................................................................................................................................75 4-11 Mean Scores of Novices (Part II B) Beliefs about Mentor Responsibility (N=40)...........76 4-12 Mean Scores of Novices' (Part II C) Beliefs about Shared Responsibility (N=40).............76 4-13 Mean Scores of Administrators (Par t III A) Rating of the Delivery of Their Own Responsibilities (N=40)........................................................................................................ ..76 4-14 Mean Scores of Administrators (Part III B) Rating of the Delivery of Mentors Responsibilities (N=40)..............77 4-15 Mean Scores of Administrators (P art III C) Rating of Delivery of Shared Responsibility (N=40)............................................................................................................77 4-16 Mean Scores of Mentors (Part III A) Rating of the Delivery of Administrator Responsibilities (N=50)........................................................................................................ ..78 4-17 Mean Scores of Mentors (Part III B) Rating of the Delivery of Their Own Responsibilities (N=50)........................................................................................................ ..78 4-18 Mean Scores of Mentors (Part III C) Rating of Delivery of Shared Responsibility (N= 50)....................................................................................................................................78 9

PAGE 10

4-19 Mean Scores of Novice Teachers (Par t III A) Rating of Delivery of Administrator Responsibilities (N=40)........................................................................................................ ..79 4-20 Mean Scores of Novice Teachers (Part III B) Rating of the Delivery of Mentor Responsibilities (N=40)........................................................................................................ ..79 4-21 Mean Scores of Novice Teachers (P art III C) Rating of Delivery of Shared Responsibilities (N=40)........................................................................................................ ..80 4-22 Correlation of Administrators Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II A) and the Actual Delivery (Part III A) of Their Responsibilities (N=42)..............................................80 4-23 Correlation of Administrators Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II B) and the Actual Delivery (Part III B) of Me ntors Responsibilities (N=42).........................................81 4-24 Correlation between Administrators Ratings of Importance (Part II C) and the Delivery (Part III C) of Shar ed Responsibilities (N=42)........................................................81 4-25 Correlation of Mentors Ratings regarding the Importance (Part II A) and the Actual Delivery (Part III A)of Administ rators Responsibilities (N=52)..........................................82 4-26 Correlation of Mentors Ratings Regard ing the Importance (Part II B) and the Actual Delivery (Part III B) of Thei r Own Responsibilities (N=52).................................................82 4-27 Correlation of Mentors Ratings Regard ing the Importance (Part II C) and the Actual Delivery (Part III C) of Shar ed Responsibilities (N=52)........................................................83 4-28 Correlation of Novice Teachers Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II A) and the Actual Delivery (Part III A) of Admi nistrators Responsibilities (N=40)..............................83 4-29 Correlation of Novice Teachers Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II B) and the Actual Delivery (Part III B) of Mentor Responsibilities (N=40)...........................................84 4-30 Correlation of Novice Teachers Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II C) and the Actual Delivery (Part III C) of Shared Responsibilities (N=40)............................................84 4-31 Correlation of Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II A) and the Actual De livery (Part III A) of Administrator Responsibilities (N=5)......................................................................................................... ...85 4-32 Correlation of Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II B) and the Actual Deliver y (Part III B) of Mentor Responsibilities (N=5).......................................................................................................................................85 4-33 Correlation of Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II C) and the Actual Deliver y (Part III C)of Shared Responsibilities (N=5).......................................................................................................................................86 10

PAGE 11

4-34 T Tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Ratings Regarding the Importance of Administrator Responsibilities...............................................................................................87 4-35 T Tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Rati ngs Regarding the Importance of Mentor Responsibilities.......................................................................................................................88 4-36 T Tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Rati ngs Regarding the Importance of Shared Responsibilities.......................................................................................................................89 4-37 Reported Means for T-Test for Inde pendent Groups Regarding the Importance................90 4-37 Continued.............................................................................................................................91 4-38 T tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Rati ngs Regarding the Actual Delivery of Administrators Responsibilities..............................................................................................92 4-39 T Tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Ratings Regarding the Actual Delivery of Mentor Responsibilities.......................................................................................................................93 4-40 T Tests for Independent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Ratings Regarding the Actual Delivery of Shared Responsibilities.......................................................................................................................94 4-41 Reported Means for T-Test for Independe nt Groups Regarding th e Actual Delivery of Administrator, Mentor and Shared Rsponsibilities................................................................95 4-41 Continued.............................................................................................................................96 4-42 Overall, What Do Administrators F eel is the Most Valuable Component of the Teacher Induction Program?...................................................................................................96 4-43 Overall, What Do Mentors Feel is the Most Valuable Component of the Teacher Induction Program?................................................................................................................96 4-44 Overall, What Do Novice Teachers F eel is the Most Valuable Component of the Teacher Induction Program?...................................................................................................96 4-45 Overall, What Do Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers Feel is the Most Valuable Component of the Teacher Induction Program?.....................................................97 4-46 What Aspects of the Teacher Inductio n/Support Program Would Administrators Most Like to See Changed, Adapted or Improved?.........................................................................97 11

PAGE 12

4-47 What Aspects of the Teacher Inductio n/Support Program Would Mentors Most Like to See Changed, Adapted, or Improved?................................................................................97 4-48 What Aspects of the Teacher I nduction/Support Program Would Novice teachers Most Like to See Changed, Adapted, or Improved?..............................................................97 4-49 What Aspects of the Teacher I nduction/Support Program Would Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers Most Like to See Changed, Adapted or Improved?................97 4-50 List the Three Most Important Things Administrators Need From a Teacher Induction/Support Program....................................................................................................98 4-51 List the Three Most Important Things Mentors Need From a Teacher Induction/Support Program....................................................................................................98 4-52 List the Three Most Important Things Novice Teachers Need From a Teacher Induction/Support Program....................................................................................................98 4-53 List the Three Most Important Things Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers Need From a Teacher Induction/Support Program.................................................................98 12

PAGE 13

LIST OF TERMS Administrator The principal or assistant principal who functions as executor to the schools novice teacher induction program. Alternative certification The li cense issued to a person w ho has attended and graduated from a university and received a ba chelors degree or higher, has obtained a temporary teacher ce rtificate, and is seeking a permanent education certification. Attrition A reduction of the teaching workforce because of reasons other than termination. Certification A license which authenticates and bestows the rights and privileges to teach. District staff Administrato rs and resource personnel w hose assignments are at a district level. Induction program An organized system of st rategies and services designed to orient, support, and retain novice teachers. Mentor An experienced teacher or ot her experienced professional charged with helping a novice teacher. Nontraditional certification Th e license issued to a person who has attended a universitybut did not receive a degree in edu cationor who is teaching out-offield. Novice teacher K-12 instructors who are in their initial year of teaching. Principal The principal or assistant principal who is assigned the primary role as executor to the schools novice teacher in duction program Retention A teachers continued empl oyment within the public school system. Staff development Any trainingformal or informalgiven to educators to expand their knowledge and foster coping strategies of their craft. Teacher literacy The teachers ability to transfer theory into performance, resulting in concrete classroom instruction. Traditional certification The certification held by a teacher who has attended and graduated from a university with a degree in education in the area he or she currently teaches. 13

PAGE 14

Abstract of Dissertation Pres ented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education AN EXPLORATION OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ELEMENTARY PRINCIPALS, MENTORS, AND NOVICE TEACHERS B ELIEFS AND PRACTICES IN A TEACHER INDUCTION PROGRAM By James Vincent Russo August 2008 Chair: James L. Doud Major: Educational Leadership The purpose of this study was to examine a district-wide teacher induction program and evaluate the relationship between the believed importance and actual deliv ery of mentors and principals responsibilities in support services, as evaluated by the administrators, mentors, and novice teachers. This study also reviewed the outcome of the teacher induction program through the perspective of traditionally and a lternatively certificated novice teachers. This public elementary school study was a modi fied replication of previous research conducted in a West Central Flor ida school district. Electronic copies of a survey instrument measuring the beliefs and actual delivery of i nduction practices were distributed to public elementary school administrators, mentors and novice teachers in one county in Central Florida. In total, 461 administrators, mentors and novice teachers at 36 elementary schools were sent the instrument. Surveys were completed by 179 participants at 36 elementary schools, a 39% response rate. The majority of respondents were Caucasian (83%); female (85%) and held a bachelors (43%), masters degree (38%), educational spec ialist (11%), or doctoral degree (6%). Thirty 14

PAGE 15

15percent (30%) of the respondents were admini strators, 39% were mentors, 28% were novice teachers and 3% were novice teachers s eeking alternative certification. Statistical analysis of the relationship between the believed importan ce and actual delivery of teacher induction services in a Central Florida county wa s conducted. The survey asked respondents to answer 10 items about the administrators role, 10 items about the mentors role, and 5 items about the shared res ponsibility of the principal and mentor. Administrators reported that 60% of their beliefs matched the actual delivery, mentors reported 72% of their beliefs matched the actual delivery and novice teachers re ported 4% of their beliefs matched the actual delivery of induction service support. The results indicate that actual delivery of induction support to novice teachers most often did not match what they believed was important. The mean scores of the novice teachers s eeking alternative certification di ffered significantly from mean scores of traditionally ce rtificated novice teachers in their be liefs and actual delivery of induction support services, indicating the two groups of novice teachers should be considered mutually exclusive.

PAGE 16

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Soaring teacher attrition rate s combined with the changing growth of the student population pose a staggering challenge to schools in the U.S. To combat high teacher attrition and retain educators, support has expanded for teacher training programs (Halford, 1999), additional money has been allocated for teach er training (Berry, Hopkins-Thompson, & Hoke, 2002), and the focus of such training has shifted to include alternative certification routes (Johnson, Birkeland, & Peske, 2005). These efforts ha ve been put in place to answer the claims that educational retention and teacher trai ning are disjointed (D arling-Hammond, 1996). Many states and localities have la unched induction programs to combat attrition and provide instructional support for novices (Archer, 1999). Although formalized induction programs have ta ken shape in Florida school districts, many of these programs fail to assess or meet th e needs of novice teachers. Thus, attrition rates as high as 50% within the first five years ar e still being reported (H alford, 1998; Ingersoll & Kralik, 2004; Ingersoll & Smith, 2003). In a stud y conducted in one Florida school district, Castorina (2003) concluded that the majority of novice teachers left their position because they felt induction services did not match their expecta tions. The attrition rate of teachers is highly correlated with their need for emotional s upport and encouragement along with formative appraisal of progress from thei r mentors and principals. Teache rs who receive high levels of substantial assistance and percei ve that their expectations are being met are more likely to experience greater job satisfact ion and school commitment (Johns on & Birkeland, 2003; Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Pon ticell & Zepeda, 1997). Induction programs help novice teachers connect their university or pre-service training with their first instructional assignment, while delivering an experience that meets the needs of 16

PAGE 17

beginning teachers (Blair-Larsen & Bercik, 1992; Carter & Francis, 2001; Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Ponticell & Zepeda, 1997). Without support d eemed effective by teachers and mentors, many beginning teachers will never fully develop their craft. Those teachers who do return for a second-year are unlikely to grow professionally (The Southeas t Center for Teaching Quality, 2003). Training is incomplete when it ceases once a teacher accepts an academic position. New teachers, including those who complete teacher education programs, need continuous support throughout their first years of teaching (Berry et al., 2002; Carter & Francis, 2001; Johnson & Birkeland, 2003). Proper funding is necessary to sustain induction support for novice teachers. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESE A) provides funds for districts to develop induction programs that assist teachers in their fo rmative years. Millions of dollars have been allocated for these programs, yet results are disappointing. The James B. Hunt Institute for Educational Leadership and Po licy (2004) and Berry and Hirsch (2003) estimated that an investment between an $8,000 and $11,500 per beginning teacher is lost when a teacher leaves the profession. The exodus has resulted in a co ntinuing need for more teachers, monetary investments consistently squandered, and district s resorting to placing personnel into positions for which they have not received formal edu cational training. High at trition rates and the difficulty of recruiting qualified cand idates equate to more than 82% of urban districts in the U. S. allowing people to teach without norma l teaching certification (Tetzeli, 1993). New alternative certificati on routes are now being investigate d. Carlos Ponce, the former Chief Human Resource Officer for Chicago public schools, reported that the small number of qualified candidates in the United States caused Chicago to begin recruiting overs eas (Archer, 1999). 17

PAGE 18

Induction programs have become required for teac hers who hold a temporary certificate or seek eligibility for alternative certification. Such novice teachers ar e often deficient in experience working with young people. They must learn to ma nage standards-based lessons, teach in ways that reach diverse students, and adjust to the daily routines of school li fe (Berry et al., 2002; Johnson & Birkeland, 2003). Investment in inducti on programs and practices need to be made wisely if states wish to retain their workforce. Induction Practices Follow up support to teacher trainingteacher inductions programsare vital to novice teachers satisfaction of career selection and keeping new instru ctors from leaving the teaching profession. A well-crafted inducti on program can improve teaching quality, increase retention rates, and decrease the overall cost of recruiting, preparing, and de veloping new teachers (Humphrey et al., 2000; Johnson & Birkeland, 2 003; Littrel & Billingsley, 2004). Yet only 19% of educators nationally reporte d participation in an induc tion program and a mentoring relationship with another teacher during their first year of teaching. Of teachers who were mentored at least once per week, 70% reported it improved their teaching significantly (NCES, 1998). The National Center for Educational St atistics (NCES) Executive Summary (2000) concluded that the attrition rate of new teachers who participated in an induction program was 15% within the first three y ears of teaching, compared with 26% for teachers who did not participate in an induction program. Novice te achers who experienced induction activities received help from mentors who assisted them with the multiple demands that teachers face. Teachers are expected to know how to plan standards-based units and translate subject matter knowledge into curriculum appropriate for students. Teachers are also expected to adapt their curriculum toward diverse learners, such as students with special needs, limited English proficiency, different lear ning styles, and a wide range of family and community circumstances. 18

PAGE 19

Publication of students test scores for stakeholders and evaluating administrators to see (Johnson & Birkeland, 2003), increases the dema nd for teachers with increased levels of knowledge. This demand for qualified teachers has been hindered by high attrition rates and inconsistencies within teacher training programs. The problem is so severe that school districts have begun recruiting individuals outsid e of teacher educ ation programs. Alternative Certification American schoolchildren are never sent home because of the lack of qualified teachers. School districts simply hire the next person down th e list (Tetzeli, 1993). Fa st-track or alternative certification programs have become widespread as a way for people with bachelor degrees to enter the profession without te acher training (Berry et al., 2002; Johnson & Birkeland, 2003; Johnson, Birkeland, & Peske, 2005). The Southe ast Center for Teaching Quality (2002) confirmed that many of the leas t prepared teachers begin their ca reer in schools that house our nations most disadvantaged urban and rural st udents (Berry et al., 2002, p. 3). Teach for America (TFA) and other similar programs allow candidates with a four-year degree a quick route into the classroom. Many of these alternat ive certification routes allow training to be completed in one summer. Within the confines of their own four walls, these teachers are left to succeed or fail (Finn & Madigan, 2001; Johns on & Birkeland, 2003; Johnson, Birkeland, & Peske, 2005). Similar to this, Ingersoll and Kralik (2004) describe this educational practice as one that cannibalizes its young and in which the initiation of new teachers is akin to a sink or swim, trial by fire, or boot-camp experience (p. 2). To assist with training of both alternative certification and traditionally cert ificated teachers, the No Chil d Left Behind Act (NCLB) (2001) has added funds. The No Child Left Behind Act mandated that by the academic year 2005-2006 every public school will have highly qualified teachers. Le gislation provided monetary support, but did 19

PAGE 20

not specify how these programs should be implemented. To offer additional assistance, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act allocated $2.85 billion to fund state teacher development systems (Berry et al., 2002). Florid a, along with many other states, has dedicated more than $1 million to mentoring programs (H alford, 1999). These efforts demonstrate progress toward financing teacher traini ng and quality teaching, but the standards for what qualified teachers need to know continues to rise. Teacher Support Halford (1999) identified increased support as an approach to alleviate the inadequate training for novice teachers. This notion gained popularity with legislators resulting in the mandate of district-created induction programs. Many novice teachers, however, find such programs inadequate for reducing stress and brid ging the gap between their university training and their first jobs (Blair-Larsen & Bercik, 1992; Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Ponticell & Zepeda, 1997). Darling-Hammond (1995) believes the continuous change in course mandates, curriculum guidelines, and standardized tests could not produce greater student le arning and understanding without investing in teacher support. State universities have cu rrently followed this line of thinking in Florida by mandating internship pr ograms, or on-the-job training, to create a seamless transition for novice teachers. If this pre-service support continued after graduation, teachers could gain access to pedagogical inform ation about the nature of learning and student development. Novice teachers would be enabled to connect theory with classroom practice. However, once novice teachers reach the classroom and support is removed, they find that time constraints often clash with idealistic concepts le arned in the pre-service practice environment. 20

PAGE 21

Statement of the Problem All educators should be continuous learners, with training that enables them to succeed. Many staffing problems result from a high attriti on rate, with a large num bers of experienced teachers retiring early (Ingersoll, 2001a). To compound the problem, 30% of the nations teaching force is over 50 (Young, 2003); experienced teachers who felt a lack of support have left the profession, and first-year teachers are becoming overwhelmed and exiting in droves (Coppenhaver & Schaper, 1999). This makes it in creasingly important to know how successful beginning teacher programs are, and how the dist ricts allocation of funds to support such programs should be invested. To ensure beginning teacher success, staff development should provide increased support and development for neophyte teachers, includi ng effective mentoring and support from administrators. Yet the NCES (2000) reported a decrease in staff development opportunities. Most beginning teache rs indicated frustration with the lack of support from school administrators and mentors, poor student motivat ion, and lack of teacher influence over schoolwide and classroom decision-making (Ingersoll, 2003; Johnson & Birkeland, 2003; Littrell & Billingsley, 1994). To combat these issues, Mor e dollars are being invested in beginning teachers than ever before (Berry et al., 2002, p. 4) Yet the question arises regarding the quality and effectiveness of such programs. Halford (1998) and Ingersoll (2001a; 2002) re ported induction program inadequacy by stating that 30% to 50% of teach ers leave in the first five year s, and the exodus was even higher in some school districts with lower socioeconom ic status. About 33% of new teachers in the United States leave the profession in the first few years. Teacher turnover averages 15.7%, which is nearly 5% higher than the attrition of non-teaching occupati ons (11%). The challenge of supporting teachers effectively remains a critical issue. 21

PAGE 22

Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to examine a district-wide teacher induction program and evaluate the relationship between the believed importance and actual deliv ery of mentors and principals responsibilities in support services, as evaluated by the principals, mentors, and novice teachers. This study also reviewed the outcome of the teacher induction program through the perspective of traditionally and alternatively certificated novice teachers. Eleven research questions examined these issues. Research Questions 1. What is the level of agreement among admini strators ratings regard ing the importance of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 2. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers ratings regarding the importance of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 3. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers ratings regarding the importance of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 4. What is the level of agreement among admini strators ratings rega rding the delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 5. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers ratings regarding the delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 6. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers ratings rega rding the delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 7. What is the level of agreement among admi nistrators ratings re garding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 8. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 22

PAGE 23

9. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 10. What is the level of agreement between alte rnatively certif icated novice teach ers ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/p rincipal responsibilities? 11. What are the differences between alternatively certificated and traditionally certificated novice teachers ratings regarding the impor tance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? Delimitations 1. The data were collected from public schools. Results and conclusions do not necessarily apply to non-public schools. 2. The study was limited to data gathered during the 2006-2007 school year. Conclusions and generalizations made from this study may th erefore not be able to be generalized to other time periods. 3. The study focused on novice teachers and mentors from one Central Florida school district. Limitations of the Study 1. The study assumed that the induction proce ss offered by this Central Florida school district followed state guidelines. 2. The study assumed that all participants pr ovided honest and accurate self-evaluation. 3. All administrators, first-year teachers and ment ors involved in this Central Florida school districts induction program we re provided an opportunity to respond to this survey. Significance of Study United States teacher education has historic ally been thin, uneven, poorly financed, and recruitment is distressingly ad hoc (Dar lingHammond, 1996, p. 194). Floridas beginning teacher training programs are considered pi ecemeal and underdeveloped (Feimen-Nemser, 1999). Efforts to redesign teacher training ultimat ely requires rethinking teacher preparation and professional development, not re formulating the status quo. Knowi ng this, a decade ago DarlingHammond (1996) set an audacious goal in the hope of challenging education professionals. She 23

PAGE 24

claimed that within 10 years the United Stat es would provide all students with access to competent, caring, and qualified teachers. As this optimistic challenge drew to its conclusion in 2006, veteran teachers continued to retire, teacher attrition rates continued to be an issue and teacher support programs have not addre ssed the needs of our new recruits. Sixty-five percent (65%) of U. S. teachers w ith less than three years experience claim to have been part of an induction program. Howeve r, only 19% received support from school level personnel (NCES, 1998). Novice teachers value induc tion practices that in clude a mentor, time for professional development, and observational feedback (Haugaard, 2005). Although content knowledge can quickly be attained, pedagogical knowledge often takes additional training. Teachers without continued support develop ineff ectiveness in areas of classroom management, lesson planning and ability to develop rapport with students and parents (Chisena, 2002; Haugaard, 2005; Spindler & Biott, 2000; Torff & Sessions, 2005). These st udies intimated that novice teachers rarely received trai ning in areas they believed were most needed and valuable. Beliefs are strong predictors of human behavior and are perceived as personal knowledge. The beliefs of the teacher will indicate what type of program and support is important. Addressing a teachers needs with feedback enables that teac her to gain confidence and reaffirm his or her abilities (Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Pajares, 1992). Novice teachers experience problems when th e beliefs they developed during their university-based teacher preparation stand in contrast to th e work environment they encounter in their first teaching assignment (Halford, 1998; Johnson & Birkel and, 2003). Too often, they find themselves trying to survive thei r first years with little support fr om the school district or from school-based personnel. In addition, several fast-tr ack, or alternative certification programs, have provided a route for instructors with no pre-service training to enter the profession (Johnson, 24

PAGE 25

Birkeland, & Peske, 2005). Without proper supp ort, many novice teachers become frustrated semi-skilled labor, demonstrating little more than the ability to use a few simple routines and tricks of the trade (DarlingHammond, 1999; Johnson, Birkela nd, Peske, & Munger, 2005). To help prevent such occurrences, administrators must gain understanding of an effective teacher induction process. Support of novice teachers from school-based ad ministrators and mentors often determines if novice teachers stay in the profession (F arkas, Johnson & Foleno, 2000; Johnson & Birkeland, 2003). Although most school district s utilize some type of indu ction program, the educational field continues to experience high attrition due to the lack of support and the inability to positively influence novice teachers on-the-job stre ssors. Castorina (2003) reported the lack of high quality induction practices re sulted in a school district losing nearly 100% of its novice teachers. Thus, it is not only important that dist ricts deliver training and support, but that the support and training meet the needs of the particip ants. Clarity of supporting roles assists in the development of teacher induction programs, en abling teachers to experience greater job satisfaction and allowing administrator and me ntor roles to be defined (Johnson & Birkeland, 2003; Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Ponticell & Zepeda, 1997). The disassociation of induction practices from pre-service trainingand the inability for mentors and administrators to relieve novice teac hers stressors once they arrive in the field makes instructional positions unattractive, whic h causes further attrition. This mass departure has resulted in a growing number of novice teachers entering classrooms with temporary certifications (NCES, 2000) and looking for support in their formative years. To combat the high quality teacher shortage, teachers must be trained effectively, supported when they enter the profession, and wa ys found to increase their retention. Quality 25

PAGE 26

support of teachers will assist in the reduction of attrition and further attract new recruits to the educational arena (Johnson, Birkeland, Kardos, Kauffman, Liu & Peske, 2001). Continued investment in teachers seeking al ternative certification solidifies the need for school districts to understand the type of support that needs to be provided. This study provides insight to help school districts understand the types of support that are necessary to crea te a successful teacher induction program. This study adds to the research of Castorina (2003) by ex amining differences between first-year alternatively certificated, and first-ye ar traditionally certificated teachers beliefs about the delivery and importance of teacher support services. It also expands the size of the populations, while focusing only on the uniquene ss of public elementary schools. The study presents evidence of the support services that are needed as well as evidence of the effectiveness of support services already provided. The study concludes with analysis of three open-ended responses that help expand knowle dge and explanation of important district and school level issues that the survey may not address. Resu lts of the study will inform elementary school principals and district level personnel about how teacher inducti on programs, and their roles in them, can be improved. 26

PAGE 27

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction This chapter presents a review of the professional literature and results of studies on teacher recruitment and retention, alternative cert ification, and induction programs as they relate to the teaching profession. Included in this review are the roles of a mentor and a description of administrative roles to support beginning teache rs and the importance of such support, along with novice teachers needs and perceptions of support and the impor tance of their beliefs, and an overview of induction program research. A brief summary concludes the chapter. Recruitment and Retention A major goal for administrators and mentor teachers should be to help beginning teachers remain in the profession (Johnson, 2001). Da rling-Hammond (2003) added, To reduce high teacher turnover rates that impose heavy costs on schools, [education professionals] must insist on effective teacher preparation and pr ovide support for new teachers (p. 1). Teacher training programs produce more highly qualifi ed teachers than should be necessary, yet educators cannot keep them in the profession. Ingersoll (2002) reported that 14% of teachers leave after one year, 24.4% leav e after two years, 32.6% leave after three year s, 40.4% leave after four years, and almost half (50%) leave the profession after five years. Not only are firstyear teachers leaving the profession, but experi enced teachers are also exiting in droves (Coppenhaver & Schaper, 1999). Halford stated, Nearly two million new teachers are projected to enter U. S. schools in the next decade, and the challenge of supporti ng them effectively has become a critical issue (1998, p. 34). Turnover fo r teachers is 5% higher per year than nonteaching occupations. In addition, Berry and Hirsch (2003) estimated a loss of thousands of dollars per teacher who leaves th e profession in the first few years. Most of the educators 27

PAGE 28

leaving the profession come from schools difficult to staff. Teacher turnover is almost 7% higher in low income public schools (Ingersoll, 2001a). As a result, poor children are far more likely to be taught by inexperienced, under prepared, a nd non-certificated teacher s (Berry & Hirsch, 2003). The American Federation of Teachers (AFT) reported a significant shortage of quality teachers (Tetzeli, 1993). Only 28% of teachers currently in the field agreed they would enter teaching if they had the choice again (Gruber, Wiley, Broughman, Strizek, & Burian-Fitzgerald, 2002). Al Shanker, former AFT president, be lieved public education co mbated the increased student populations by hiring the next able body down the list (T etzeli, 1993). Finding quality teachers in the United States has become so difficult that American sc hool districts have begun to search beyond the borders to find quality te achers (Archer, 2001). The Houston Independent School district is one of many U. S. school districts that travel ove rseas to hire teachers (Archer, 1999). The Houston school district in 1999 claimed that it found more of the teachers that it needed in Moscow than it found in Texas dur ing the last three year s. Although the National Education Association voiced that this is the wr ong direction for educatio n to head in order to achieve excellence, Congress has already made it easier for foreign teachers to get temporary visas (Archer, 1999). The continued public focus on educational exce llence has made keeping quality teachers in the classroom a priority among policymakers. As a result, two broad approaches have been identified: (a) increasing teacher salaries a nd (b) addressing inadequate support for novices (Halford, 1999). Support for both appr oaches is gaining increased popularity with legislators and county-created teacher induction programs. 28

PAGE 29

As of 2000, only 5% of teachers st rongly agreed that they were satisfied with their salaries (Gruber et al., 2002). Other negative factors making support for teachers even more vital include rising school violence, overcrow ded schools, and inadequate pub lic appreciation for the work done by teachers. Poor working conditions a nd lack of on-the-job training and support are primary factors for the exodus of novice teacher s from the profession. Regardless of these negative factors, Singh and Billingsley (1998) st ated that teachers who encounter stronger disposition toward teaching and support to remain in the profession are more likely to continue. Research conducted by the Project on the Next Gene ration of Teachers suggested that the key to addressing shortages lies not in attractive recruitment polices but in support and training for new teachers at the school site (p. 1). Of the teach ers involved in the study, most reported that although they were once eager to teach, they f ound that they needed much more support and direction than was provided by their cu rrent schools (Johnson et al., 2001). Florida has adjusted its retention focus by di stributing additional f unds to support teacher incentives and increase support programs. Berry and Hirsch (2003) discussed how states have offered 10% to 12% pay increases for teacher s who become certified by the National Board Certified Teacher (NBCT) Program. In addition, Halford (1999) reported that Florida already allocated more than $1 million toward teacher support programs. These funds added to the NBCT program, granting teachers another 10% pa y increase as an incentive to mentor and support beginning teachers within the school system. Novice teachers are offered incentives such as housing, health club memberships, loan fo rgiveness, and bonuses. Despite such programs teacher attrition rates continue to soar. Although such enticements increase the supply of new teachers to schools, they do nothing to guarantee that novice teachers remain. Such short-term 29

PAGE 30

responses to long-term challenges bring to light and question the effectiv eness of current support practices (Johnson et al., 2001). Alternative Certification Alternative Certification conf licts with the push for high qua lity teaching. Within this context, state policy makers and program directors face the challenge of designing and implementing appealing, fast-track preparation programs that will also ensure teacher quality (Johnson, Birkeland, & Peske, 2005, p. 72). Persons w ho seek temporary certification in Florida only have to meet minimum state requiremen ts. Requirements for a three-year teacher certification are only a bachelo rs degree with a 2.5 GPA and to pass a background check. Once they are in the classroom teaching children, they must pass the National Teacher Exam, Florida Professional Education Test and the College Leve l Academic Skills Test (Baines, McDowell, & Foulk, 2001). Alternatively certific ated teachers in Florida are gr anted complete control over a childs education, but they are not required to have any previous classroo m training. They are not only employed and elevated to a full instructor, bu t they receive full benefits and the same status as teachers with often twice their educational training. These teachers are expected to teach and to have as much knowledge as traditionally certifi cated teachers after as little as a two-week crash course. Finn and Madigan (2001) repor ted some Florida educational leaders feel minimum requirements should be removed entirely. They suggested that we lose a huge number of nontraditional teacher candidates because of our hoops and hurdles and red tape (p. 29). The tightening of teacher requirements and training does not necessarily mean higher achievement for students. Many school districts have begun to widen the pathways into the profession by experimenting with private a lternative certification programs. Johnson, Birkeland, and Peske (2005) reported on fast-track programs which are completed in one summer. Candidates in these 30

PAGE 31

programs expressed they would not have been ab le or willing to ente r the profession if the certification timeline was longer. These ultra-condensed programs can be provided by the state, but they are often provided by private vendors as a less expensive alternative. Teach for America (TFA), which places liberal arts graduates in poor inner city schools, and Troops to Teachers, which places military veterans in classrooms, are now working with the public system to provide alternative certifications. More than 90% of principals were satisfied enough to hire more teachers from both of these programs and 60% were retained for at least a second year of service (Finn & Madigan, 2001; Tell, 2001). Johnson and Birkelands (2003) qualitative study examined a program that duplicated the training model of TFA. They showed an investment of nearly $20,000 per alternative certification teacher, but offered little follow-up once they reached the classroom. These teachers were placed in areas they did not feel qualified to teach, and often received a higher workload than a traditionally certificated teacher. In sp ite of the large amount of money allocated to the training of these teachers, almost half left the profession after one year in the classroom. They were also three times more likely to change schools. Because of pr ior career experience, alternatively certificated teachers were believed to have had a lower tolerance for unsupportive school situations. These teachers thought they were not placed in situati ons where effectiveness could be achieved. The commonality among training programs is that most novice educators need support in order to remain in the educat ional field. Once the extrinsic or monetary incentives are gone, novice teachers need to make an intrinsic connection to remain in the field. States have now begun to debate the idea of whether they should decentralize or centralize alternative certification c ontrol in order to meet the demands of alternately certif icated teachers. 31

PAGE 32

Johnson, Birkeland, and Peske (2005) studied th e decentralized and centralized programs of three states. Each state repr esented a different level of centr alization or decentralization. The centralized programs were able to pull from a la rger pool of candidates with higher credentials. They were also able to offer a wider variety of certifications. However, these candidates were not, and could not be, guaranteed jobs. The decentralized or local programs had a higher success rate of filling jobs, but they ha d limitations on the areas of expert ise in each subject they could offer. Gaps in training were reported in all of the programs. Quality was treated as an afterthought rather than a process. The research implied that the best solution was for the state and local agencies to work toge ther. A selectively decentralized model could allow for both state and local agencies to do what they do best. Additional research suggested that not only should the agencies work together, but th at the length and quality of traini ng programs continue to be an issue. Johnson, Birkeland, Peske, and Munger (2005) studied a sample of 13 alternative certification program sites in four states. They found additional evidence th at fast-track program incentives brought many professionals into teac hing that would not have otherwise had the opportunity in enter the field. The difficultly for program administrators was an inability to deliver the promised quality of training. The t eaching candidates reported major gaps in their training, lack of knowledge of how to teach their subject, mismatched student teaching placements with untrained mentors, and inadequate follow-up support once they began teaching. Induction Programs Furtwengler (1995) conducted an analysis of state induction programs. Of the 34 states that were determined to have policie s for beginning-teacher induction, common trends in each state included the use of support teams, provision of teacher mentors, development of training programs for participants, and determination of evaluation decisions for certification. The state 32

PAGE 33

of Florida passed legislation in 1982 that required and funde d Floridas Beginning Teacher Program, or Professional Orie ntation Program. Each district became responsible for implementation of the program and for gaini ng annual endorsement by the Commissioner of Education. The supporting staff was defined as a principal, peer teacher, and another professional educator. Both formative and summative assessments should be conducted, using the recommended Florida Performance Measurement System. Feimen-Nemser (1999) investigated Floridas program and found that the training programs were piecemeal. She also discovered that induction practices varied enormously stem ming from Floridas decentralization. Johnson (2001) believed that instructional pr actices cannot be grasped through pre-service classes and student teaching. Support must continue throughout the first year and be part of an ongoing process of development. The fact many t eachers remain past the first years is a tribute toward their desire to teach, not to the received support. Stan sbury (2001) stated, An induction program aims at supporting beginning teachers who have completed their professional preparation, using assessment stra tegies to inform support (p. 1). Ponticell and Zepeda (1997) added that planned induction activities with me ntors, department chairs, and administrators should be geared to help beginning teachers make the transition from student teacher to teacher of students. These activities should help novice teachers make connections with information sources and build a support network for problem-s olving. Florida has mandated that all districts have a specific plan of action. However, what constitutes a minimally acceptable program has not been established (Baines et al., 2001). Spindler and Biott (2000) suggested that support for novice teachers should include: (a) obtainment of an induction tutor (mentor), (b ) observation of beginning teacher instructional practices, (c) observation of experienced teachers, (d) a formal review of the novice teachers 33

PAGE 34

progress conducted with a mentor, and (e) pr ofessional development based on the beginning teachers needs. Although 28 states have institute d some form of induction program, the level of participation varies greatly. For example, 10 st ates (not including Fl orida) do not fund the program fully and do not mandate school district participation (Halford, 1999). Torff and Sessions (2005) continued examination of the effectiveness of teacher training programs. Three hundred school principals were aske d to give their perceived causes of teacher ineffectiveness. The results concluded that, although content mastery co uld be achieved in a short amount of time, pedagogical knowledge was not reached. The teachers experienced threats to effectiveness in the skill areas of cla ssroom-management, lesson-implementation, lessonplanning, and rapport with students. The authors reported that the results implied teacher training programs centered on content knowledge and lacked pedagogical focus. The data also supported the need to not shorten programs any further or reduce rigor for convenience. An effective induction program not only pr ovides support for beginning teachers, but provides training to help mentors develop their sk ills in this role. The mentor teacher should be allotted time to meet with his/her novice teacher to analyze teaching and problem-solving skills. In turn, the beginning teacher should be given time to observe the mentors teaching practices and reflect on what they do in their classroom s (Stansbury, 2001). Such additional visitation time is usually not mandated, and must be provided through leadership support. Chisena (2002) researched the new teacher induction program in Orange County, Florida outlining the elements important for a successful induction program. A survey was given to 285 first-year teachers to identify induction activities that they perceived as the most helpful and relevant to their success as teachers. Curriculu m, students, parents, a nd staff were the four subgroups selected to determine the importance of support. Results indicted that the five most 34

PAGE 35

important induction support topics included: (a) motivating students, (b) student discipline, (c) establishing professional relationships with other teachers, (d) establishing effective communication with parents, and (e) communicati on about student progre ss with parents. The majority of the teachers reported that they were not provided assistance in these important areas. In addition, neither principals nor university st aff were viewed as an integral source of assistance. Beginning Teacher Support Mentors Perceptions of Their Roles Support provided to beginning teachers is importa nt to the quality of their short and longterm professional success. Carter and Francis (20 01) suggested, Mentoring is one such form of professional support that has received widespread attention in the literatu re and which has been implemented in a number of teacher educati on and induction programs during the past two decades (p. 249). Mentoring is often used to deal with issues of skill, classroom development, and the articulation of school norms. Researchers sometimes believe the term mentor is an ambiguous synonym for teacher tutor, professional tutor, or host teacher. Saunde rs and Pettinger (1995) described a mentor as someone who contributes and plays a role in the training, supervis ion, or assessment of a student teacher. Spindler and Biott (2000) continued the ambiguity by using a more global definition that a mentor is anyone who is involved with the development of a begi nning teacher, but an Induction Tutor is the member who is tagged with the respons ibility of coordinating guidance and support. Thus, it is increasingly important for programs that aid beginning teachers to clearly define roles of the mentoring teacher. When th e principal communicates clear expectations for the beginning teacher and the mentor, teachers experience a greater professional commitment 35

PAGE 36

(Singh & Billingsley, 1998). The principals role, as related to beginni ng teachers, will be discussed later in this review. In Florida schools, mentors have an important role in the induction process that expands the definition even further. An induction mentor or peer teacher, as termed by a Central Florida county, aids in the supervision of teachers w ho have a bachelors degree, but do not have a teaching certificate from a Florida university or a university that is recognized by Florida. This school district also assigns mentors at the sc hool level for all novice teachers. However, the mentors roles were not defi ned. Florida Department of Ed ucation (FDOE) guidelines for selecting mentors require that they meet one of th e following three criteria. First, a mentor can be selected because he/she has a Pr ofessional Service Contract (PSC ) and has completed a clinical education program. Second, a mentor may be se lected if he/she has a PSC and also has completed a FDOE course in Florida Performance Management System (FPMS), a state approved evaluation system. Third, a teacher can be selected by possessing a PSC and training as a supervisor of interns. All three methods of selection must be accompanied by a principals recommendation. In addition, mentors are given a $1,200 yearly stipend if they are aiding a novice teacher in obtaining alternative certification. It is important for the mentor pairing to be a cohesive match. Cart er and Francis (2001) emphasized the importance of the mentor a nd mentee developing commonalities beyond a stipend or the receipt of a cer tification. Forming a relationship beyond basic day-to-day routines is termed a multi-dimensional mentor. A mentor who merely gives information is functioning as a transmitter of teacher professional learning, whic h Carter and Franciss (2001) research defined as a uni-dimensional approach (p. 250). Ballantyne and Hansford (1995) and Ponticell and Zepeda (1997) both state that uni-dimensional mentoring can constrain th e learning of beginning 36

PAGE 37

teachers rather than reinforce reflective practice that results in creating professional connections. Carter and Francis (2001) were suspicious of mentoring that lacked essential workplace connections. When workplace learning is grounde d in a constructivist epistemology, it has the capacity to generate a dynamic, interactive learning process that has the potential to challenge, if not transform, the status quo (p. 251). A mentor acts as a gateway to a novice te achers job satisfacti on. A novice teacher who interacted with his mentor on a regular basis viewed the sch ool professional climate more favorably. Within the workplace, the mentor should be viewed as a critical friend rather than a superior. However, Carter and Francis (2001) em phasized that the sepa ration of mentor and supervisor roles is less critical than the de gree of personal compatibility between beginning teacher and mentor (p. 258). Greater success was reported when a formal mentor was assigned to a novice teacher who shared commonalities with them. Spindler and Biotts (2000) on-the-job training research, also reported that formal meeti ngs can have less effect than informal contact. Beginning teachers resent being the object rather than the partner in the process (Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998). Mentoring shoul d be regarded as a strategy to provide professional and personal support to beginning te achers outside the schools line management structure (Carter & Francis, 2001, p. 254). It is important for the ment ors in a district level program to be aware of their roles and to accentuate daily guidance, al ong with summative and formative evaluations. Ballantyne and Hansford (1995) further define d the mentors multi-dimensional approach in describing a mentor as a buddy They reported that mentors should provide novice teachers with what they require to be successful in varying degrees. These ar eas are personal support, task-related assistance and advice, problem-related assistance and advice, critical reflection, and feedback on practice. Personal support encompasses Carter and Francis (2 001) characteristics of 37

PAGE 38

effective mentoring. This mentor role entails th e attributes of approachability, friendliness, openness, interest in development, and also em phasizes the importance of compatibility between novice teacher and mentor. Novice teachers find co mfort and reduction in their stress level by having access to someone to talk to, and ask fo r advice and assistance. A buddy mentor is able to offer empathy and reassurance based on shared difficulties, as well as the benefits of greater experience (Ballantyne & Hansford, 1995, p. 3). A buddy mentor is described as a teacher who simply shows the novice where things are located and assists the primary mentor when he is not a teacher from the campus (Stansbury, 2001). However, an off-campus mentor may cause a poor affiliation and further confusion and create undue stress for the novice. Castorina (2003) reported that mentors felt a 10to 15-year difference in age was unimportant. Carter and Francis (2001) supported Castor inas findings and noted that the age and experience differences in a mentoring relationship should not be too great. Rather than age and status, the physical location, and ease of me ntor access has considerable impact on the effectiveness of the pairing. Ponticell and Zepe da (1997) agreed, citing examples of effective novice teaching programs using proximity and c ontent area to drive mentor partnering. Stansburys (2001) evaluation of The Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment Program showed that teachers with four or five years of experience made excellent support providers. The experience these teachers lacked was compensate d for by a fresh understanding of the obstacles that novices face. This relevance aided in the mentors understa nding of what new teachers need to know and be able to do. Task-related assistance should begin in the first weeks where the mentor becomes multidimensional, thus helping the novice teacher develop his instructional role in the workplace. The mentor embarks on helping the novice teacher w ith daily school routin es, assisting the novice 38

PAGE 39

with student progress reports, covering school-based requirem ents, cooporative planning, and modeling effective teaching behaviors (Ballantyne & Hansford, 1995). When the mentor works on tasks along side the novice teacher, it presents an opportunity to initia te collegial activities and model grade-level planning. This helps novi ce teachers accomplish teaching-related work with feedback from lead teachers on current le ssons and units being planned (Stansbury, 2001). Ponticell and Zepeda (1997) extended the notion that it is important for teachers at this stage not to neglect attention to classroom issues and fi xate on the way we do things around here (p. 9). School culture issues are addresse d through interaction with mentor s who are already part of the schools teaching community. Established cultures, along with classroom di fficulties, are barrier s that a novice teacher quickly encounters. To address some of thes e barriers, Ballentyne and Hansford (1995) suggested that problem-related assistance shoul d begin after four w eeks. Castorina (2003) proposed that support should begin during preplanning. Both findings concur that help for novice teachers should begin very close to the beginning of a school year. At this point the mentor begins to explore instru ctional problems and possible solution s with the novice teacher. Early intervention helps combat the increasing sour ce of concern the beginning teacher may have about individual student learning and behavi ors and about where to find assistance. DeJongs (1997) learning process perspectiv e (p. 461), described as a training method, allows the novice to obtain the necessary skill s to become as independent as possible. The support provider should help the novice teachers id entify their strengths and better develop their teaching practices (Stansbury, 2001). This feedback helps improve the novices skills, allowing the improvement to continue after support is withdrawn. Once support is removed, teacher thinking or teacher literacy can continue (Bor een & Niday, 2000, p. 2). Teacher literacy allows 39

PAGE 40

for the practitioner to transfer theory into performance, sift ing through educational jargon and understanding expectations which result in concrete teaching in the classroom. Critical reflection and feedback on practice give the novice te acher a chance in the latter phase of induction to analyze success and failure s. Reflection allows for self-learning during which the novice can determine both the competencies to be gained and the strategies to acquire those skills. Reflective supervision serves as a ca talyst for novice teachers to have the courage to look into their own classroom prac tices and change what is consid ered less effective (Brownlee, Dart, Boulton-Lewis, & McCrindl e, 1998; Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998) In turn, the novice teacher begins to see how he can incorporate how he wants to teach rather than how he had to teach to get through the year (Ballantyne & Hansford, 1995). Mentors have reported that novice teachers often wanted to hide problems they were having. Mentors used their own shortcomings to eas e the novice teachers stre ss levels. This aids the teacher training process, allowing for a jo int effort in which both the mentor and novice teacher improve together (Johnson, 2001; Spindler & Biott, 2000). The mentors share in the challenging timetables, sometimes shouldering much of the novice teachers responsibility, andin many instancesincreasing their time commit ment an extensive number of hours. Most mentors believed that novice teachers who initia lly showed limited skill can learn to improve (Saunders & Pettinger, 1995). It is the mentors role to provide the level of assistance the beginning teacher requires. Novice teachers were more responsive to being provided appropriate levels of assistance rather than being told what they needed to do (Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998). Administrative Role Principals can feel isolatedcaught in the chain of command between students, teachers, parents, and the distri ct office. They can become overwhelmed by too many people clamoring for their attention (Bolman & Deal, 1993). Howe ver, the need for principal support for novice 40

PAGE 41

teachers is documented throughout research. A pr incipals concept of teacher tasks plays an influential role in making decisi ons, and that concept can have a positive or negative effect on a teachers behavior and learning (Ballantyne, Thompson, & Taylor, 1998). Singh and Billingsley (1998) summarized, Principal supp ort appears to be important to teachers general well-being (p. 9). Well-being was defined by Littrell and Bi llingsley (1994) as teacher stress, personal health, job satisfaction, school commitment, and intent to stay in teaching (p. 7). Principals who address this need develop teachers who are more likely to be satisfied with their work. Zepeda and Ponticell (1998) reported that novice t eachers also look for empowerment from their principal. The principal is regularly in my classroom to observe and in teract with the children and me. This is important. Both the principa l and I have seen strengt hs, concerns addressed, and progress made (p. 4). The message sent from the principal to a novice teacher can aid in the necessary developmental process from content knowledge to quality te aching practice. Johnson (2001) agreed that a clear message expressing the value and overall need for the beginning teacher should come from the principal. Principals need to exert management skills and emotional support to provide teachers with a sense of belonging, while understanding the importance of their role (Littr ell & Billingsley, 1994). Ballantyne et al. (1998) suggested that principals reflect on their personal views on teaching expectations. Becoming cognizant of their personal myths (p. 9) will enable the administra tor to take a more consistent approach and further meet the needs of a beginning teacher. Often administrative managerial techniques place novice teachers in content areas without regard to their qualifications (Ingersoll, 2001b). The requirements of novice teachers are so metimes ignored. Principals often lack understanding of their roles in regard to the importance of easing new teachers into their profession (Johnson, 2001). The principal must be in sync with what the novice teacher needs. 41

PAGE 42

It is the principals duty to avoid burdening beginning teachers with unnecessary tasks. Novice teachers should be encouraged to learn, but they should not develop cognitive overload by enrolling in every professional developmen t opportunity. Although a common practice within school systems, principals should avoid: (a) as signing beginning teachers the most challenging students, (b) scheduling separate preparations in secondary schools, or (c) combining classes in elementary schools. The principal must also shoulder the responsibility of preventing enthusiastic novice teachers from volunteering fo r too much responsibility (Stansbury, 2001). Administrators must avoid the pitfalls of using novice teachers as in expensive after-school labor (Ponticell & Zepeda, 1997) Avoiding this kind of situation can be achieved by administrators encouraging veteran teachers to take on additional responsibilities. However, Ponticell and Zepeda reported that the principal needs to keep th e new staff members involved in learning opportunities (p. 9) by inspiring them to attend school-re lated activities to learn more about the schools culture and ch aracteristics. This type of administrative support helps novices create a sense of belonging, inter act with students outside of the classroom, and be exposed to the informal structures of the schools commun ity without feeling the burdensome responsibility or obligation of assigned duties at these events. The principa ls emotional support motivates novices to a higher level of performance and invo lvement, while decreasing their health-related problems and increasing their commitment toward teaching (Littrell & Billingsley, 1994). When principal leadership is strong, teachers are more likely to be professionally committed (Singh & Billingsley, 1998). Ponticell and Zepeda (1997) demonstrated the impact of admini strative support through their research conducted on three high schools. Two schools that were deemed successful 42

PAGE 43

reported administrators as encouraging and emphas ized formative interaction and observation. In turn, both the novice teachers and administrators re ported high levels of satisfaction and skill. The principals support encourag es commitment of novice teach ers to the profession, and his/her bolstering directly infl uences peer support. Mentors are less likely to aid beginning teachers if perception of their principal s leadership is poor. The support shown by administrators has the strongest correlation between assistance and teacher performance (Singh & Billingsley, 1998). Singh and Billingsleys (1998) research showed little correlation be tween the number of years a teacher has been in the profession a nd his overall commitment toward teaching. The education level of the teacher ex erted a slightly negative relationship, leading one to believe that teachers with more education exhibited more re sistance to leadership. While 42% of Florida teachers felt their principals were supportiv e, only 9% of Florida teachers remembered discussing instructional practices with their principals. Urzua (1999) noted that principals sometimes have high, although possibly unrealistic, expectations of recent university graduates, and they start the school year w ith expectations of supervisin g novice teachers. Yet principals quickly become overextended, overworked, or ov erwhelmed by their duties. As a result, the principals rely on mentors or assistants to cove r duties such as instruct ing novice teachers. Doud and Keller (1998) reported training or staff development as a principals lowest priority. A mentors ability to cooperate with principals regarding th e training of novice teachers was dependant on the principals support and ab ility to evaluate fairly. The principal leadership/support not only influenced profession al commitment directly, but it also affected professional commitment indirectly through peer support (Singh & Bill ingsly, 1998, p. 8). This study concluded that principals play a vital role in novice teacher support and mentor 43

PAGE 44

effectiveness. Littrell and Billings ly (1994) attested that a higher level of support is perceived by beginning teachers within a school where its lead er emphasizes camaraderie and optimism (p. 7) and interacts frequently with all members of his staff. Novice Teachers Needs and Perceptions The needs of novice teachers and those preparin g to enter the field must be addressed. With the growth in student popula tion, the public school system cannot afford to continue to lose new members within its ranks (Johnson, 2001). Halford (1998) re ported that novice teachers classrooms often become dumping grounds (p. 33) for students w ith behavioral difficulties, attendance issues, and learning deficiencies. Po nticell and Zepedas (1997) study showed many novice teachers were left to flounder in the mi dst of extremely difficult assignments. Johnson (2001) stated that in most fi elds the tougher assignments go to those with experience. Why should teaching be different? Some of the gr eatest challenges for fi rst-year teachers are classroom management, student motivation, deali ng with individual differences, assessment, and getting along with parents (Baines et al., 2001; Haugaard, 2005). These areas have been readily addressed through staff development. However, the NCES Teacher Survey on Professional Development and Training (1998) de tected only slight increases in many of these areas. More teacherswho did not attend staff developmentfe lt confident in the area of maintaining order and discipline. It was not determined what level of understanding these teachers had in classroom management, which may explain this result. Dissimilarly, Haug aards (2005) recent study reported 80% of novice teachers felt that classroom management was an extremely important topic for induction programs. The 110 teachers surveyed in Haugaards (2005) study valued the support of 10 topics at 89% or above. These 10 topics in cluded: (a) student di scipline plans and classroom management, (b) accessing resources, (c) curric ulum assistance, (d) procedures for the first days of school, 44

PAGE 45

(e) student assessment, (f) read ing instruction, (g) di strict policies and procedures, (h) lesson planning and preparation for instruction, (i) instructional techniques, and (j) parent communication methods. These teachers also report ed that the four most valuable ways of delivering these support topics we re: (a) teaching coaches, (b) re lease time for professional development activities, (c) observation feedback from mentors or administrators, and (d) teacher mentors. Haugaard concluded that the participants were satisfied with the induction-support topic assistance or training received. However, onl y 63% of the novice teachers reported receiving assistance from a teaching coach. A teaching coach or mentor was reported as the most valued resource for a novice teacher. In addition, almost a quarter of the respondents did not receive support with classroom management, whic h was the top-rated support topic. The Schools and Staffing Survey 1999-2000 (Grube r et al., 2002), shows that support of Floridas new teachers is ahead of the U. S. average in all areas except for extra classroom assistance, where Florida fell 2% below the national average. In relation to the national average, Floridas common planning time is 9% above, seminar time for beginning teachers is 18% above, regular supportive communica tion is 9% above, and mentor time is 5% above. Yet only 38% of Florida teachers felt their mentors were he lping significantly. This data indicate novice teachers are being allotted time, but they may not be getting the support they need. This could be explained by Singh and Billingsleys (1998) resear ch that found that time must not be the only ingredient, but that support must also include discussion, assistance with instruction, and help with discipline. Novice Teachers Beliefs and Practices MacNab and Payne (2003) reported that school experiences dictated novice teachers beliefs about instruction. Sevent y-one percent (71%) of beginning or alternat ively certificated teachers responded to questions about their be liefs about teaching mathematics. Through a 45

PAGE 46

survey and qualitative questioning, MacNab and Payne determined that past negative or positive experiences reflected the novice teachers current f eelings. The nature of teachers beliefs, their antecedents and influences, and their effect s on classroom practice are very revealing. Brownlee et al. (1998) examin ed graduate students who recently completed a degree in education. They found that novice teachers, who l eave university training programs, depart with beliefs that can be described as nave or inform ed. Nave beliefs have no evidence of theoretical knowledge and may lack understand ing. Informed beliefs reflect a theoretical connection and demonstrate understanding. Novice teachers who rece ived theoretical classroom training, had an on-the-job experience, and who utili zed methods of reflection demonstrated an increased level of informed beliefs. The authors determined that whether nave or informed, beliefs are a strong predictor of teaching behavior, t hus impacting student achievement. Pajares (1992) examined teachers perception and reported that beliefs of the teacher will indicate what type of program and support is important. Beliefs are strong predictors of human behavior and are perceived as personal knowle dge. Zepeda and Pontic ells (1998) study of teachers needs supported this pattern of thought, concluding that supervision is best when teachers receive validation, empowerment, a visible presence, and coaching. Novice teachers feel that validation is obtained through the feedback received from a mentor or supervisor. Zepeda and Ponticell ( 1998) pointed out that pos itive feedback helped teachers gain confidence while reaffirming thei r abilities. This intera ction assists in the validation of the teachers self-c onfidence and beliefs a bout their role in th e school system. The dog and pony show (p. 5), in which the supervis or makes the evaluation based on a checklist of boxes, was of little value and provided scant professional growth. Novice teachers felt more personal gains were achieved when the only ev aluation process was not structured around 46

PAGE 47

mandated guidelines and two yearly performances (p. 5). The evaluation process for teachers should be empowering and simulate instructiona l growth. Assistance they receive should help the novice teachers take control of their own knowledge, skills, and ability to improve. Teachers who received encouragement to reflect on their ow n classroom practice felt a sense of power and awareness. This was achieved with the ai d of properly used assessment techniques. Although teachers viewed instrumental support as important, their testimonials favored receiving more informational support (Littrell & Billingsley, 1994). It is therefore important for the mentor, as well as the principal, to evaluate the support that novice teachers require and use an instrumental approach to obtain informati on. Unfortunately, mentors often do not provide the support that teachers believe they should receive and feel is so important. Zepeda and Ponticell (1998) made a strong c onnection with supervis ors who took time to complete frequent summative and formative obs ervations and coached the novice along the way. One respondent in their study stated: [My supervisor] was there for me and helped me through any problems that I had. I was successful because I felt [my supervisor] was on my side to assist me with concerns . interested in what I was accomplishing and eagerly involved in what students were accomplishing . then provided evidence of my and my students success. (p. 4) This formative approach satisfies the need for a novice teacher to receive a visible presence while encompassing the necessity for teachers to receive coaching. The mentor or supervisor works alongside the novice teacher to provide assistance that is pa rticular to his/her classroom situation. Summary Research indicates that, without support in their beginning years, novice teachers will not fully develop and will continue to leave the pr ofession. Once the teacher reaches the classroom, vital sources of support should come from admi nistrators and support pe rsonnel in the form a 47

PAGE 48

mentor. Major components for teacher induction success were reported to be follow-through and focus on areas that novices believed were beneficial. Most research indicated that the areas of focus were discipline, curriculu m, instructional feedback, a nd communication. If the novice teacher believed that these areas were being properly addressed, they achieved job satisfaction and connection to the workplace. 48

PAGE 49

CHAPTER 3 DESIGN OF THE STUDY The purpose of this study was to examine a district-wide teacher induction program and evaluate the relationship between the believed importance and actual deliv ery of mentors and principals responsibilities in support services, as evaluated by the administrator, mentor, and novice teacher. This study also reviewed the out come of the teacher induction program through the perspective of traditionally and a lternatively certificat ed novice teacher. Data was obtained from K-5 novice teachers, me ntors and principals using an electronic survey. The survey was based on the following research questions. 1. What is the level of agreement among admini strators ratings regard ing the importance of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 2. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers ratings regarding the importance of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 3. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers ratings regarding the importance of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 4. What is the level of agreement among admini strators ratings rega rding the delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 5. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers ratings regarding the delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 6. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers ratings rega rding the delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 7. What is the level of agreement among admi nistrators ratings re garding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 49

PAGE 50

8. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 9. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 10. What is the level of agreement between alte rnatively certif icated novice teach ers ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/p rincipal responsibilities? 11. What are the differences between alternatively certificated and traditionally certificated novice teachers ratings regarding the impor tance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? Methodology To answer these research questions, a survey adapted with the perm ission of Dr. Susan Castorina (2003) was used. This research was a descriptive quantitative study designed to measure the relationship between the beliefs of th e administrators, mentors, and novice teachers and the delivered services of a Cent ral Florida teacher induction program. The survey was separated into four parts. Part I of the survey used demographic questions to help identify the participants. Part II of the survey asked the participants to rate the importance of support services that their t eacher induction program provided. Th is section was separated into 3 parts. Part II A asked the importance of suppor t services related to teacher induction program beliefs about administrator res ponsibilities. Part II B asked th e importance of support services related to beliefs about mentor responsibilitie s. Part II C asked the importance of support services related to beliefs about mentor/principal responsibilities. Part III of the survey asked participants to rate, based upon pe rsonal experiences, their level of satisfaction with delivery of support services in their school. Part III A sought the level of satisfaction of delivery of support services related to administrato r responsibilities. Part III B sought the level of satisfaction of delivery of support services related to mentor responsibilities. Part III C sought the level of 50

PAGE 51

satisfaction of delivery of support services related to mentor/principal respons ibilities. Part IV of the survey asked participants to answer four open-ended questions in reference to personal beliefs about the teacher induction program. Population This quantitative study used the population and se tting as they were in order to report an accurate description of the induction practices as they naturally occur. Tuckman (1999) stated that the population, the target group the type of people th e researcher is interested in studying (p. 283), is addressed th rough the selection of a sample drawn from a school district. The sample for this study included all K-5 elementa ry first year teachers, their mentors, and the building principals and assistan t principals designated to mon itor the teacher induction program in a Central Florida county school district (n = 179). This study examined the satisfaction levels of participants in an induction program in an urban Centra l Florida county school district. The district includes 37 elementary schools. The 36 schools sampled have been in operation for a minimum of one year and have experienced facu lties. To reduce the sampling and coverage errors, all K-5 administrators, mentors and first-year novice teachers for the school year 20062007 were given the opportunity to participate in the study, thus incr easing the ability to estimate with considerable precision (Dillman, 2007). A list was obtained from the examined school district which cont ained the names of elementary administrators, mentors, and first-ye ar teachers. The U. S. school mail address and email address for each person was obtained from the school districts website. One elementary school was omitted because it was in its first year of operation. Each building principal was contacted via phone to ask for their schools par ticipation in the study. The survey was sent to 461 administrators, mentors and beginning teache rs at 36 elementary schools in one Central 51

PAGE 52

Florida County School District. Participants were given the option to not respond to any questions they did not want to answer. All administrators held current Florida educat ional leadership certificates and were trained about the induction process. Mentor teachers he ld current Florida t eacher certification, a professional service contract (ten ure), and were provided opportuni ties to receive district level training and support as needed. Preplanning training was mandatory for all district employees. All teachers who participated in the districts induction program received support provided by the school district. If traditionally certificated, novice teachers held a Florida teaching certificate; a Florida temporary teaching cer tificate was held by those participants who were alternatively certificated. For alternative certif ication teachers, successful comp letion of the district teacher induction program is necessary to receive a fi ve-year professional teach ing certificate. All participants held at least a b achelors degree; however, some have degrees in fields other than education. All participants received the Internet survey questionnaire through both the U. S. Mail and their school district email accounts. Open-ende d questions provided space for comments and encouraged subjects to develop their thoughts on the survey items. All participan ts responded to the same survey: 29 items that concerned both beliefs about teacher i nduction and delivery of teacher induction services. Procedure for Data Collection Prior to the collection of data, all essential paperwork was submitted and approved by the University of Florida Institutional Review Board (UFIRB) to conduct the research. The researcher also submitted necessary information to the Central Florida school district for approval of the study. 52

PAGE 53

Confidentiality was provided through the use of anonym ous surveys. Security and confidentiality issues associated with electronic tec hnologies raise issues of trust, which are beginning to be addressed by researchers (Dillm an, 2007). The consent was determined once the participant read the approved le tter explaining their rights and clicked, I agree. The online survey allowed all responses to be directly uploaded to a secure web site and then to an SPSS program. This method secured the id entity of each participant. Participants were given four weeks to respond to the survey; the deadline was stated at least twice. An initial letter was sent to each pa rticipant, with a follow-up letter 2 weeks later. Two follow-up emails were also distributed; one email three days after the original mailing and another three weeks late r. The web address which led to the electronic survey accompanied all letters and emails. Instrumentation The researcher adapted an induction survey with permission from its creator, Dr. Susan Castorina. The questions consisted of statements representative of s ubsets of components of quality induction plans as described in the litera ture. A 10-point Likert scale was used, as it was preferred during the original p iloting of the survey (Castorina, 2003). The statements were interpreted only by the category of the provide r: administrator responsibilities, mentor responsibilities, and shared re sponsibilities. The ite ms within each subset were randomly intermixed. Mean scores less than 5 were considered low. Moderate scores were those between 5.0 and 7.4. Scores above 7.4 were considered high. The survey was field tested by a panel of 7 district personnel, who were former administrators, classroom teachers, and mentors. The district personnel were asked to review the clarity of the questions, the perceived comfor t level in responding to the question, and the accuracy of terminology used. To reduce measuremen t error and control threats to validity, the 53

PAGE 54

researcher received direct feedb ack about the clarity of the su rvey (Shaughnessy, Zechmeister & Zechmeister, 2000; Dillman, 2007). The researcher utilized recommendations of the panel for wording changes where appropriate in the instrument. Castorinas survey produced hi gh reliability coefficients th at matched with showing high internal consistency. Cronbachs alpha (reliabili ty coefficient) was used to measure the relationship of each indicator. If the relationship is high, the researcher can claim reliability. Alpha coefficient ranges can be sc aled as high (greater than + .75), moderate (+ .50 to + .74), and low (less than + .25 to + .49). Reliability is the level of accu racy or consistency of data as reported from an instrument over a period of time therefore showing test stability where similar results are reported for similar data (Norusis, 199 4; Tuckman, 1999). Reliability ensures that if the researcher conducted this st udy again, similar results should occur and the item responses should be consistent across c onstructs (Creswell, 1994). In this study, multiple questions were used to control for consistency of reporting attitudes. Anytime a questionnaire requires se lf-reporting an issue of showing ones self in the best light (Tuckman, 1999, p. 256) or social de sirability bias can emerge. Self-serving bias, a threat to internal validity, is more likely to occur when one rates ones own behavior than when one rates others behavior (Nauta & Kluw er, 2004, p. 464). To control for th is bias, the research about quality induction programs and how the data will be analyz ed was not revealed to the participants. The survey also allowed each gr oup (administrator, mentor, or novice teacher) to report how they felt the other groups delivered services. A survey was used to provide access to what is inside a persons head. This questionnaire allowed the investigator to measure what someone knows (knowledge or information), what someone likes and dislikes (values and preferen ces), and what someone thinks (attitudes and 54

PAGE 55

beliefs) (Tuckman, 1999). The survey design enable d the researcher to generalize from a sample to a population so that an inference can be made about the population (Babbie, 1990). Survey research is designed to be analyzed in a manne r that requires a comparison. When relationships are not being analyzed between variables, th e reason for the results cannot be determined (Tuckman, 1999). Data Analysis Demographic information was added to the or iginal survey to identify alternatively certificated teachers and to further describe th e participants. The survey was reformatted for online implementation. Descriptive statistics were used to uncover characteristics of the sample populations. Questions 1-6 were analyzed for means and commonalities between like groups. Questions 7-10 were compared using Spearmans Questions 710 were also evaluated for their significance levels (one-tailed). Signi ficance is another measure for reliability. Significance testing compares th e means relative to the degrees of variation among scores in each group to determine the probability that the ca lculated differences between the means reflect real differences between subject groups and not chance occurrences (Tuckman, 1999, p. 282). If the null hypothesis, which states there is no corr elation between rank pairs is rejected, then the alternate hypothesis is favored. Th is means the ranked pairs are pos itively (or nega tively) related. Question 11 compared beginning teachers who were traditionally and alternatively certificated using an independent samples t-test. The Levenes Test of Variance was used when necessary to make a needed adjustment when an equal variance could not be assumed between two independent samples. Content validity was en sured through the research review in which conformation of the themes were re presented in each question. A te st has content validity if the 55

PAGE 56

sample of situations or performances it measures is representative of the set from which the sample was drawn (Tuckman, 1999, p. 202). Spearmans was used to measure the correlation of beliefs of the administrators, mentors, and novices in relation to their practices. When dealing with tw o ordinal variables that are greater than 10, the Spearman rankorder correlation is the most appr opriate to use. According to Tuckman (1999), Spearmans is a test used to compare two sets of ranks to determine their degree of equivalence (p. 314). Spearmans results were displayed as a range between -1 and +1, thus measuring direction and strength of a correlation. Spearmans will also report an alpha reliability coefficient. This is the alpha significance level that is used to reject the null hypothesis at 0.05. The confidence level for re jection of the null hypothesis is 95%, meaning there is a 5% chance to falsely reject the null. An independent samples t-test was used to compare the two types of novice teachers that took part in this study. This test compares the two means to determine the probability that the difference between them reflects a real differenc e between the groups of subjects rather than a chance variation (Tuckman, 1999, p. 300). When usi ng an independent t-te st, an assumption is made that the variances are relatively similar. The Levene test was used to determine if the variances were equal or unequal. If the variance was determined to be unequal, the necessary statistical adjustments were made, and equal va riances were not assumed. Responses to openended questions were analyzed inductively to id entify common themes. A tally system was used to record the number of times a theme occurred. 56

PAGE 57

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS Upon competition of data collection, the data were analyzed to determine the effectiveness of a district-wide teacher induction program by assessing the congruence of mentors and principals perceptions about their roles in de livery of support services as evaluated by the administrator, mentor, and novice teacher. Data al so revealed the success level of actual delivery of induction support services through the perspect ive of the novice teacher. Differences between alterative certification teachers and traditional certification teachers were examined. Open ended responses were analyzed for common themes. Response Rate Surveys were completed by 179 participants at 36 elementary schools for a 39% (179 of 461) response rate and a completion rate of 76% (146 of 195) when the online survey was viewed (Table 4-1). Demographic Information Demographic data is summarized and reported in Table 4-2. The 179 pa rticipants included 153 females and 21 males; 5 respondents did not answer the questions about gender or race/ethnicity. On the survey 18 male participants described themselves as White; 0 as Black; 2 as Hispanic and 1 as Multi-raci al. The hundred fifty-three (153) females included 130 Whites, 11 Blacks, 10 Hispanics, 10 Multi-racial and 1 Othe r. Five participants did not respond to the question about race/ethnicity. Part icipant ages ranged from 21 to 63. Seventy-seven (77) of the participants held a bachelors de gree; 68 a masters degree; 19 an e ducational specialist degree and 11 a doctoral degree. Four particip ants did not answer the question about their highest level of education. Responses of profe ssional status are reported in Table 4-3. Respondents included 50 administrators (30%); 64 mentors (38%); 47 beginning teachers (28%), and 5 novice teachers 57

PAGE 58

pursuing alternative certification (3%). The la tter figure represents 100% of the teachers pursuing an alternative elementary certification in this Centra l Florida County School District (Table 4-3). Research Questions Q1. What is the level of agreement among administrators ratings regarding the importance of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? Administrators were asked to rate 25 items using a 10-point Li kert scale, with 10 representing the highest perc eived importance, and 1 repres enting the lowest perceived importance. The Cronbach's Alpha (reliability coefficient) was = .894, indicating a high level of agreement among administrator beliefs about the importance of their own responsibilities, mentor responsibilities and shar ed principal/mentor responsibilities for te acher induction. The mean score of administrators beliefs about their own respons ibilities ranged from 3.86 to 8.78 (Table 4-4). The belief that the ment or should be 10 to 15 years older than the mentee was rated lowest at 3.86. It em #7 (the belief that the administrators should provide frequent observations/feedback) and item #2 (the belief that the ment or should be in the same or related field as the novice) were ra ted highest at 8.78 and 8.76 respectively. Table 4-5 presents the mean scores of admi nistrators beliefs a bout the importance of mentor responsibilities for teacher induction towa rd novices. The mean scores ranged from 7.79 to 9.12. All areas were considered highly importa nt by elementary school administrators. Areas which encompass lesson planning (#14), tracking of student progress (#19) and classroom management (#20) were rate d as the most important. The mean range of scores of administrato rs beliefs about shared principal/mentor responsibilities toward novice teachers (Table 4-6) ranged from 8.48 to 9.10. This indicates that 58

PAGE 59

administrators believe that their role and that of the mentors are both instrumental to beginning teachers as related to items 21-25. Q2. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers ratings regarding the importance of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? The mentors were asked to rate 25 items using a 10-point Likert scale, with 10 representing the hightest pe rceived importance, and 1 repr esenting the lowest perceived importance. The Cronbach's Alpha (reliability coefficient) was = .910, indicating a high level of agreement among mentor beliefs about the importance of admini strator responsibilities, their own responsibilities, and shared principal and mentor responsib ilities for teacher induction. Mentors reported means ranging from 3.92 to 9.27 regarding their beliefs about administrators responsibilities (T able 4-7). Item #6, belief that the mentor should be 10 to 15 years older than the novice, was rated low indica ting this age difference was not believed to be important. Items #3 and #9 were rated as moderate indicating mentors did not feel strongly that teaching styles should be similar or that administrators needed to have a weekly walk-through. Item #2, (mentors should work in the same or a related field as the novice) was rated as having the highest importance (9.27). Rating their own responsibilitie s for teacher induction, mentors felt that they were all highly important (Table 4-8). Means range d from 8.54 to 9.06. Provi ding assistance in developing lesson plans in compliance with the S unshine State Standards (#14) was deemed the most important item (9.06). Table 4-9 reports mentor beliefs about the responsibil ities they share w ith administrators. Means ranged from 8.54 to 9.29, in dicating that mentors believed all areas of responsibilities shared with administrators were important. 59

PAGE 60

Q3. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers ratings regarding the importance of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? Novice teachers were asked to rate 25 items using a 10-point Like rt scale, with 10 representing the highest perc eived importance, and 1 repres enting the lowest perceived importance. The Cronbach's Alpha (reliability coefficient) was = .884, indicating a high level of agreement among novice teacher beliefs re garding the importance of administrator responsibilities, mentor responsibilities, and shared administrator and mentor responsibilities for teacher induction. Table 4-10 reports the level of importance th at novice teachers assign to administrator responsibilities in relatio n to their teacher induction traini ng. The mean scores ranged from 3.88 to 8.85. Novice teachers rated 6 of 10 items as highly important. Items #3 (mentors should have similar teaching style), #9 (weekly walk-through for novice teachers from administration) and #10 (provides guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations) were rated as moderately important. Items #9 (weekly walk-through fo r novice teachers from administration) and #6 (mentors should be 1015 years older than the novice) were both rated by novice teachers as having the lowest importance with mean scores of 5.80 and 3.88 respectively. Mean scores of novice teacher beliefs about mentor responsib ilities for teacher induction (Table 4-11) ranged from 6.53 to 8.71. Novice t eachers felt all areas were highly important except item #16 (mentors should provide assistan ce with room organization). That item was viewed as moderately important (6.53). Table 4-12 shows how novice teachers rated th e responsibilities shared by mentors and administrators. The mean scores ranged from 7. 62 to 8.31, indicating that al l of these items were viewed as highly important in district induction practices. 60

PAGE 61

Q4. What is the level of agreemen t among administrators rating s regarding the delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? The respondents were asked to rate 25 ite ms using a 10-point Li kert scale, with 10 representing complete satisf action with the delivery of i nduction support service, and 1 representing complete dissatisfaction the with the delivery of induction support service. The Cronbach's Alpha (reliability coefficient) was = .980, indicating a high level of agreement among administrator beliefs about the delivery of administrator responsibilities, mentor responsibilities, and shared administrator a nd mentor responsibilitie s for teacher induction. Tables 4-13 and 4-14 summarize the mean scores of administrators ra tings for the delivery of their own and mentor responsibilities for te acher induction. Administrators only rated item #2 (mentor in the same or related field as novice) as being delivered at a high level (7.73). The remaining items in regards to their own deliver y of teacher induction services were rated as moderate, with means ranging from 5.92 to 7.41. It em #6, placing a novice teacher with a mentor 10-15 years older, held the lowest administ rative importance for delivery of service. Administrators reported the delive ry of mentor teacher induction responsibilities as moderate, with means ranging from 6.54 to 7.26. Table 4-15 shows how administrators rated the delivery of shared administrator and mentor responsibilities for teacher inducti on. Items #24 (welcomes questions and gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses) and item #25 (keeps novice teachers up to date on training opportunities/development) were reported to be delivered at a high level. The other 3 items in this domain were reported as deliv ered in the moderate range. 61

PAGE 62

Q5. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers ratings regarding the delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? The respondents were asked to rate 25 ite ms using a 10-point Li kert scale, with 10 representing complete satisfact ion and 1 representing complete dissatisfaction the with the delivery of an induction support service. The Cr onbach's Alpha (reliability coefficient) was .976, indicating a high level of agreement among mentor beliefs about the delivery of administrators responsibilities, their responsibi lities, and shared admi nistrative and mentor responsibilities for teacher induction. Table 4-16 reports how mentors rated the delivery of administrator responsibilities. The means ranged from 5.81 to 8.06. The mentors reported moderate (6.46-7.19) delivery of items #1 (administrators assign mentors prior to prepla nning), #3 (mentors were assigned with similar teaching style), #6 (mentors should be 10-15 years older), #8 (administrators provide guidelines for observations/feedback), #9 (administrators provide novices with weekly walk-through feedback), and #10 (administrators provide guidelines for scheduling observations and consultation). Items #2 (assigned mentors are in the same or related field as the novice), #4 (the mentor is in close proximity to the novice), #5 (m entors assigned have th e necessary specialized expertise), and #7 (administrators provide freque nt observations/feedback) were all rated at a high level of delivery. Item #6 (mentor is 10-15 year s older than novice) rate d the lowest level of delivery (5.81). The mentors rated satisfaction with thei r own delivery of teacher induction support services as shown in Table 4-17. The mentors rated themselves as providing a high level delivery of the following items: #13 (providi ng assistance lo cating books and materials), #14 (providing assistance in devel oping lesson plans in compliance with the Sunshine State 62

PAGE 63

Standards), #18 (providing examples of measur ement tools), #19 (providing assistance with implementation of appropriate tools for tracking and defining pupil progress), and #20 (providing assistance in establishing efficient cl assroom routines and rules). The mentors rated the remaining items of the domain as delivered at a moderate level (7.04-7.23). Table 4-18 reports the mentors rating of their respons ibilities shared with administrators. The means ranged from 7.29 to 7.98. The mentors only rated item #24 (welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely re sponses) as delivered at a high level (7.98). The results indicated the remaining items were viewed as delivered moderately. Q6. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers ratings regarding the delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? Novice teachers were asked to rate 25 items using a 10-point Like rt scale, with 10 representing complete satisfact ion and 1 representing complete dissatisfaction with the delivery of an induction support service. The Cronbach 's Alpha (reliability coefficient) was .978, indicating a high level of ag reement among novice teacher beliefs about the delivery of administrator responsibilities, me ntor responsibilities, and shar ed administrator and mentor responsibilities for teacher induction. Table 4-19 reports the novice teachers mean ratings for delivery of induction services by administrators. The means ranged from 5.32 to 8.50. Items #2 (mentors were assigned in the same or related field as novice) and #5 (the mentor has the ne cessary expertise) were rated highest (8.50 and 8.15). Items #1 (m entors were assigned prior to preplanning), #3 (mentors were assigned with similar teaching styles), #7 (administrators provide frequent observations/feedback), #8 (administrators provide guidelines for observations/feedback) were all rated as moderately delivered (6.18-6.97). Items #9 (administrators did a weekly walk63

PAGE 64

through for novices) and #10 (administrators provide guidelines for scheduling observation and consultation) were also viewed as moderately delivered with mean scores of 5.32 and 5.95 respectively. The mean scores of novice teachers rating of delivery of mentor responsibilities for teacher induction (Table 4-20), ranged from 5.51 to 6.85. In this domain, all of the areas were viewed as being moderately delivered by the mentors. The standard deviations exceeded 3.0, indicating a larger variation in mentor support received by each novice teacher than reported in previous domains. Table 4-21 shows the results of novice teach ers rating of the delivery of shared administrator and mentor responsibilities for t eacher induction services. The teachers rated all areas as moderately delivered by their administ rator and mentors, with means ranging from 6.08 to 7.23. The standard deviations also exceeded 3. 0, which indicated a variation in the level of support received on each elementary school campus. Q7. What is the level of agreement among administrators ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities ? The first section of research question seven evaluates the correlation between administrators ratings regard ing their perceived importance of induction activities, and the actual delivery of their responsibilities. Of the 10 items show n in Table 4-22, five were found to have a significant relationship: items #2 (mentors should be in the same or related field), #5 (mentors should have the necessary specialized e xpertise), #8 (administrators provide guidelines for observation and feedback), #9 (administrat ors conducted a weekly walk-through for novice teachers), and #10 (administrators provide guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations). Items #1 (mentors assigned prio r to preplanning), #3 (m entors with similar 64

PAGE 65

teaching style), #4 (mentors are assigned with cl ose proximity to their mentees), #6 (mentors 1015 years older than novices) and #7 (administrator s provide frequent obser vations and feedback) were not found to have a significant relationship. Table 4-23, shows the comparison of administrators rating of importance to the delivery of mentor responsibilities for teacher induction. Significance was found for seven of the 10 items including items #11 (greets novice at preplann ing), #12 (expedites orientation/preplanning activities), #13 (provides assi stance location books/materials), #14 (provides assistance in developing lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards), #15 (provides training for parent communication), #16 (provi des assistance with room or ganization) and #18 (mentors provide examples of measurement tools). It ems #17 (mentors provide training on record keeping), #19 (mentors provide assistance with the implementation of appropriate tools for tracking and defined pupil progress) and # 20 (m entors provides assistance in establishing efficient classroom routines and rules) were found not to be significan tly correlated. The correlation between administrators rating of importance and the delivery of shared mentor and administrator responsibilities toward teacher induction training is shown in Table 424. Although all five items were rated as highly important by administrators, three showed a significant correlation. They were items #21 (provides training in how to best handle classroom disturbances), #24 (welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses), and #25 (keeps novice teachers up to date on tr aining opportunities/development). Items #22, (provides frequent observations with nonjudgm ental formative feedback) and #23 (provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make observa tions of other teachers) were found not to be significantly correlated. 65

PAGE 66

Q8. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, ment or responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? The first section of research question eight examines the correlation between mentors rating of importance about administrators responsi bilities for teacher induction services, and the mentors perception of the delivery of such se rvices. Although the mentors rated each of these items highly, table 4-25 reports a significant relationship between 5 of 10 items. Significance was found for items # 2 (mentor in the same or re lated field as novice), #3 (mentor with similar teacher style), #4 (mentor in close proximity), #6 (mentor 10-15 years older than novice), and #10 (provides guidelines for scheduling observations and consultations). Items #1(mentors assigned prior to preplanning), #5 (a mentor shoul d have the necessary sp ecialized expertise), #7 (administrators provide frequent observations and feedback), #8 (administrators provide guidelines for observations and feedback) and #9 (administrators conduct a weekly walkthrough for novice teachers) were found not to be significant. Mentors rating of the importance and deliv ery of their responsibilities for teacher induction showed significance in 9 of 10 items (T able 4-26). Item #11 (the mentor greets the novice teacher at preplanning) while viewed as important, was not found to correlate with its actual practice. Mentors ratings regarding the importance and actual delivery of teacher induction responsibilities shared with administrators were found to be significant in 4 of 5 belief items (Table 4-27). Item #22 (provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental [formative] feedback), was rated as highly im portant, yet did not correlate with the delivery of this induction practice. 66

PAGE 67

Q9. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? The correlation of novice teachers in their ratings regarding the importance and actual delivery of administrators responsibilities for te acher induction is shown in Table 4-28. Of the 10 questions, only one#2: Mentor in the same or related field as novice teacherwas found to have a significant relationship. A significant correlation was not found in items #1 (mentors assigned prior to preplanning), #3 (mentors with similar teaching style), #4 (mentors in close proximity), #5 (mentors has necessary specialized expertise), #6 (mentors 10-15 years older than novices), #7 (provides frequent observations/feedback) #8 (provi des guidelines for observations/feedback), #9 (week ly walk-through for novice teachers), and #10 (provides guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations). The correlation of novice teachers ratings rega rding the importance a nd actual delivery of mentor responsibilities is shown in table 4-29. Although 9 of 10 items in this domain were viewed as highly important induction practices by novice teachers (item #16 was viewed as moderately important), none were found to have a significa nt relationship. Table 4-30 shows the correlation of novice t eachers rating regarding the importance and the actual delivery of teacher i nduction responsibilities shared by administrators and mentors. All five items were reported as highly important by novice teachers; however none were found to have a significant relationsh ip to the actual delivery. Q10. What is the level of agreement between a lternatively certificated novice teachers ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and ment or/principal responsibilities? The correlation of alternativel y certified novice teachers ra tings regarding the importance and actual delivery of administrators responsibili ties for teacher induction services is shown in 67

PAGE 68

table 4-31. Two (2) of the 10 beli efs were found to have a signif icant relationship. They were items #6 (mentor 10-15 years older than novice ) and #10 (provides guidelines for scheduling observations and consultations). Items #1 (mentors assigned prior to preplanning), #2 (mentor in the same or related field as novice), #3 (mentor with similar teaching style), #4 (mentor in close proximity) #5 (mentor has necessary specialized expertise), #7 (provides frequent observations/feedback), #8 (pr ovides guidelines for observati ons/feedback) and #9 (provides guidelines for scheduling observations) were f ound not to be significant. The relationship of alternatively certificat ed novice teachers ratings regarding the importance and actual delivery of mentor responsibilities is shown in table 4-32. Item #16 (provides assistance with room organization) was found to have a significant negative correlation. This indicates that the independent variables are m oving in opposite directions, as one increased the other decrea sed. The remaining items were found not to have significant relationships. All items indicated that the rati ng of importance did not match the delivery of induction services to alternativel y certificated novice teachers. The correlation of alternativ ely certificated novice teach ers ratings regarding the importance and actual delivery of shared mentor a nd administrator responsibilities is shown in table 4-33. Of the five items, #21 (provides tr aining in how best to handle classroom disturbances) resulted in a si gnificant negative correlation. This indicates that the independent variables are moving in opposite di rections, as one increased the other decreased. The remaining items were found not to be significant. All items indicate that the rati ng of importance did not match the delivery of induction services to a lternatively certificat ed novice teachers. Q11. What are the differences between alternatively certificated and traditionally certificated novice teachers ratings regarding the impor tance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 68

PAGE 69

A t-test for independent groups wa s used to analyze the data for differences in means. This research question examined two groups: N ovice teachers who were seeking alternative certification and novice teachers w ho received their degree within the field in which they currently teach. Table 4-34 shows the results of the independent samples t-test for novice teachers and alternatively certificated novice te achers ratings regarding the importance of delivery of administrator responsibilities for teacher induction. Of the 10 items, two were found to have significantly different means. Items #9 (administrators conduct weekly walk-through for novice teachers) and #10 (administrators prov ide guidelines for scheduling observations and consultations) were found to be significant at p< .05. Table 4-35 shows the results of the t-test fo r independent samples of novice teachers and alternatively certificated novi ce teachers ratings regardi ng the importance of mentor responsibilities in teacher i nduction. Of the 10 items, only #14 (mentor provides assistance in developing lesson plans in compliance with S unshine State Standards) was found to be significant (p< .01). Table 4-36 shows the results of the independent samples ttest of novice teachers and alternatively certificated novi ce teachers ratings regarding the importance of shared responsibilities for te acher induction. None of the items was found to be significant. The independent samples t-test of novice teach ers and alternativel y certificated novice teachers ratings regarding the actual delivery of administrator responsibilities for teacher induction is reported in table 4-38. Two (2) of 10 items, #3 (administrative assignment of mentors with similar teaching style) a nd #7 (administrators provide frequent observations/feedback) were f ound to be significant at p< .01 and p< .05 respectively. 69

PAGE 70

Table 4-39 shows the results of the independent samples t-test for novice teachers and alternatively certificated novice teachers ratings regarding th e actual delivery of mentor responsibilities for teach er induction. Six of 10 items were found to be significant. Items #13 (provides assistance with the location of books/materials) and #16 (provides assistance with room organization) we re significant at p< .05. Items #12 (expedites orientation/preplanning activities), #14 (provides assist ance in developing lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards), #19 (provides assistance with implementati on of appropriate tools for teaching/defining pupil progression), and #20 (pro vides assistance in establishing efficient classroom routines/rules) were found significant at p < .01. The independent samples t-test of novice teach ers and alternativel y certificated novice teachers ratings regarding the actual delivery of administrator and mentor teacher induction services is reported in table 4-40. Items # 21 (p rovides training in how best to handle classroom disturbances) and #22 (provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental [formative] feedback), were bot h found to be significant at p< .05. Short Answer Responses Participants were asked to answer 3 open-ende d questions at the conc lusion of the survey. The responses were separated into four groups : administrators, ment ors, novice teachers and novice teachers seeking alternativ e certification. The most common themes for item #26: What do you feel is the most valuable component of the teacher induction program? are summarized for (a) administrators (Table 4-42), (b) mentors (Table 4-43), (c) novice teachers (Table 4-44) and (d) novice teachers seeking a lternative certification (Table 445). The importance of having a strong mentor relationship (someone to be there) with the novice teacher exceeded the combined importance of the other themes for administrators, mentors, novice teachers and novice teachers 70

PAGE 71

seeking alternative certif ication. One alternative certification teacher re ported she never met her mentor, while another reported she co-ta ught with her mentor for the year. Administrators, mentors, novice teachers and novice teachers seeking alternative certification responses to open-ended ques tion #27: What aspects of the teacher induction/support program would yo u most like to see changed, adapted, or improved? These responses were tallied, and the most frequent th emes are reported in Tables 4-46, 4-47, 4-48, and 4-49 respectively. Administrators responses reflect a concern for program consistency and fiscal support. Mentors reported a need for clarification of teacher in duction guidelines and how the selection process of mentor/m entee relationships was conduc ted. Also expressed was the mentors need for early assignment, more fre quent meetings with mentees, and an increased fiscal support to provide them with more time to meet with their mentee. Novice teachers responses were primarily focused on their need for more interaction w ith feedback and followthrough from mentors. Novice teachers seekin g alternative certification reported that communication and the handling of paperwork (assessment, educat ional plans, lesson plans) were their primary concerns. Question #28 requested administrators, ment ors and novice teachers to List what they believed were the 3 most important things they need from a teacher induction/support program. Responses from each group are reported in Ta bles 4-50, 4-51, 4-52 and 4-53. Although several common themes were mentioned between each group, there was not an agreed upon top choice. Administrators reported their n eed for district level support, consistency and a common checklist of what training areas should be covered, fiscal support for mentor s to provide substitute days and for the mentors to be traine d. Mentors reported their greatest need was to make sure they were being consistent with observations and in giving immediate and meaningful feedback. To 71

PAGE 72

accomplish this, they also expressed need for more fiscal and administrative support. Novice teachers most common theme was the need for understanding of record keeping required by the district and school. They also emphasized th e need for parent communication/classroom management training, and observations with i mmediate feedback. Novi ce teachers seeking alternative certificati on expressed a need for paperwork and classroom management training, good communication and model teaching examples from mentor, and clear expectations and emotional support from the mentor and administrator. 72

PAGE 73

Table 4-1. Response Return Rate Sent Viewed Surveys returned All questions answered Response rate 461 195 179 146* 179/461= 39% Participants were invited to skip any questions they did not want to answer Table 4-2. Demographic Information (Part I) (N=179) Sex White Black Hispanic Mult Other NR Bachelors Masters Ed. S. Doc NR Male 21 18 0 2 1 0 5 14 2 0 Female 153 130 11 10 1 1 72 53 17 11 No report 5 5 4 NR= not reported Table 4-3. Response Rate of Po sition Status (Part I) (N=179) Administrators Mentors Novice teachers Novice teachers seeking alternative certification NR 50 64 47 5 13 NR= not reported Table 4-4. Mean Scores of Admi nistrators' Beliefs (Part II A) about Own Responsibility (N=42) Belief items Mean Std. deviation 1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning 8.02 1.93 2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice 8.76 1.49 3 Mentor with similar teaching style 6.07 1.64 4 Mentor in close proximity 8.00 1.45 5 Mentor has necessary sp ecialized expertise 8.64 1.43 6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice 3.86 2.04 7 Provides frequent observations/feedback 8.78 1.13 8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback 8.60 1.25 9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers 8.33 1.51 10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations 8.32 1.35 73

PAGE 74

Table 4-5. Mean Scores of Admi nistrators' Beliefs (Part II B) about Mentor Responsibility (N=42) Belief items Mean Std. deviation 11 Greets novice at preplanning 8.50 2.03 12 Expedites orientation/pr eplanning activities 8.40 1.59 13 Provides assistance locating books/materials 8.43 1.58 14 Provides assistance in devel oping lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards 9.02 1.16 15 Provides training for pa rent communication 8.81 1.38 16 Provides assistance with room organization 7.79 1.68 17 Provides training on record keeping 8.88 1.05 18 Provides examples of measurement tools 8.95 0.99 19 Provides assistance with implemen tation of appropriate tools for tracking/defining pupil progress 9.10 0.91 20 Provides assistance in esta blishing efficient classroom routines/rules 9.12 1.23 Table 4-6. Mean Scores of Ad ministrators'(Part II C) Beliefs about Shared Responsibility (N=42) Belief items Mean Std. deviation 21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom disturbances" 9.10 1.10 22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative feedback) 8.90 1.05 23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make observations of other teachers 8.48 1.45 24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses 9.10 1.01 25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training opportunities/development 8.57 1.35 Table 4-7. Mean Scores of Mentors (Part II A) Beliefs about Administrators Responsibilities (N=52) Belief items Mean Std. deviation 1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning 8.29 2.19 2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice 9.27 1.22 3 Mentor with similar teaching style 6.35 1.96 4 Mentor in close proximity 8.37 1.67 5 Mentor has necessary sp ecialized expertise 8.38 1.78 6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice 3.92 2.82 7 Provides frequent observations/feedback 8.29 1.84 8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback 8.14 2.09 9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers 6.94 2.74 10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations 7.90 2.21 74

PAGE 75

Table 4-8. Mean Scores of Mentors (Part II B) Beliefs about Own Responsibilities (N=52) Belief items Mean Std. deviation 11 Greets novice at preplanning 8.77 1.92 12 Expedites orientation/pr eplanning activities 8.54 2.00 13 Provides assistance locating books/materials 8.81 1.79 14 Provides assistance in de veloping lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards 9.06 1.35 15 Provides training for pa rent communication 8.73 1.51 16 Provides assistance with room organization 8.12 1.90 17 Provides training on record keeping 9.00 1.24 18 Provides examples of measurement tools 9.02 1.48 19 Provides assistance with im plementation of appropriate tools for tracking/defining pupil progress 8.98 1.42 20 Provides assistance in esta blishing efficient classroom routines/rules 8.96 1.53 Table 4-9. Mean Scores of Mentors (Part II C) Beliefs about Shared Responsibilities (N=52) Belief items Mean Std. deviation 21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom disturbances" 8.69 1.46 22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative feedback) 8.60 1.52 23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make observations of other teachers 8.71 1.87 24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses 9.29 1.05 25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training opportunities/development 8.54 1.80 Table 4-10. Mean Scores of Novices (Part II A) Beliefs about Admini strator Responsibilities (N=40) Belief items Mean Std. deviation 1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning 8.15 1.83 2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice 8.85 1.44 3 Mentor with similar teaching style 7.08 2.02 4 Mentor in close proximity 8.30 1.56 5 Mentor has necessary sp ecialized expertise 7.98 1.82 6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice 3.88 2.42 7 Provides frequent observations/feedback 7.68 1.99 8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback 7.54 2.30 9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers 5.80 2.73 10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations 6.68 2.36 75

PAGE 76

Table 4-11. Mean Scores of Novices (Part II B) Beliefs about Mentor Responsibility (N=40) Belief items Mean Std. deviation 11 Greets novice at preplanning 7.82 1.86 12 Expedites orientation/pr eplanning activities 7.71 1.64 13 Provides assistance locating books/materials 7.97 1.79 14 Provides assistance in de veloping lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards 8.53 1.39 15 Provides training for pa rent communication 7.61 2.27 16 Provides assistance with room organization 6.53 2.63 17 Provides training on record keeping 7.97 1.94 18 Provides examples of measurement tools 8.37 1.51 19 Provides assistance with im plementation of appropriate tools for tracking/defining pupil progress 8.71 1.27 20 Provides assistance in esta blishing efficient classroom routines/rules 7.89 2.29 Table 4-12. Mean Scores of Novices' (Part II C) Beliefs about Shared Responsibility (N=40) Belief items Mean Std. deviation 21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom disturbances" 8.28 1.57 22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative feedback) 8.00 1.84 23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make observations of other teachers 7.62 2.31 24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses 9.08 1.16 25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training opportunities/development 8.31 1.72 Table 4-13. Mean Scores of Administrators (P art III A) Rating of the Delivery of Their Own Responsibilities (N=40) Delivery items Mean Std. deviation 1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning 6.40 2.16 2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice 7.73 1.87 3 Mentor with similar teaching style 6.53 1.77 4 Mentor in close proximity 7.28 2.15 5 Mentor has necessary sp ecialized expertise 7.41 1.87 6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice 5.92 2.02 7 Provides frequent observations/feedback 6.93 2.21 8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback 6.60 2.37 9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers 6.33 2.49 10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations 6.82 2.65 76

PAGE 77

Table 4-14. Mean Scores of Admi nistrators (Part III B) Rating of the Delivery of Mentors Responsibilities (N=40) Delivery items Mean Std. deviation 11 Greets novice at preplanning 6.95 2.42 12 Expedites orientation/pr eplanning activities 6.95 2.32 13 Provides assistance locating books/materials 7.21 2.22 14 Provides assistance in de veloping lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards 7.26 2.25 15 Provides training for pa rent communication 6.72 2.36 16 Provides assistance with room organization 6.54 2.14 17 Provides training on record keeping 6.95 2.11 18 Provides examples of measurement tools 6.87 2.38 19 Provides assistance with im plementation of appropriate tools for tracking/defining pupil progress 7.03 2.32 20 Provides assistance in esta blishing efficient classroom routines/rules 7.26 2.49 Table 4-15. Mean Scores of Administrators (Part III C) Rating of Delivery of Shared Responsibility (N=40) Delivery items Mean Std. deviation 21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom disturbances" 7.25 2.28 22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative feedback) 6.93 2.27 23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make observations of other teachers 7.10 2.13 24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses 7.83 2.17 25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training opportunities/development 7.63 2.39 77

PAGE 78

Table 4-16. Mean Scores of Mentors (Part II I A) Rating of the Delivery of Administrator Responsibilities (N=50) Delivery items Mean Std. deviation 1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning 6.46 3.07 2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice 7.86 2.37 3 Mentor with similar teaching style 6.67 2.23 4 Mentor in close proximity 7.64 2.23 5 Mentor has necessary sp ecialized expertise 8.06 1.98 6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice 5.81 2.88 7 Provides frequent observations/feedback 7.40 2.21 8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback 7.19 2.45 9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers 6.76 2.55 10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations 7.12 2.60 Table 4-17. Mean Scores of Mentors (Part III B) Rating of the Delivery of Their Own Responsibilities (N=50) Delivery items Mean Std. deviation 11 Greets novice at preplanning 7.06 3.22 12 Expedites orientation/pr eplanning activities 7.04 3.13 13 Provides assistance locating books/materials 7.73 2.70 14 Provides assistance in devel oping lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards 7.60 2.62 15 Provides training for pa rent communication 7.10 2.79 16 Provides assistance with room organization 7.00 2.71 17 Provides training on record keeping 7.23 2.64 18 Provides examples of measurement tools 7.63 2.52 19 Provides assistance with implem entation of appropriate tools for tracking/defining pupil progress 7.67 2.26 20 Provides assistance in esta blishing efficient classroom routines/rules 7.60 2.56 Table 4-18. Mean Scores of Mentors (Part III C) Rating of Delivery of Shared Responsibility (N= 50) Belief items Mean Std. deviation 21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom disturbances" 7.29 2.42 22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative feedback) 7.48 2.23 23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make observations of other teachers 7.33 2.20 24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses 7.98 2.30 25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training opportunities/development 7.46 2.33 78

PAGE 79

Table 4-19. Mean Scores of Novice Teachers (P art III A) Rating of Delivery of Administrator Responsibilities (N=40) Delivery items Mean Std. deviation 1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning 6.70 3.01 2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice 8.50 2.29 3 Mentor with similar teaching style 6.97 2.81 4 Mentor in close proximity 7.50 2.90 5 Mentor has necessary sp ecialized expertise 8.15 2.29 6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice 7.51 2.77 7 Provides frequent observations/feedback 6.45 3.28 8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback 6.18 3.36 9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers 5.32 3.12 10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations 5.95 3.32 Table 4-20. Mean Scores of Novice Teachers (P art III B) Rating of the Delivery of Mentor Responsibilities (N=40) Delivery items Mean Std. deviation 11 Greets novice at preplanning 6.68 3.04 12 Expedites orientation/pr eplanning activities 6.55 3.03 13 Provides assistance locating books/materials 6.78 3.24 14 Provides assistance in de veloping lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards 6.41 3.29 15 Provides training for pa rent communication 6.21 3.08 16 Provides assistance with room organization 5.51 3.36 17 Provides training on record keeping 6.38 3.31 18 Provides examples of measurement tools 6.85 3.12 19 Provides assistance with im plementation of appropriate tools for tracking/defining pupil progress 6.60 3.41 20 Provides assistance in esta blishing efficient classroom routines/rules 5.90 3.42 79

PAGE 80

Table 4-21. Mean Scores of Novice Teachers (Part III C) Rating of Delivery of Shared Responsibilities (N=40) Delivery items Mean Std. deviation 21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom disturbances" 6.45 3.25 22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative feedback) 6.18 3.38 23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make observations of other teachers 6.08 3.19 24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses 7.23 3.26 25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training opportunities/development 7.03 3.10 Table 4-22. Correlation of Admini strators Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II A) and the Actual Delivery (Part III A) of Their Responsibilities (N=42) Spearman Correlation Sig. 1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning 0.15 0.17 2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice 0.27 0.05* 3 Mentor with similar teaching style 0.21 0.10 4 Mentor in close proximity 0.06 0.36 5 Mentor has necessary sp ecialized expertise 0.32 0.03* 6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice 0.13 0.23 7 Provides frequent observations/feedback 0.20 0.12 8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback 0.33 0.02* 9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers 0.45 0.00** 10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations 0.40 0.01** *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 80

PAGE 81

Table 4-23. Correlation of Admini strators Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II B) and the Actual Delivery (Part III B) of Mentors Responsibi lities (N=42) Spearman Correlation Sig. 11 Greets novice at preplanning 0.49 0.00** 12 Expedites orientation/pr eplanning activities 0.40 0.01** 13 Provides assistance locating books/materials 0.34 0.02* 14 Provides assistance in devel oping lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards 0.33 0.02* 15 Provides training for pa rent communication 0.33 0.02* 16 Provides assistance with room organization 0.36 0.01** 17 Provides training on record keeping 0.21 0.11 18 Provides examples of measurement tools 0.27 0.05* 19 Provides assistance with implem entation of appropriate tools for tracking/defining pupil progress 0.06 0.37 20 Provides assistance in esta blishing efficient classroom routines/rules 0.01 0.47 = significance < .05 **= significance < .01 Table 4-24. Correlation between Administrators Ratings of Importance (Part II C) and the Delivery (Part III C) of Shar ed Responsibilities (N=42) Belief items Spearman Correlation Sig. 21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom disturbances" 0.35 0.01** 22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative feedback) 0.21 0.10 23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make observations of other teachers 0.15 0.18 24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses 0.34 0.02* 25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training opportunities/development 0.31 0.03* *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 81

PAGE 82

Table 4-25. Correlation of Mentors Ratings regarding the Importanc e (Part II A) and the Actual Delivery (Part III A) of Administ rators Responsibilities (N=52) Belief items Spearman Correlation Sig. 1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning 0.16 0.13 2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice 0.38 0.00** 3 Mentor with similar teaching style 0.37 0.00** 4 Mentor in close proximity 0.31 0.02* 5 Mentor has necessary sp ecialized expertise 0.19 0.10 6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice 0.34 0.01** 7 Provides frequent observations/feedback 0.19 0.09 8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback 0.07 0.32 9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers 0.17 0.12 10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations 0.26 0.04* *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 Table 4-26. Correlation of Ment ors Ratings Regarding the Im portance (Part II B) and the Actual Delivery (Part III B) of Th eir Own Responsibi lities (N=52) Spearman Correlation Sig. 11 Greets novice at preplanning 0.14 0.17 12 Expedites orientation/pr eplanning activities 0.26 0.04* 13 Provides assistance locating books/materials 0.37 0.01** 14 Provides assistance in de veloping lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards 0.37 0.01** 15 Provides training for pa rent communication 0.30 0.02* 16 Provides assistance with room organization 0.32 0.01** 17 Provides training on record keeping 0.25 0.04* 18 Provides examples of measurement tools 0.27 0.03* 19 Provides assistance with im plementation of appropriate tools for tracking/defining pupil progress 0.26 0.04* 20 Provides assistance in esta blishing efficient classroom routines/rules 0.31 0.02* *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 82

PAGE 83

Table 4-27. Correlation of Ment ors Ratings Regarding the Im portance (Part II C) and the Actual Delivery (Part III C) of Shared Responsibilities (N=52) Belief items Spearman Correlation Sig. 21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom disturbances" 0.41 0.00** 22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative feedback) 0.15 0.16 23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make observations of other teachers 0.30 0.02* 24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses 0.40 0.00** 25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training opportunities/development 0.48 0.00** *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 Table 4-28. Correlation of Novi ce Teachers Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II A) and the Actual Delivery (Part III A) of Administrators Responsibilities (N=40) Belief items Spearman Correlation Sig. 1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning 0.24 0.07 2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice 0.42 0.00* 3 Mentor with similar teaching style 0.12 0.24 4 Mentor in close proximity -0.05 0.39 5 Mentor has necessary sp ecialized expertise 0.07 0.33 6 Mentor 10-15 years ol der than novice -0.12 0.23 7 Provides frequent observations/feedback -0.15 0.19 8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback -0.02 0.45 9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers -0.08 0.31 10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations -0.11 0.26 *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 83

PAGE 84

Table 4-29. Correlation of Novi ce Teachers Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II B) and the Actual Delivery (Part III B) of Mentor Responsibilities (N=40) Belief items Spearman Correlation Sig. 11 Greets novice at preplanning 0.01 0.48 12 Expedites orientation/pr eplanning activities 0.09 0.29 13 Provides assistance locating books/materials 0.10 0.27 14 Provides assistance in de veloping lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards -0.08 0.31 15 Provides training for pa rent communication 0.07 0.34 16 Provides assistance with room organization 0.24 0.08 17 Provides training on record keeping -0.01 0.48 18 Provides examples of measurement tools 0.19 0.13 19 Provides assistance with im plementation of appropriate tools for tracking/defining pupil progress 0.17 0.15 20 Provides assistance in esta blishing efficient classroom routines/rules 0.09 0.30 *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 Table 4-30. Correlation of Novi ce Teachers Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II C) and the Actual Delivery (Part III C) of Shared Responsibilities (N=40) Belief items Spearman Correlation Sig. 21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom disturbances" -0.09 0.29 22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative feedback) -0.15 0.18 23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make observations of other teachers -0.10 0.27 24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses 0.18 0.13 25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training opportunities/development 0.14 0.19 *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 84

PAGE 85

Table 4-31. Correlation of Altern atively Certificated Novice T eachers Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II A) and the Actual De livery (Part III A) of Administrator Responsibilities (N=5) Belief items Spearman Correlation Sig. 1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning -0.16 0.40 2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice 0.79 0.06 3 Mentor with similar teaching style -0.79 0.06 4 Mentor in close proximity -0.15 0.40 5 Mentor has necessary sp ecialized expertise 0.29 0.32 6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice 0.80 0.05* 7 Provides frequent observations/feedback -0.30 0.32 8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback -0.30 0.32 9 Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers -0.75 0.07 10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations 1.00 0.00** *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 Table 4-32. Correlation of Altern atively Certificated Novice T eachers' Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II B) and the Actual Deliver y (Part III B) of Mentor Responsibilities (N=5) Belief items Spearman Correlation Sig. 11 Greets novice at preplanning -0.05 0.47 12 Expedites orientation/pr eplanning activities -0.79 0.06 13 Provides assistance locating books/materials -0.79 0.06 14 Provides assistance in de veloping lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards -0.79 0.06 15 Provides training for parent communication -0.69 0.10 16 Provides assistance with room organization -0.80 0.05* 17 Provides training on record keeping -0.54 0.17 18 Provides examples of measurement tools -0.13 0.42 19 Provides assistance with im plementation of appropriate tools for tracking/defining pupil progress 0.75 0.07 20 Provides assistance in esta blishing efficient classroom routines/rules -0.74 0.08 *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 85

PAGE 86

Table 4-33. Correlation of Altern atively Certificated Novice T eachers' Ratings Regarding the Importance (Part II C) and the Actual Deliver y (Part III C) of Shared Responsibilities (N=5) Belief items Spearman Correlation Sig. 21 Provides training in "how best to handle classroom disturbances" -0.92 0.01** 22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative feedback) 0.61 0.14 23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make observations of other teachers -0.26 0.33 24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses -0.30 0.31 25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training opportunities/development -0.35 0.28 *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 86

PAGE 87

Table 4-34. T Tests for Indepe ndent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Ratings Regarding the Importance of Administrator Responsibilities Levene's Test Sig. tvalue DF Sig. (2tailed) Error 95% Confidence Interval Upper Lower 0.10 Equal -0.06 37 0.95 0.89 -1.85 1.75 1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning Unequal -0.05 5 0.96 0.97 -2.55 2.44 0.53 Equal -0.91 38 0.37 0.69 -2.03 0.77 2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice Unequal -0.97 5 0.37 0.65 -2.26 1.00 0.08 Equal 0.56 38 0.58 0.97 -1.43 2.51 3 Mentor with similar teaching style Unequal 0.39 4 0.72 1.40 -3.20 4.28 0.55 Equal 0.76 38 0.45 0.75 -0.94 2.09 4 Mentor in close proximity Unequal 0.64 5 0.55 0.90 -1.77 2.92 0.10 Equal -0.55 38 0.58 0.88 -2.26 1.29 5 Mentor has necessary specialized expertise Unequal -0.50 5 0.64 0.98 -3.01 2.04 0.10 Equal 1.27 38 0.21 1.15 -0.87 3.78 6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice Unequal 1.83 8 0.11 0.80 -0.40 3.32 0.82 Equal -1.11 38 0.27 0.95 -2.98 0.87 7 Provides frequent observations/feedback Unequal -1.02 5 0.35 1.03 -3.72 1.61 0.56 Equal -1.32 37 0.19 1.09 -3.66 0.77 8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback Unequal -1.62 6 0.16 0.89 -3.62 0.72 0.34 Equal -2.00 38 0.05* 1.26 -5.06 0.03 9 Weekly "walkthrough" for novice teachers Unequal -2.12 5 0.08 1.18 -5.49 0.46 0.03 Equal -2.77 38 0.01 1.04 -4.99 -0.78 10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations Unequal -5.37 15 0.00* 0.54 -4.03 -1.74 *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 87

PAGE 88

Table 4-35. T Tests for Indepe ndent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Rati ngs Regarding the Importance of Mentor Responsibilities Levene's Test Sig. tValue D F Sig 2tailed Error 95% Confidence Interval Upper Lower 0.87 Equal -0.23 36 0.82 0.90 -2.04 1.62 11 Greets novice at preplanning Unequal -0.19 5 0.86 1.14 -3.20 2.78 0.85 Equal -1.01 36 0.32 0.79 -2.39 0.80 12 Expedites orientation/ preplanning activities Unequal -1.08 6 0.33 0.74 -2.63 1.05 13 Provides assistance locating books/materials 0.20 Equal -1.39 36 0.17 0.85 -2.91 0.54 Unequal -1.87 7 0.10 0.63 -2.68 0.31 0.05 Equal -2.33 36 0.03 0.63 -2.75 -0.19 14 Provides assistance in developing lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards Unequal -4.68 19 0.00* 0.31 -2.12 -0.81 0.35 Equal -0.84 36 0.41 1.10 -3.14 1.31 15 Provides training for parent communication Unequal -0.95 6 0.38 0.96 -3.28 1.45 0.94 Equal -0.07 36 0.95 1.28 -2.68 2.51 16 Provides assistance with room organization Unequal -0.07 5 0.95 1.26 -3.25 3.08 17 Provides training on record keeping 0.83 Equal -0.77 36 0.45 0.94 -2.62 1.18 Unequal -0.73 5 0.50 0.99 -3.24 1.80 0.45 Equal -0.05 36 0.96 0.74 -1.53 1.46 18 Provides examples of measurement tools Unequal -0.06 7 0.95 0.58 -1.42 1.35 0.04 Equal -0.54 36 0.59 0.62 -1.58 0.92 19 Provides assistance with implementation of appropriate tools for teaching/defining pupil progression Unequal -0.85 9 0.42 0.39 -1.22 0.55 0.40 Equal -0.11 36 0.91 1.11 -2.38 2.14 20 Provides assistance in establishing efficient classroom routines/rules Unequal -0.13 6 0.90 0.93 -2.39 2.15 *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 88

PAGE 89

Table 4-36. T Tests for Indepe ndent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Rati ngs Regarding the Importance of Shared Responsibilities Levene's Test Sig. t-value DF Sig. 2tailed Error 95% Confidence Interval Upp er Low er 0.41 Equal -1.42 37 0.16 0.74 -2.56 0.45 21 Provides training in "how best to handle" classroom disturbances Unequal -1.64 6 0.15 0.64 -2.63 0.53 0.71 Equal -1.32 37 0.20 0.87 -2.91 0.62 22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative feedback) Unequal -1.10 5 0.32 1.04 -3.87 1.58 0.79 Equal -0.39 37 0.70 1.12 -2.71 1.83 23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make observations of other teachers Unequal -0.39 5 0.71 1.12 -3.29 2.41 0.09 Equal -1.09 37 0.28 0.55 -1.72 0.52 24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental appropriate/ timely responses Unequal -1.87 11 0.09 0.32 -1.31 0.11 0.70 Equal -0.96 37 0.34 0.82 -2.46 0.88 25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training opportunities/ development Unequal -0.76 5 0.48 1.04 -3.52 1.94 *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 89

PAGE 90

Table 4-37. Reported Means for T-Test for I ndependent Groups Regarding the Importance of Administrator, Mentor, and Shared Responsibilities Novice teachers Mean Std. Dev Std. Error Item 1 Traditional 8.15 1.83 0.31 Alternative 8.20 2.05 0.92 Item 2 Traditional 8.77 1.46 0.25 Alternative 9.40 1.34 0.60 Item 3 Traditional 7.14 1.88 0.32 Alternative 6.60 3.05 1.36 Item 4 Traditional 8.37 1.52 0.26 Alternative 7.80 1.92 0.86 Item 5 Traditional 7.91 1.80 0.31 Alternative 8.40 2.07 0.93 Item 6 Traditional 4.06 2.48 0.42 Alternative 2.60 1.52 0.68 Item 7 Traditional 7.54 1.96 0.33 Alternative 8.60 2.19 0.98 Item 8 Traditional 7.35 2.33 0.40 Alternative 8.80 1.79 0.80 Item 9 Traditional 5.49 2.65 0.45 Alternative 8.00 2.45 1.10 Item 10 Traditional 6.31 2.29 0.39 Alternative 9.20 0.84 0.37 Item 11 Traditional 7.79 1.80 0.31 Alternative 8.00 2.45 1.10 Item 12 Traditional 7.61 1.66 0.29 Alternative 8.40 1.52 0.68 Item 13 Traditional 7.82 1.83 0.32 Alternative 9.00 1.22 0.55 Item 14 Traditional 8.33 1.38 0.24 Alternative 9.80 0.45 0.20 Item 15 Traditional 7.48 2.32 0.40 Alternative 8.40 1.95 0.87 Item 16 Traditional 6.52 2.67 0.46 Alternative 6.60 2.61 1.17 Item 17 Traditional 7.88 1.93 0.34 Alternative 8.60 2.07 0.93 Item 18 Traditional 8.36 1.58 0.27 Alternative 8.40 1.14 0.51 Item 19 Traditional 8.67 1.34 0.23 Alternative 9.00 0.71 0.32 90

PAGE 91

Table 4-37. Continued Novice teachers Mean Std. Dev Std. Error Item 20 Traditional 7.88 2.37 0.41 Alternative 8.00 1.87 0.84 Item 21 Traditional 8.15 1.58 0.27 Alternative 9.20 1.30 0.58 Item 22 Traditional 7.85 1.76 0.30 Alternative 9.00 2.24 1.00 Item 23 Traditional 7.56 2.34 0.40 Alternative 8.00 2.35 1.05 Item 24 Traditional 9.00 1.21 0.21 Alternative 9.60 0.55 0.24 Item 25 Traditional 8.21 1.65 0.28 Alternative 9.00 2.24 1.00 91

PAGE 92

Table 4-38. T tests for Indepe ndent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Rati ngs Regarding the Actual Delivery of Administrators Responsibilities Levene's Test Sig. tvalue DF Sig. (2tailed) Error 95% Confidence Interval Upper Lower 0.60 Equal 1.88 38 0.07 1.40 -0.20 5.46 1 Mentors assigned prior to preplanning Unequal 2.07 6 0.09 1.27 -0.53 5.79 0.30 Equal -0.73 38 0.47 1.10 -3.03 1.43 2 Mentor in the same or related field as novice Unequal -1.13 9 0.29 0.71 -2.42 0.82 0.91 Equal 3.20 37 0.00* 1.21 1.42 6.32 3 Mentor with similar teaching style Unequal 2.85 5 0.04 1.36 0.36 7.38 1.00 Equal -0.24 38 0.81 1.40 -3.18 2.50 4 Mentor in close proximity Unequal -0.22 5 0.84 1.57 -4.42 3.73 0.48 Equal -0.46 38 0.65 1.11 -2.76 1.73 5 Mentor has necessary specialized expertise Unequal -0.61 7 0.57 0.85 -2.55 1.52 0.35 Equal -0.07 37 0.94 1.34 -2.82 2.62 6 Mentor 10-15 years older than novice Unequal -0.06 5 0.96 1.81 -4.89 4.69 0.58 Equal 2.02 36 0.05* 1.51 -0.02 6.11 7 Provides frequent observations/feedback Unequal 2.30 6 0.06 1.32 -0.21 6.30 0.43 Equal 1.75 36 0.09 1.57 -0.44 5.93 8 Provides guidelines for observations/feedback Unequal 2.06 6 0.08 1.33 -0.51 6.00 0.60 Equal 1.17 36 0.25 1.49 -1.28 4.77 9 Weekly "walkthrough" for novice teachers Unequal 1.32 6 0.24 1.32 -1.51 5.00 0.40 Equal 1.58 36 0.12 1.56 -0.69 5.64 10 Provides guidelines for scheduling observation and consultations Unequal 1.86 6 0.11 1.33 -0.78 5.73 *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 92

PAGE 93

Table 4-39. T Tests for Indepe ndent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Rati ngs Regarding the Actual Delivery of Mentor Responsibilities Levene's Test Sig. tvalue DF Sig. (2tailed) Error 95% Confidence Interval Upper Lower 0.82 Equal 1.50 38 0.14 1.43 -0.76 5.04 11 Greets novice at preplanning Unequal 1.45 5 0.21 1.48 -1.64 5.93 0.45 Equal 2.67 38 0.01* 1.35 0.88 6.32 12 Expedites orientation/preplanning activities Unequal 3.16 6 0.02 1.14 0.81 6.39 0.48 Equal 2.14 38 0.04* 1.48 0.17 6.17 13 Provides assistance locating books/materials Unequal 2.38 6 0.06 1.33 -0.15 6.49 0.13 Equal 3.95 37 0.00* 1.34 2.57 8.00 14 Provides assistance in developing lesson plans in compliance with Sunshine State Standards Unequal 6.87 11 0.00 0.77 3.60 6.98 0.20 Equal 1.26 37 0.22 1.46 -1.12 4.81 15 Provides training for parent communication Unequal 1.65 7 0.15 1.12 -0.83 4.51 0.15 Equal 2.35 37 0.02* 1.52 0.49 6.65 16 Provides assistance with room organization Unequal 3.44 8 0.01 1.04 1.17 5.97 0.13 Equal 1.45 38 0.16 1.56 -0.90 5.42 17 Provides training on record keeping Unequal 1.80 6 0.12 1.26 -0.79 5.30 0.69 Equal 1.60 38 0.12 1.46 -0.62 5.30 18 Provides examples of measurement tools Unequal 1.74 6 0.14 1.35 -1.02 5.71 0.30 Equal 3.30 38 0.00* 1.46 1.85 7.75 19 Provides assistance with implementation of appropriate tools for teaching/defining pupil progression Unequal 4.70 7 0.00 1.02 2.41 7.19 0.11 Equal 2.81 37 0.01* 1.51 1.18 7.30 20 Provides assistance in establishing efficient classroom routines/rules Unequal 4.58 10 0.00 0.93 2.17 6.31 *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 93

PAGE 94

Table 4-40. T Tests for Indepe ndent Groups of Novice Teachers' (N=35) and Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers' (N=5) Rati ngs Regarding the Actual Delivery of Shared Responsibilities Levene's Test Sig. t-value DF Sig. (2tailed) Error 95% Confidence Interval Uppe r Low er 1.00 Equal 2.37 38 0.02* 1.47 0.51 6.46 21 Provides training in "how best to handle" classroom disturbances Unequal 2.51 5 0.05 1.39 -0.01 6.98 0.67 Equal 2.37 38 0.02* 1.53 0.54 6.72 22 Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative feedback) Unequal 2.70 6 0.04 1.34 0.31 6.95 0.59 Equal 0.95 38 0.35 1.53 -1.63 4.55 23 Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make observations of other teachers Unequal 0.85 5 0.43 1.71 -2.97 5.88 0.31 Equal 1.51 38 0.14 1.53 -0.79 5.42 24 Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental appropriate/timel y responses Unequal 1.22 5 0.28 1.90 -2.68 7.30 0.73 Equal 1.43 38 0.16 1.46 -0.88 5.05 25 Keeps novice teachers up to date on training opportunities/dev elopment Unequal 1.55 6 0.18 1.35 -1.28 5.45 *= significance < .05 **= significance < .01 94

PAGE 95

Table 4-41. Reported Means for TTest for Independent Groups Regarding the Actual Delivery of Admi nistrator, Mentor, and Shared Responsibilities Novice teachers Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Item 1 Traditional 7.03 2.96 0.50 Alternative 4.40 2.61 1.17 Item 2 Traditional 8.40 2.39 0.40 Alternative 9.20 1.30 0.58 Item 3 Traditional 7.47 2.48 0.42 Alternative 3.60 2.88 1.29 Item 4 Traditional 7.46 2.88 0.49 Alternative 7.80 3.35 1.50 Item 5 Traditional 8.09 2.38 0.40 Alternative 8.60 1.67 0.75 Item 6 Traditional 7.50 2.64 0.45 Alternative 7.60 3.91 1.75 Item 7 Traditional 6.85 3.20 0.56 Alternative 3.80 2.68 1.20 Item 8 Traditional 6.55 3.34 0.58 Alternative 3.80 2.68 1.20 Item 9 Traditional 5.55 3.15 0.55 Alternative 3.80 2.68 1.20 Item 10 Traditional 6.27 3.32 0.58 Alternative 3.80 2.68 1.20 Item 11 Traditional 6.94 2.98 0.50 Alternative 4.80 3.11 1.39 Item 12 Traditional 7.00 2.87 0.49 Alternative 3.40 2.30 1.03 Item 13 Traditional 7.17 3.14 0.53 Alternative 4.00 2.74 1.22 Item 14 Traditional 7.09 2.93 0.50 Alternative 1.80 1.30 0.58 Item 15 Traditional 6.44 3.14 0.54 Alternative 4.60 2.19 0.98 Item 16 Traditional 5.97 3.29 0.56 Alternative 2.40 1.95 0.87 Item 17 Traditional 6.66 3.34 0.57 Alternative 4.40 2.51 1.12 Item 18 Traditional 7.14 3.09 0.52 Alternative 4.80 2.77 1.24 Item 19 Traditional 7.20 3.15 0.53 Alternative 2.40 1.95 0.87 95

PAGE 96

Table 4-41. Continued Novice teachers Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Item 20 Traditional 6.44 3.29 0.56 Alternative 2.20 1.64 0.73 Item 21 Traditional 6.89 3.09 0.52 Alternative 3.40 2.88 1.29 Item 22 Traditional 6.63 3.25 0.55 Alternative 3.00 2.74 1.22 Item 23 Traditional 6.26 3.14 0.53 Alternative 4.80 3.63 1.62 Item 24 Traditional 7.51 3.09 0.52 Alternative 5.20 4.09 1.83 Item 25 Traditional 7.29 3.09 0.52 Alternative 5.20 2.77 1.24 Table 4-42. Overall, What Do Administrators Feel is the Mo st Valuable Component of the Teacher Induction Program? Administrators' common themes Tally marks Mentor relationship (confidence, dialogue, support and followthrough) 23 Mentor in close proximity and grade level 4 Frequent observations 4 Classroom management/parent interaction 2 Table 4-43. Overall, What Do Mentors Feel is the Most Valu able Component of the Teacher Induction Program? Mentors' common themes Tally marks Mentors relationship (support, dial ogue, frequent interaction) 29 Someone to answer questions 8 Bookkeeping, materials, record keeping, progress monitoring 3 Classroom management 3 Table 4-44. Overall, What Do Novice Teachers F eel is the Most Valuable Component of the Teacher Induction Program? Novice teachers common themes Tally marks Someone to "be there" 20 Similar expertise and proximity 4 Time to observe others/classroom management 4 Testing, scheduling, bookkeeping 3 96

PAGE 97

Table 4-45. Overall, What Do Alternatively Ce rtificated Novice Teacher s Feel is the Most Valuable Component of the Teacher Induction Program? Novice teachers seeking a lternative certification common themes Tally marks Strong mentor relationship (patient, approachable) 3 Classroom management 1 Never assigned a mentor 1 Table 4-46. What Aspects of the Teacher I nduction/Support Program Would Administrators Most Like to See Changed, Adapted or Improved? Administrators' common themes Tally marks District-wide continuity (checklists, mentor training) 10 Stipends for all mentors creati ng formal induction for all novice teachers 8 Dollars to support the induction program (substitutes to observe other teachers, meet with mentor) 7 Training in curriculum, unders tanding data, differentiated instruction 3 Table 4-47. What Aspects of the Teacher Indu ction/Support Program Woul d Mentors Most Like to See Changed, Adapted, or Improved? Mentors' common themes Tally marks Consistency (program guidelines an d partner selection process) 17 Mentor assigned before preplanning 10 More frequent mentor/mentee meetings and observations 9 Money to support the program (paid mentors, sub days) 8 Table 4-48. What Aspects of the Teacher I nduction/Support Program Would Novice teachers Most Like to See Changed, Adapted, or Improved? Novices' common themes Tally marks More interaction, feedback, and follow-through from mentors 11 Preplanning meeting 5 Help with bookkeeping and record keeping 4 Mentor in same school and area of expertise 3 Table 4-49. What Aspects of the Teacher I nduction/Support Program Would Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers Most Like to See Changed, Adapted or Improved? Novice teachers seeking alternative cer tification common themes Tally marks Communication 3 Handling of paperwork (assessment, educational plans lesson plans) 3 97

PAGE 98

Table 4-50. List the Three Most Important Th ings Administrators Need From a Teacher Induction/Support Program. Administrators' common themes Tally marks Consistency of implementation/distri ct level support (checklist of what should be covered) 16 Dollars to support mentors and sub days 10 Skilled mentors (trained and willing) 8 Table 4-51. List the Three Most Importan t Things Mentors Need From a Teacher Induction/Support Program. Mentors' common themes Tally marks Support from mentorsobservati ons/feedback (immediate and consistent) 21 Procedures, planning, assessment, and record keeping 9 Dollars to support program (stipends, sub days) 8 Administrative support 8 Table 4-52. List the Three Mo st Important Things Novice Te achers Need From a Teacher Induction/Support Program. Novices' common themes Tally marks Understanding of grade book, planning, recordkeeping, and materials 17 Parent communication/classroom management 12 Observation with immediate feedback 10 Table 4-53. List the Three Most Important Things A lternatively Certificat ed Novice Teachers Need From a Teacher Induction/Support Program. Novice teachers seeking alternative cer tification common themes Tally marks Paperwork and classroom management training 4 Good communication and m odel teaching examples from mentor 3 Clear expectations and emoti onal support from mentor and administration 2 98

PAGE 99

CHAPTER 5 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS The purpose of this study was to examine a district-wide teacher induction program and evaluate the relationship between the believed importance and actual deliv ery of mentors and principals responsibilities in support services, as evaluated by the administrators, mentors, and novice teachers. This study also reviewed the outcome of the teacher induction program through the perspective of traditionally and alternatively certificated novice teachers. The research specifically addressed th e following 11 questions: 1. What is the level of agr eement among administrators ratin gs regarding the importance of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 2. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers ratings regarding the importance of teacher induction program se rvices, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 3. What is the level of agreement am ong novice teachers ratings regarding the importance of teacher induction program se rvices, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 4. What is the level of agreem ent among administrato rs ratings regardin g the delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 5. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers ratings regarding the delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 6. What is the level of agreement among novice teachers ratings regarding the delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 7. What is the level of agr eement among administrators ratin gs regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 8. What is the level of agreement among mentor teachers ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction pr ogram services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 99

PAGE 100

9. What is the level of agreement am ong novice teachers ratings regarding the importance and delivery of teacher induction pr ogram services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? 10. What is the level of agreement between alternatively certifi cated novice teachers ratings regarding the importance and deliv ery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and ment or/principal responsibilities? 11. What are the differences betw een alternatively certificated and traditional certificated novice teachers ratings regarding the impor tance and delivery of teacher induction program services, mentor responsibilities, and mentor/principal responsibilities? Summary of Findings The focus of this study was on the appraisal of teacher induction se rvices provided to a Central Florida countys elementary novice teach ers. Teacher induction has been defined as support necessary to complete novice teachers in structional training, faci litate a change from student teacher to teacher of students, and build a support netw ork for problem-solving (Baines et al., 2001; Johnson, 2001; Stansbury, 2001). For th e purpose of this study principals and administrators refer to building principals or assistant principals assi gned to teacher induction tasks, mentors refer to an experienced teacher assigned to provide support to the novice teacher, and novice refers to a first year elementary school teacher. Research Question 1: What is the Level of Agreement among Administrators Ratings Regarding the Importance of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor/Pr incipal Responsibilities? The first 25 items presented in the survey aske d the administrators to rate personal beliefs about their own responsibilities (Part II A), mentor responsibilities (P art II B) and responsibilities they shared with mentors (Par t II C) related to teacher induc tion services. In Part II A, administrators viewed 8 of 10 ite ms as highly important, 1 as mode rately important (mentor with similar teaching style) and 1 (an age difference of 10-15 years between mentor and mentee) of low importance, thus signifying agreement that the services are necessary for novice teachers success. Administrators agreed that 9 of the 10 administrative support items were important to 100

PAGE 101

the success of novice teacher pa rticipants in a teacher induc tion program. Prior research indicated that the 10-15 years age difference between mentor and mentee would be rated low (Ponticell & Zepeda, 1997; Carter & Francis, 20 01; Stansbury, 2001; Castorina, 2003). However, this item was left in the survey to protect against acquiescence response bias (Tuckman, 1999), which is true throughout the study. Part II B results show that administra tors rated all 10 items regarding mentor responsibilities for teach er induction services as highly impor tant (mean scores ranged from 7.79 to 9.12). Responses suggest that ad ministrators view the mentors most important role as the transfer of information about building and district procedures. These results concurred with research identifying efficient cl assroom routines/rules or clas sroom management as among the highest needs of a novice teacher in a high quality teacher induction progr am (Banes et al., 2001; Castorina; 2003; Haugaard, 2005). Part II C of the survey found administrators re porting all 5 items of shared responsibility as highly important to effective teacher inducti on. These results support prior research that classroom management and comm unication between the mentor, mentee and administration is vital to the retention and successful empowerment of a novice teacher (Banes et al., 2001; Castorina; 2003; Haugaard, 2005; Littrell & Billinsley, 1994; Stansbury, 2001; Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998). Combined with the high level of alpha reliability ( = .894), principals accepted 24 of 25 components (Part II A, Part II B & Part II C) as important component s of a quality teacher induction program. 101

PAGE 102

Research Question 2: What is the Level of Agreement among Mentor Teachers Ratings Regarding the Importance of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor/Pr incipal Responsibilities? Mentors rated their beliefs about administra tors responsibilities (Part II A), personal responsibilities (Part II B) and re sponsibilities that th ey share with administrators (Part II C) regarding teacher induction services with responses to the first 25 items pres ented in the survey. Part II A found that mentors believed that 7 of 10 items were highly important (mean scores ranged from 7.909.27) teacher indu ction services. Part II B repor ted that mentors perceived all 10 items related to their own responsibilities in a teacher induc tion program as highly important. The same was true of all 5 items reported in Part II C regarding beliefs ab out the responsibilities they shared with administrators for quality teacher induction. These results agree, except in the areas of weekly walk-through for novice teachers, and assigning a mentor with similar teaching style, with previous research about the important elements of the mentors role in a teacher induction program (Banes et al., 2001; Carter & Francis, 2001; Castorina, 2003; Haugaard, 2005; L ittrell & Billinsley, 1994; Ponticell & Zepeda, 1997; Stansbury, 2001; Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998). The mean scores and high alpha reliability ( =.910) indicates agreement among mentors in their beliefs of the importance of the components of a quality teach er induction program. Research Question 3: What is the Level of Agreement among Novice Teachers Ratings Regarding the Importance of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor/Principal Responsibilities? Novice teachers rated their be liefs about administrators responsibilities (Part II A), mentors responsibilities (Part II B) and responsibilities that ad ministrators and mentors share (Part II C) related to teacher induction services in their responses to the first 25 items presented in the survey. The analysis of mean scores and a high al pha reliability ( =.884) indicate 102

PAGE 103

agreement among novice teachers regarding the elemen ts of a quality teacher induction program. Novice teachers reported 6 of 10 items about administrators responsibili ties (Part II A) in a quality teacher induction program as highly im portant. Three (3) were rated moderately important, and 1 was rated as having low importance. Elementary novice teachers believed the most important items were having a mentor in the same or related field as novice (8.85), having a mentor in close proximity (8.30), and having mentors assigned prior to preplanning (8.15). Responses to Part II B indicate that novice t eachers agreed that 9 of 10 items regarding their beliefs about mentor responsibilities for teacher induction were highly important with mean scores ranging from 7.54-8.85. Novice teachers believed that me ntors who provide assistance with implementation of appropriate tools for teaching/defining pupil progress and who provide assistance in developing lesson plans in complia nce with Sunshine State Standards were of greatest value. All items regarding responsibilities shared be tween administrators and mentors were rated as highly important by the novice teachers. Princi pals and mentors who welcome questions/give nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses to the novices received the highest mean score from novices (Part II C). Novice teachers agree that 24 of the 25 items related to quality teacher induction program were highly or moderately important. These results indicate to district a nd school personnel what first year teachers in this Central Florida county believe are important to their success. Beliefs are strong predictors of human behavior and perceived as personal knowledge (Pajares, 1992). Novice teachers, mentors and administrators a ll agreed that highly important elements in teacher support from a mentor incl ude: teaching in a related field (c ontent area), working in close proximity, assignment made before preplanning, ability to identify the proper resources and 103

PAGE 104

assist in how to align curriculum with the stan dards and that the mentor should be a peer or supervisor that is approachable and provide s immediate feedback (B rownlee et al., 1998; Castorina, 2003; Haugaard, 2005; Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Singh & Billingsley, 1998; Spindler & Biott, 2000; Stansbury, 2001, Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998). Research Question 4: What is the Level of Agreement among Administrators Ratings Regarding the Delivery of Teacher I nduction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor/ Principal Responsibilities? Administrators rated 25 survey items for the actual delivery of their own responsibilities (Part III A), mentor responsibilitie s (Part III B) and re sponsibilities that they share with mentors (Part III C) related to a quality teacher inducti on program. Agreement among administrators was demonstrated through an analysis of m ean scores and a high alpha reliability ( =.980). Part III A shows administrators were highly satisfied with the assignment of mentor in the same or related field as the novice teacher (7.73). The mean scor es of administrators ratings of mentor responsibilities (Part III B) show none of the teacher induction services were being delivered at more than a moderate level of satisfaction (6.54-7.26). The means reflected in Part III C indicate that administrators rated 2 of 5 items as delivered with a high level of satisfaction (7.63 and 7.83). Although early questions in this study reveal (with the excl usion of assigning mentors with similar teaching style and a mentor who is 10-15 years older than novice) that administrators believed these items were highly important to a quality teacher induction program, only 3 of the 23 items were perceived as being delivered at the same high level. Administrators were found not to be highly satisfied with the delivery of 23 of the 25 teacher induction practices in this Central Fl orida county. The highest level of satisfaction reported was the shared administrator and mentor responsibility of welcoming questions and giving nonjudgmental, appropriate and timely res ponses (7.83). Previous research found this a 104

PAGE 105

key component of teacher induction (Brownlee et al., 1998; Castorina, 2003; Haugaard, 2005; Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Singh & Billingsley, 1998; Spindler & Biott, 2000; Stansbury, 2001, Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998), and aligned with th e high importance administ rators place in this area. The mean scores of delivery were consistently lower than administrators reported their rated importance of quality teacher induc tion services earlier in this study. Research Question 5: What is the Level of Agreement among Mentor Teachers Ratings Regarding the Delivery of Teacher I nduction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor/Pr incipal Responsibilities? Mentors rated 25 survey items assessing the actual delivery of administrator responsibilities (Part III A), thei r responsibilities (Part III B) and responsibilities that they share with administrators (Part III C) in relation to a quality teache r induction program in a Central Florida county. Agreement among mentors was demons trated through an analysis of mean scores and a high alpha reliability ( .976). Mentors reported that administrators delivered 3 of 10 items at a hi gh level of satisfaction (Part III A). The remaining 7 items were reported as being delivered with a moderate satisfaction level (5.81-7.40). Mentors reported that they are highly satisfied with the delivery of 50% (5 of 10) of their responsibilities in a quality induction program (P art III B). Room organization (7.00) received the lowest score on its actual delivery. Part III C indicated that mentors viewed 1 of 5 items as having a high level of delivery. Mentors agreed they were highly satisfied with the delivery of welcoming questions and gives nonj udgmental appropriate and timel y responses (7.98) in this domain. Although mentors believed that all of the items (excluding ad ministrative responsibilities of weekly walk-through for novice teachers, assigning a mentor with similar teaching style, 105

PAGE 106

and assigning mentors 10-15 years older than the novice) were highly important to the success of a quality induction program, only 9 of the 22 items were actually deliver ed at the same high level. Thus, mentors may be aware of the types of services necessary for novice teachers, but are not highly satisfied with the actual delivery of those services. Mentors reported the most satisfaction with services they were solely responsible for delivering. Administrators, mentors and novice teachers all believed that welcoming questions and giving nonjudgmental, appropriate and timely res ponses was the most important service to a quality teacher induction program (9.10 or highe r), which matched the mentors high level of satisfaction of its delivery (7.98). Openness, approachability, friendliness, interest in development and finding comfort to reduce stress characterizes an effective mentor (Carter & Francis, 2001). Research Question 6: What is the Level of Agreement among Novice Teachers Rating Regarding the Delivery of Teacher I nduction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor/ Principal Responsibilities? Novice teachers rated 25 survey items assessi ng the actual delivery of administrators responsibilities (Part III A), mentor responsibilities (Part II I B) and the responsibilities that administrators and mentors share (Part III C) in a teacher induction program in this Central Florida county. Agreement among novice teachers was demonstrated through an analysis of mean scores and a high alpha reliability ( =.978). Novice teachers were highly satisfied with the delivery of 4 of 10 items for which administrators are responsible (P art III A). Administrators were reported by the novice teachers to assign mentors in the same or related field as the novice (8.50) and assign a mentor with the necessary specialized expertise (8.15), at the highest level of satisfaction. The novice teachers reported they were moderately satisfied with the remaining 6 items. Part III B asked novice 106

PAGE 107

teachers to rate their level of sa tisfaction with the actual delivery of mentor responsibilities. The novice teachers report they were not highly satisfied with the delivery of any induction services provided by a mentor in this Cent ral Florida county. The 10 items we re all rated with a moderate level of satisfaction (5.51-6.85). Novice teachers also reported they were not highly satisfied with delivery of any of the quality teacher induction services shared by administrators and mentors (Part III C). The results indicate that novice teachers were highly satisfied with delivery of just 4 of the 25 items even though they reported earlier in this study (Part II A-C) they believed that 21 of the items were highly important to a quality teacher induction program. One (1) of the 4 items (mentors 10-15 years older than novice) was rate d as being delivered at a high level, yet was view by administrators, mentors, novices and prior researchers as not an important part of a teacher induction program (Littrell & B ilingsley, 1994; Brownlee et al., 1998; Singh & Billingsley, 1998; Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998; Stan sbury, 2001, Castorina, 2003). This indicates that a common practice of this Central Florida county induction program ma y not be necessary to meet the needs of beginning teachers. The three items that novice teachers were highl y satisfied with, administrators assigning mentors in the same or related field as the novice, mentor having th e necessary specialized expertise, and mentor being assigned in clos e proximity, were all rated by novices as being highly important to their training. Novices also believed that ment or responsibilities and shared administrator/mentor responsibilities reported in Part II B and C (excl uding provides assistance with room organization) were highly important, yet none of thes e items were delivered with a high level of satisfaction. The sta ndard deviations in these two s ections were larger than other areas (3.03 to 3.42), which may indicate some inconsistencies in the delivery of teacher 107

PAGE 108

induction services. Additional st ress, lower job satisfaction, and school commitment can be affected when the needs of novice teachers are no t aligned with inductio n services (Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Singh & Billingsley, 1998; Ca rter and Frances, 2001; Stansbury, 2001; MacNab & Payne, 2003). Research indicates the importance for teacher induction practitioners to be cognizant and consistent with application of their personal beliefs so that they are more enabled to meet the needs of novice teachers (B allantyne et al., 1998; Littrell & Billingsley, 1994). Research Question 7: What is the Level of Agreement among Administrators Ratings Regarding the Importance and Delivery of Te acher Induction Program Service, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor/ Principal Responsibilities? Administrators rated 25 paired survey items describing the importance and actual delivery of their responsibilities (P art II A & Part III A), mentor responsibilities (Part II B & Part III B) and shared administrator and mentor responsibilities (Part II C & Pa rt III C) relate d to a Central Florida teacher induction program. Analysis of this data indi cated a significant correlation between 15 of the 25 paired items. Such correl ation between the believed importance and actual delivery indicated a homogeneous relationship between what is important and what services are being received. Beliefs and percep tions indicate what type of program and support is vital to novice teacher training (Brownlee et al., 1998; MacNab & Payne, 2003; Pajares, 1992). Part II B and Part III B results indicated a positive significant relationship (Spearman Correlation) was found for administrators ratings regarding th e importance and the actual delivery of seven (7) mentor re sponsibilities (Table 4-23). Part II C and Part III C results indicted a positive significant relationship (Spearman Correlation) for three (3) shared administrator and mentor responsibilit ies. Administrators believed that all of the significant items were highly important to a quality teacher induction program. 108

PAGE 109

Administrators reported there was not a si gnificant relationship between 10 of the 25 paired items. Results show the items that were found not to be significant indicate the null hypothesis was true (n o relationship). Similar to the findings of Johnson (2001), thes e results show that administrators concur that the items in the survey are elements of a quality induction program and that they understand their role in delivery of these services. They did not believe, however, th at delivery of 8 items matched the level of perceived importance. Administ rators were not highly satisfied with either their own delivery or the delivery of mentor s support for novice teachers in many key support services that are part of a quality teacher induction program. The 8 items indicate a low level of delivery for necessary induction support such as classroom management, feedback from mentors and administrators, instrumental support, a nd systematic pairing of mentors and mentees (Ballantyne & Hansford, 1995; Brow nlee et al. 1998; Carter & Fr ancis, 2001; Castorina, 2003; Haugaard, 2005; Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998). Research Question 8: What is the Level of Agreement among Mentor Teachers Rating Regarding the Importance and Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and the Men tor/Principal Responsibilities? Mentors rated the importance and the actual de livery of administrators responsibilities (Part II A & Part III B), their ow n responsibilities (Part II B & Part III B) and res ponsibilities that they share with administrators (Part II C & Part III C) related to a Centra l Florida county teacher induction program. Analysis of this data indicated existence of a significant correlation (Spearman Correlation) between 18 of the 25 paired items. Beliefs and perceptions indicate the type of program and support is vital to novice te acher training (Brownl ee et al., 1998; MacNab & Payne, 2003; Pajares, 1992). Significant relationships indicate that the mentors level of believed importance correlates with the actual delivery of the induction serv ice. Correlation between the believed importance 109

PAGE 110

and actual delivery indicate a homogeneous relati onship between what is important and what services are being received. Mentors believed th at 16 of the 18 items, including all 10 items related to their own resp onsibilities, found to be significant were highly important to a quality teacher induction program; 9 of 10 items were belie ved to be delivered at the same high level. Mentors also believed that all five (5) items relati ng to their shared respon sibilities were highly important; delivery of 4 of 5 items matched their perceived importa nce. The significant relationships (Spearman Correlatio n) indicate that mentors are satisfied with teacher induction services for 13 of 15 services th at they deliver. Mentors reported that although they believed it is highly important to greet novices at preplanni ng, and that feedback should be provided by the administrator and/or themselves, neither wa s found to be significant. Although such a relationship was not found, these resu lts indicate that mentors agree with the research that novice teachers should be assigned at the beginning of th e year and that feedback is vital to a novice teachers success (Ballantyne & Hansford, 1995; Ze peda & Ponticell, 1998; Spindler & Biott, 2000; Carter & Frances, 2001; Castorina, 2003). Research Question 9: What is the Level of Agreement among Novice Teachers Rating Regarding the Importance and Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor/Principal Responsibilities? Novice teachers rated 25 paired survey items describing the importance and the actual delivery of administrators respon sibilities (Part II A & Part III B), mentor responsibilities (Part II B & Part III B) and responsibilities that princi pals and mentors share (Part II C & Part III C) related to a Central Florida c ounty teacher induction program. On ly one significant relationship (Spearman Correlation) was reported in Part II A a nd Part III A (mentor in the same or related field as novice [.42]). This re sult indicates that the belief s of novice teachers matched the delivery of just one item. 110

PAGE 111

Of the 24 paired items that were found not significant, novices believed that 19 were highly important, 4 moderately important, and 1 had low importance. None of the mentors responsibilities, as rated by novice teachers, were found to ha ve a significan t relationship between their importance and actual delivery. In addition, no correlation was found in novice teachers rating regarding the importance and the act ual delivery of shared mentor/administrator responsibilities on any of the 5 items. These results indicate incons istencies, as viewed by novice teachers, between the beliefs and actual delivery of 24 of 25 quality induction services. Correlation between the believed importance and actual delivery indicate a hom ogeneous relationship (Spearman Correlation) between what is important and what services ar e being received. Thus, concern should be raised about a teacher induction program where the novice teachers beliefs are not in alignment with the actual delivery of support serv ices. Research indicates that the type of support that should be delivered by a teacher induction program should match the novice teachers beliefs resulting in validation and empowerment (Brownlee et al., 1998; MacNab & Payne, 2003; Pajares, 1992). Beliefs and perceptions also indi cate what type of program and support is vital to novice teacher training (Pajares, 1992; Zepe da & Ponticell, 1998). Research Question 10: What is the Level of Agreement between Alternatively Certificated Novice Teachers Ratings Regarding the Impo rtance and Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor/Principal Responsibilities? Alternatively certificated novice teachers ra ted 25 paired survey items describing the importance and the actual delivery of administ rators responsibilities (Part II A & Part III A), mentor responsibilities (Part II B & Part III B) and responsibilities that principals and mentors share (Part II C & Part III C) related to a Central Florida Co unty teacher induction program. Although the population of altern atively certificat ed novice teachers was small (N=5), it represented 100% of beginning teachers seeking alternative certification in this county. 111

PAGE 112

The findings of this study indicated there was a positive significant relationship (Spearman Correlation) between 2 of the 25 paired items. Of the remaining items, 7 of 8 were rated as highly important and one (assigning mentor with si milar teaching style) as moderately important; none were found to be significant. These results indicate inconsistenc ies between the rated importance and the actual delivery of the admi nistrators role in an induction program for alternatively certificated teachers. Part II B and Part III B di d not report a positive signi ficant relationship (Spearman Correlation) for any of the items related to alte rnatively certificated novice teachers beliefs regarding the importance and the actual delivery of mentor responsibilitie s in a teacher induction program. Although alternatively certif icated teachers believed that all but one of the items were highly important to a quality teacher induction program, none were found to have a significant relationship. These results indicate that the beliefs of alternatively certificated teachers do not match the delivery of support during their first year of teaching. Provides assistance with room organization (-.80), was found to ha ve a significantly negative rela tionship, which indicates that although alternatively certificated novice teachers felt this was important, the delivery lacked consistency and resulted in a low level of satisfaction. Responses to Part II C and Part III C found no positive significant relationship for any of the items related to alternatively certificated novice teachers ratings of the importance and the actual delivery of shared mentor/administrator responsibilities in a teacher induction program. All items were believed to be highly important to a quality teac her induction program. One item, provides training in how best to handle clas sroom disturbance (-.92), reported a negative relationship, which indicates that the high level importance correlated to a low level of satisfaction for the actual delivery of this induction service. 112

PAGE 113

These results agree with those of novice teach ers, indicating inconsistencies between the beliefs and actual delivery of quality induction services in 23 or th e 25 items. Spearmans Correlation between the believed importance and actual delivery indicate a homogeneous relationship between what is important and what services are being received. Beliefs and perceptions indicate what type of program and support is vi tal to novice teacher training (Brownlee et al., 1998; MacNab & Payne, 2003; Paja res, 1992). Thus, concern should be raised for alternatively certificated teacher induction programs where the novice teachers beliefs are not in alignment with the actua l delivery of support services. These results are unexpected given that the state of Florida has a mandatory induction program for all teachers seeking alternative certification (Furtwengler, 1995). Unlike the traditional induction program, mentors are grante d a stipend and successful completion of the induction program is necessary to be considered for a standard certification and a professional service contract. These results suggest that, al though we are spending dollars to fast-track alternative certification teachers (Johnson et al., 2001), the programs may be piecemeal and vary enormously in Floridas decentralized program (Feimen-Nemser, 1999). The call for a reduction of barriers (Finn & Magidan, 2001) and quickening of training for alternatively certificated teachers entering the classroom, may fall short of meeting the support needs of this group of novice teachers. Research Question 11: What are the Differen ces between Alternatively Certificated and Traditionally Certificated Novice Teach ers Rating Regarding the Importance and Delivery of Teacher Induction Program Services, Mentor Responsibilities, and Mentor/Principal Responsibilities? A t-test for independent groups was used to analyze the data for difference in means between novice teachers who were seeking altern ative certification, and novice teachers who received their degree within the field in which they currently teach. It is assumed that the 113

PAGE 114

variances are equal. The Levenes Test for Equality of Variances is us ed to evaluate this assumption. If Levenes Test for Equality of Variances is found significant (> .05), you would refer to the adjusted results that are unequa l. Items 10, 14 and 19 required this adjustment. The t-test for independent groups of novice teach ers and alternatively certificated novice teachers ratings regarding the importance of admi nistrator responsibilities revealed a significant difference for 2 of the 10 items (Table 4-34). The beliefs of novice teachers who were seeking alternative certification (alternatively certificated), and novice teachers who received their degree within the field in which they currently teach (traditionally certificated) were significantly different for items 9 and 10. Traditionally certificated novice teachers re ported both items in Table 4-37 as moderately important (5.49 and 6. 31), whereas alternatively certificated teachers rated both items as highly important (8.00 and 9.20). These results indicate that teachers seeking alternative certification have higher expectations for prof essional feedback and timely observations. The t-test for independent groups of novice teach ers and alternatively certificated novice teachers ratings regarding the importance of mentor responsibilities revealed a significant difference for 1 of the 10 items (Table 4-35). It em 14 was found to have significantly different means (Table 4-37) between traditionally (8.33) and alternatively cer tificated (9.80) novice teachers. Both groups felt that this item is highly important, yet lear ning the Sunshine State Standards was a very high priority for te achers seeking altern ative certification. The t-test for independent groups of novice teach ers and alternatively certificated novice teachers ratings regarding the importance of shar ed administrator/mentor responsibilities did not reveal a significant difference for any of the items (Table 4-36). These results indicate that there 114

PAGE 115

is no significant difference in the beliefs of either group of novice teachers regarding shared administrator/mentor responsibilities. The t-test for independent groups of novice teac hers and alternativel y certificated novice teachers ratings regarding the actual delivery of administrator responsibilities revealed a significant difference for 2 of the 10 items (Table 4-38). Traditionally certificated teachers rated items 3 and 7, found in Table 4-41, with m oderate satisfaction (7.47 and 6.85), while alternatively certificated teachers rated actual delivery of these items as resulting in low satisfaction (3.60 and 3.80). The t-te st results of item 3 indicate th at alternatively certificated novice teachers found dissatisfaction with not receivi ng a mentor that they can relate to more often than did traditionally certificated teachers. Item 7 indicates that, although alternatively certificated novice teachers are requ ired to receive formative and summative assessments in the form of FPMS, they had low satisfaction with th e frequency of such observations. The need for mentor interaction was found to be a greater issue for alternatively certific ated teachers. This can cause issues with job satisfaction, and may be i ndicative of poor pairing of mentor with mentee and/or administrators not fully understanding th eir role when working with alternatively certificated teachers (Carter & Francis, 2001, Castorina, 2003; Doud & Keller, 1998; Johnson, 2001, Littrell & Billingsley, 1994; Singh & Billingsley, 1998; Urzua, 1999; Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998). The t-test for independent groups of novice teach ers and alternativel y certificated novice teachers ratings regarding the ac tual delivery of mentor respons ibilities revealed a significant difference for 6 of the 10 items (4-39). The mean s of alternatively certif icated teachers indicate low satisfaction, whereas traditionally certificated teachers were moderately satisfied (4-41). These results suggest inconsiste ncies between the delivery of me ntor support for alternatively 115

PAGE 116

certificated teachers and traditionally certificated novice teachers. The altern atively certificated novice teachers level of support need s either exceed those of a trad itionally certificated teacher, or the mentor support received is not suffici ent. Alternatively certificated novice teachers participate in a state approved mentor program in which their mentors receive additional pay and are provided substitutes so th ey can meet and perform FPMS ev aluations. These results should inform this Central Florida county, of areas in which potential changes in mentor responsibilities might improve delivery of their teacher induction program. The t-test for independent groups of novice teach ers and alternatively certificated novice teachers ratings regarding the ac tual delivery of shared administrator and mentor responsibilities revealed a significant difference for 2 of the 5 ite ms (Table 4-40). Satisfaction ratings for items 21 and 22 were found to be significantly different between the two group s of novice teachers. Traditionally certificated teachers rated both items with mode rate satisfaction (6.63 and 6.26), whereas alternatively certificated teachers rate d these same items with low satisfaction (3.00 and 4.80) respectively (Table 4-41). These responses are surprising because this Central Florida countys decentralized program has set guide lines for mentoring novice teachers seeking alternative certification that pr ovide each mentor with a stipe nd ($1200), and provide substitute pay so they can meet mandatory formative and summative assessments that must be completed. These results support Johnson & Bi rkelands (2003) study of alte rnative certification training models that found little followup once the alternatively certificated teacher reached the classroom. Many of these teachers felt they were not qualified to teach their content area, and did not receive the necessary support. Conclusions Data from this study showed that administ rators, mentors and novi ce teachers reported a high level of agreement in their beliefs about th e importance of the identified components of a 116

PAGE 117

quality teacher induction program. This supports pr ior research that the items included in the survey represented essential components of a quality teacher induction program (Baines et al., 2001; Ballantyne & Hansford, 1995; Carter & Fr ances, 2001; Castorina, 2003; Chisena, 2002; Furtwengler, 1995; Haugaard, 2005; Johnson, 2001; Pettinger, 1995; Pontic ell & Zepeda, 1997; Saunders & Singh & Billingsley, 1998; Spindler & Biott, 2000). The believed importance of teacher induction services provided by administrators, mentors and those services whose delivery was shared were consistently rate d with higher mean scores than was actually delivered for those services. Administrators reported less than half (12 of 25) of the services which they believed were important, were actually delivered at the sa me level of importance. Mentors reported that 72% of items they believed were important to teacher induction matche d their actual delivery. Mentors also reported that 12 of the 15 (80%) items that they sole ly delivered or shared with building administrators matched the level of believed importance. Novice teachers reported high satisfaction with four of the items actually de livered by administrators and none of the items delivered by mentors. The study shows that none of the mentor responsibilities or shared administrator and mentor responsibilities beli eved level of importance, as rated by novice teachers, matched the actual delivery of the i nduction service. Novice teachers rated only one service delivered by administrators ma tched their rating of importance. Alternatively certificated teachers reported only two induction services delivered by administrators matched their rating of importanc e. Through analysis of independent t-tests, novice teachers who were seeking alternative cert ification reported significant differences in their believed level of importance from traditi onally certificated novice teachers. The deliveries of quality induction services were also found to ha ve significant differences, thus justifying that 117

PAGE 118

the perceptions and needs of alternatively certifi cated novice teachers are di fferent from those of traditionally certificated novice teachers. Implications As the role of teachers change, the basic needs of teacher training have remained invariable for over a decade (Ballantyne & Hansford, 1995; Carter & Francis, 2001; Castorina, 2003; Chisena, 2002; Darling-Hammond, 2003; Ha ugaard, 2005; Johnson et al., 2001; Singh & Billingsley, 1998; Spindler % Biott, 2000). This re search study provides evidence that it is not always the amount of training, but the types of support the no vice teacher or alternatively certificated novice teacher may need once they enter their own classroom. To combat high turnover rates, teacher induction programs have been put into place to support novice teachers. This study identified consistent delivery of teacher inductio n services as a concern of administrators, mentors and novice teachers. Thei r responses to open-ended questions suggest that unclear expectations for th e induction process have resulted in ambiguous expectations and inconsistent delivery of support se rvices. It is essential that pr ocedures and best practices are implemented for administrators and mentors to serve the newest members of their organization. An awareness of novice teachers needs and proper training for administrators and mentors in facilitating induction services should lead to a hi gher rate of job satisfaction and teacher literacy. Induction services should focus on the well-being of novice teachers and s hould be modeled after the personal and professional needs of the novice (Boreen & Niday, 2000; Carter & Francis, 2001; Dejong, 1997; Singh & Bill ingsley, 1998; Stansbury, 2001). The results reveal a need for continuity in di strict level induction pr actices. Administrators, mentors and novice teachers alike value the importance of inducti on practices and agreed with the elements of a quality induction program. Yet, resu lts revealed that the actual delivery of such services often did not match their perceived importance. Respons es to open-ended questions by 118

PAGE 119

administrators, mentors, novice teachers, and alte rnatively certificated novice teachers revealed aspects of induction they would most like to see changed, adapted or improved. In this study administrators and mentors overwhelmingly call fo r a district-wide plan. They both agree that financial support of this practice would be necessary to pa y for substitute days for staff development, and a stipend for quality mentor services. This study did not support their assumptions that mentor services improve when a stipend is paid. Although mentors believed they were effectiv ely delivering services the novice teachers did not share the same level of satisfaction fo r induction services they received. Possibly, the optimistic self-appraisal of the delivery of induction services by mentors could be explained by the administrative concern that mentors were not well trained in how best to support novice teachers. Mentors failed to recognize that their efforts to deliver induction service did not match the teachers needs and was just not enough. Th is concern was validated by novice teachers who reported that the delivery of none of the mentor services matched the importance they gave to each of the elements of a quality teacher induc tion program. The results of this study showed larger standard deviations for novices (Part II I A-C). Novice teachers responses to open-ended questions regarding delivery of induction serv ices suggested that these services were implemented in a scattered and piecemeal manner throughout the district. Alternatively certificated novice teachers concu rred with traditional novices that, even though their induction program was part of a state mandate, they were not receiving the support they needed and voiced a concern for the improvement of communicatio n between administrators, mentors and novice teachers. Alternatively certificated novice teacher re sponses raise some additional points for discussion. Although the population was limited in size (N=5), it represented 100% of 119

PAGE 120

elementary teachers seeking alternate certification in this Central Florid a county at the time of this survey. The alternative cer tificated teachers agreed with traditionally certificated novice teacher beliefs about the importance of induction services except in tw o areas. Alternatively certificated novice teachers reported that they believed weekly walk-throughs and guidelines for scheduling observations and consultations were highly important, whereas traditionally certificated novice teachers believed these serv ices were on the lower end of moderately important. The level of expectation and/or need for feedback may be higher for alternative certificated teachers. The results could also imply that alterative certification is an area of beginning teacher training that is overlooked. Mentors of novice teachers seeking alternative certification are the only paid ment ors in the district, yet the participants reported they were significantly less satisfied with the feedback they received than traditionally certificated teachers with unpaid mentors. This should be addressed by district and school-l evel administrators because the needs of alte rnatively certificated teachers are not adequately being satisfied. In addition, novice teachers seeking alternate certif ication are put through a state approved novice teacher program that is designed to meet the special non-certificated needs of novice teachers. Results of this study indicate th at there are truly two unique gr oups of beginning teachers that should be treated as mutually exclusive. Alternatively certificated teacher s expressed a need for additional training once they re ach the classroom preferably through a relationship built with their administrator and on campus mentor. One a lternatively certificated teacher commented, It is important that all novice teachers are assigned mentors who follow through and understand their teacher training oblig ation and expectation. The NCLB act has initiated the age of accountability, which has forced districts to track the data of individual students, pr ovide stringent guidelines for lesson planning, and increase the 120

PAGE 121

documentation of differentiated instruction. Th e abundance of paperwork and technical skill required by teachers today is much more demanding. Novice teachers reported that communication and having a mentor that they could openly talk to is the ca talyst for day-to-day questions. Novice teachers reported that having someone to be there was one of the most important components of the te acher induction program. If novi ces are being assisted by a nonjudgmental member of the organization, they can seek out the information necessary to meet their individual needs. The timeliness and physical location of the mentor/mentee relationship was the initial factor in a novices success. The u ndertones of prior resear ch and the results of this study continue to emphasize the need for novice teachers to have support once they reach the classroom. The above information designed into a district-wide plan could be beneficial for this Central Florida countys teacher training program, and help with the rigors of state mandates, day-to-day job satisfaction, and the attrition of both tr aditional novice teachers and alternatively certificated novice teachers. Recommendations for Further Research High attrition rates caused by teacher dissatisfacti on with their career path in the first years remain a major concern for educational leaders. Understanding the needs of novice teachers, and how induction services can be e ffectively delivered through inducti on practices is necessary to the retention of a stable faculty in a school district. All conclusions are based on voluntary responses from elementary administrators, mentors and novice teachers in one Central Florida county. Further study should be conducted to verify these results and to increase generalizability to other districts. To control against social desirability bias it is recommended that future researchers use the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. 121

PAGE 122

Further examination of the pe rceptions/beliefs and value of the delivery of induction services to novice teachers seeking alterna tive certification should be conducted using a larger population of elementary school teachers. Decentralized control of teacher induction s hould be examined to determine a need for consistent guidelines and training for invested members. A study should be designed and conducted to explore ways to improve actual delivery of all aspects of teacher induction services. An exploration should be conducted to exam ine the correlation be tween mentoring of novice teachers and the impact it has on standardized tests scores. The following research possibilities exist with regard to continued study of relationships between elementary principals, mentors and n ovice teachers beliefs and practices in a teacher induction program. Conduct a qualitative study to identify a nd understand the obstac les that prevent administrators and mentors from delive ring quality teacher induction support. Examine a larger population of novice teachers seeking alternate cert ification to compare with traditionally ce rtificated teachers. Conduct a similar study with middle school a nd high school administ rators, mentors and novice teachers to see if the teacher inducti on issues might differ at these levels. Examination of the beliefs of induction serv ice needs of novice teach ers using a larger population of elementary school teachers Summary This study was conducted as a follow-up to earli er research completed by Susan Castorina in 2003. The results agree with her findings. Teac her induction services ar e most often not in alignment with novice teachers beliefs. Follow-up support to teacher trainingteacher inductions programsare instrumental to novice teachers initial satisfaction of career selection and to prevent new instructors from leaving the teaching profession. A well-crafted induction program can improve teaching quality, increase retention rates, and decrease the ove rall cost of recruiting, preparing, and developing 122

PAGE 123

new teachers (Johnson & Birkeland, 2003; Littrel & Billingsley, 2004; Humphrey et al., 2000). As a teachers role becomes more demanding and attrition rates continue to rise, issues of beginning teacher support for elementary teacher s become more critical. The perceived job satisfaction and well-being of a t eacher has a high correlation with whether they remain in the field. To attract and retain high quality teachers in education, a broader study and analysis of teacher induction services is warranted. An investment in novice teacher training increases performance and thus impacts the success of scho ol districts and the stud ents they serve. 123

PAGE 124

124APPENDIX A LETTER OF INVITATION University of Florida PO Box 117049 College of Education Gainesville, FL 32611-7049 Department of Educational Leadership (352)392-2391 Policy and Foundations (352)846-0131 April 15, 2007 Dear Colleague: My name is James Russo and I am a doctoral candidate at the University of Florida. I am conducting a study on the relationships between K-5 administrators, mentors and first year teachers beliefs and practices in a teacher induction/support program. I exp ect that the results of this research will provide direction for improving beginning teacher support in elementary schools. I request your participation in this research project. The superintendent of your district has endorsed the study. I would appreciate it if you would take a fe w minutes to answer questions on the online survey. You will be asked to complete the survey on the enclosed web address with the password below. The survey will take about 15-20 minutes. Your privacy will be protected and your identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. You do no t have to answer any question you do not wish to answer. The completed survey will be submitted to a secure server at the University of Florida. To take the online survey, you must select I agree on the website, agreeing that you have read this letter of invitation and agree to the consent. You may prin t a copy of this letter for your records by pressing the control button and the letter p. The results of the survey will be provided to you at your request. There is no anticipated risk, compensation, nor benefit for participating in the stud y. Your participation is strictly voluntary and you are free to withdraw your participation at any time without penalty. Should you have questions about your rights as a research participant, contact the Institutional Review Board (IRB) office at (352) 392-9433 or irb2@ufl.edu If you need additional information or have questions about the survey please contact me at (407) 252-0879 or my faculty advisor, Dr. James Doud, at (352) 392-2391, ext. 275. The survey website address is listed below: Website: http://grove.ufl.edu/~jvrusso/index.php Thank you very much for your participation in this study. Sincerely, James V. Russo Principal Investigator

PAGE 125

APPENDIX B QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW PANEL Dr. Geraldine Wright Ms. Beverly Perrault Elementary Executive Director Elementary Executive Director Educational Support Center Educational Support Center Seminole County Public Schools Seminole County Public Schools 400 E. Lake Mary Blvd. 400 E. Lake Mary Blvd. Sanford, FL 32773-7127 Sanford, FL 32773-7127 geraldine_wright@scps.k12.fl.us Beverly_Perrault@scps.k12.fl.us 407-320-0000 407-320-0000 Dr. Anna-Marie Cote Ms. Crill Head Executive Director Title 1 Director Educational Support Center Educational Support Center Seminole County Public Schools Seminole County Public Schools 400 E. Lake Mary Blvd. 400 E. Lake Mary Blvd. Sanford, FL 32773-7127 Sanford, FL 32773-7127 Annmarie_cote@scps.k12.fl.us Crill_head@scps.k12.fl.us 407-320-0000 407-320-0000 Ms. Debbie Warner Ms. Jane Lane Elementary Reading Admin. Director of Community Involvement Educational Support Center Educational Support Center Seminole County Public Schools Seminole County Public Schools 400 E. Lake Mary Blvd. 400 E. Lake Mary Blvd. Sanford, FL 32773-7127 Sanford, FL 32773-7127 Debbie_warner@scps.k12.fl.us Jane_lane@scps.k12.fl.us 407-320-0000 407-320-0000 Mr. Hugh Harris Director of Curriculum Educational Support Center Seminole County Public Schools 400 E. Lake Mary Blvd. Sanford, FL 32773-7127 Hugh_harris@scps.k12.fl.us 407-320-0000 125

PAGE 126

APPENDIX C TEACHER INDUCTION/SUPPORT PROGRAM SURVEY Part I Demographic Data (Fill in or check where appropriate): 1 Gender female male 2. AGE 3 Ethnicity Asian Black Hispanic multi-racial white Other 4 What is your level of education. (highest degree earned) bachelors degree masters degree specialist degree doctorate 126

PAGE 127

5. Are you an administrator(pr incipal/assistant principal) n your campus? o yes no 6 Are you a mentor/peer teacher? yes no 7 Are you a beginning teacher? yes no 8 How long have you been involve d with teacher induction/support? less than 1 year 1-1 1/2 years 2-3 years 4-5 years 5+ years 9 I am: Certified in the area I teach Working on alternative certification to obtain a professional certification in the area I teach. A mentor or administrator 127

PAGE 128

PART II Importance Ratings Rate the importance of support services that a teacher induction/support p ro g ram might provide to novice teachers. For each item indicate how important that service is to you.Ten (10) is th e highest importance level you can give an tem. One (1) is the lowest import ance level you can give an item. i A Teacher Induction/Support Program Beliefs. Lowest Importance <-----------------------------> Highest Importance 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1. Mentors assigned prio r to preplanning: 2. Mentor in the same or related field as novice: 3. Mentor with similar teaching style: 4. Mentor in close proximity: 5. Mentor has necessary specialized expertise (example: ESE, similar grade level, science lab): 6. Mentor 10-15 years older than novice: 7. Provides frequent observations/feedback: 8. Provides guidelines for observations/feedback: 128

PAGE 129

9. Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers: 10. Provides guidelines for scheduling observations and consultations: B Mentor Responsibilities Beliefs. Lowest Importance <------------------------------> Highest Importance 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11. Greets novice at preplanning: 12. Expedites orientation/preplanning activities: 13. Provides assistance locating books/materials: 14. Provides assistance in developing lesson plans in compliance w ith Sunshine State Standards: 15. Provides training for parent communication: 16. Provides assistance with room organization: 17. Provides training on record keeping: 18. Provides examples of measurement tools(tests, assists in determining the appropriate tools for various skills): 19. Provides assistance with implementation of appropriate tools for tracking/defining pupil progress: 129

PAGE 130

20. Provides assistance in establishing efficient classroom routines/rules: C. Mentor/Principal Re sponsibilities Beliefs. Lowest Importance <--------------------------> Highest Importance 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 21. Provides training in "how best to handle classroom disturbances": 22. Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative) feedback: 23. Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make observations of other teachers (makes arrangements, covers class, provides substitute): 24. Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses: 25. Keeps novice teachers up to date on raining opportunities/development: t PART III Delivery of Service Rate the delivery of support services that your teacher induction/support p ro g ram provides to novice teachers. Cons idering your experience, rate your level of satisfaction with the deliver y of the support services in your school/district.Ten (10) is completely sa tisfied with the delivery of the item, and one (1) indicates you are completely dissatisfied with the way that item is being elivered in the teacher induction program. d 130

PAGE 131

A Delivery of Teacher Induction/Support Program Services completely dissatisfied <---------------------------> Comp letely Satisfied 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1. Mentors assigned prio r to preplanning: 2. Mentor in the same or related field as novice: 3. Mentor with similar teaching style: 4. Mentor in close proximity: 5. Mentor has necessary specialized expertise (example: ESE, similar grade level, science lab): 6. Mentor 10-15 years older than novice: 7. Provides frequent observations/feedback: 8. Provides guidelines for observations/feedback: 9. Weekly "walk-through" for novice teachers: 10. Provides guidelines for scheduling observations and consultations: 131

PAGE 132

B Delivery of Mentor Responsibilities Services.. completely dissatisfied <-------------------------> comple tely satisfied 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11. Greets novice at preplanning: 12. Expedites orientation/preplanning activities: 13. Provides assistance locating books/materials: 14. Provides assistance in developing lesson plans in compliance w ith Sunshine State Standards: 15. Provides training for parent communication: 16. Provides assistance with room organization: 17. Provides training on record keeping: 18. Provides examples of measurement tools(tests, assists in determining the appropriate tools for various skills): 19. Provides assistance with implementation of appropriate tools for tracking/defining pupil progress: 20. Provides assistance in establishing efficient classroom routines/rules: 132

PAGE 133

C. Delivery of Mentor/Principal Responsibilities Services: Communication. completely dissatisfied <-------------------------> comple tely satisfied 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 21. Provides training in "how best to handle classroom disturbances": 22. Provides frequent observations with nonjudgmental (formative) feedback: 23. Provides opportunities for the novice teacher to make observations of other teachers (makes arrangements, covers class, provides substitute): 24. Welcomes questions/gives nonjudgmental, appropriate/timely responses: 25. Keeps novice teachers up to date on raining opportunities/development: t PART IV Open Ended Response lease answer the following questions P 26. Overall, what do you feel is the most valuab le component of the teacher induction program? 133

PAGE 134

27. What aspects of the teacher induction/suppor t program would you most like to see changed, adapted or improved? 28. List the three most important things you ne ed from a teacher induction/support program. 29. Use the space below to make additional comment s or suggestions, including any aspects that you feel were not covered in the survey that you would like to see addressed for future teacher induction/support programs. 134

PAGE 135

LIST OF REFERENCES Archer, J. (1999). New teachers abandon field at high rate. Education Week, 18 (27), 20-21. Archer, J. (2001). Recruitment pinch fu els global track in K-12 teachers. Education Week, 20(22), 8. Babbie, E. (1990). Survey research methods (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Baines, L., McDowell, J., & Foulk, D. (2001) One step forward, three steps backward: Alternative certification programs in Texas, Georgia, and Florida. Educational Horizons, 32-37. Ballantyne, R., & Hansford, B. (1995). Mentoring beginning teachers: A quali tative analysis of process and outcomes. Educational Review 1(3), 297-307. Ballantyne, R., Thompson, R., & Taylor, P. (1998, March). Principals conceptions of competent beginning teachers. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 1(1), 51-65. Berry, B., & Hirsch, E. (2003, January). What we know and can do to recruit and retain quality teachers. Presented at Teaching Quality, Re cruitment and Retention Symposium, Clearwater, FL. Berry, B., Hopkins-Thompson, P., & Hoke, M. (2002, December). Assessing and supporting new teachers: Lessons from the Southeast. The Southeast Center for Teaching Quality, 1-16. Blair-Larsen, S., & Bercik, J. (1992). A collaborative model for teacher induction. Education 113(1), 25-31. Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (1993). The path to school leadership: A portable mentor. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Boreen, J., & Niday, D. (2000, October). Breaki ng through the isolation: Mentoring beginning teachers. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44 (2), 1-13. Brouwer, N., & Kothagen, F. (2005). Can teacher education make a difference? American Educational Research Journal, 42 153-225 Brownlee, J., Dart, B., Boulton-Lewis, G., & McCrindle, A. (1998). The integration of preservice teachers nave and informed beliefs about learning and teaching. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 26, 104-118. Carter, M., & Francis, R. ( 2001). Mentoring and beginning teachers workplace learning. AsiaPacific Journal of Teacher Education 29, 249-262. Castorina, S. (2003). An exploration of the rela tionships between administrators, mentors, and teachers beliefs and practices in a teache r induction program. (D octoral dissertation, University of Florida, 2003.) 135

PAGE 136

Chisena, C. (2002). A study of the perceptions of Orange County, Florida, first-year elementary teachers regarding the effectiveness of select ed induction activities and the main sources of assistance for first-year teachers. (Doctoral dissertation, Un iversity of Central Florida, 2002.) Coppenhaver, A., & Schaper, L. (1999). Mentoring the mentors. In M. Scherer (Ed.), A better beginning supporting and mentoring new teachers (pp. 60-68). Alexandria,VA: Association for Supervision a nd Curriculum Development. Creswell, J. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Darling-Hammond, L. (1995). Policies that support professional te acher development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 642-644. Darling-Hammond, L. (1996). What matters mo st: A competent teacher for every child. Phi Delta Kappan, 78, 193-200. Darling-Hammond, L. (1999, January/February). Educating teachers: The academy's greatest failure or its most important future? ACADEME, 85(1), 26-33. Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Keeping good teachers. Educational Leadership, 60 (8), 6-13. DeJong, J. A. (1997). Research into on-the-job tr aining: A state of the art Utrecht, The Netherlands: Utrecht Universit y, Department of Education. Dillman, D. (2007). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Doud, J., & Keller, E. (1998). The K-8 principal in 1998: Seventh in a series of research studies launched in 1928 Alexandria, VA: National Association of Elementary School Principals. Farkas, S., Johnson, J., & Foleno, T. (2000). A sense of calling: Who teaches and why. New York: Public Agenda. Feiman-Nemser, S. (1999). A conceptual review of lite rature on new teacher induction. College Park, MD: National Partnership for Exce llence and Accountability in Teaching. Feistritzer, C. E., & Chester, D. T. (2003). Executive summary: Alternative teacher certification : A state-by-state analysis 2003 Washington, DC: National Center for Education Information. Finn, C. E., Jr., & Madigan, K. (May, 2001). Re moving the barriers for teacher candidates. Educational Leadership, 58(8), 29-36. Furtwengler, C. B. (1995). Beginning teachers programs: Analysis of state actions during the reform era. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 3 (3), 1-23. 136

PAGE 137

Gordon, R. (1997). How novice teachers can succeed with adolescents. Educational Leadership, 54(7), 56-58. Gruber, K., Wiley, S., Broughman, S., Strizek, G ., & Burian-Fitzgerald, M. (2002). Schools and staffing survey, 1999-2000: Overview of the data for public, private, public charter, and Bureau of Indian Affairs elementary and secondary schools. NCES 2002-313. Washington, DC: United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Halford, J. (1998). Easing the way for new teachers. Educational Leadership, 55 (5), 33-36. Halford, J. (1999). Policies to support new teachers. Educational Leadership, 56 (8), 85. Haugaard, J. (2005). Critical elements of beginni ng teacher induction: An analysis of support contributing to professional development. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Florida, 2005.) Humphrey, D., Adelman, N., Esch, C., Riehl, L., Shields, P., & Tiffany, J. (2000, September). Preparing and supporting new teac hers: A literature review. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Hussar, W. J. (1999). Predicting the need for newly hired teachers in the United States to 200809. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics. Ingersoll, R. (2001a). Teacher turnover and t eacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal 38, 499-534. Ingersoll, R. (2001b). The rea lities of out-of-field teaching. Educational Leadership, 58 (8), 4245. Ingersoll, R. (2002, June). The teacher s hortage: A case of wrong diagnosis and wrong prescription. NASSP Bulletin, 86, 16-31. Ingersoll, R. (2003). The teacher shortage: Myth or reality? Educational Horizons, 81 (3), 146152. Ingersoll, R., & Kralik, J. (2004). The impact of mentoring on teacher retention: What the research says. Research Review: Teaching Quality, 1-23. Ingersoll, R., & Smith, T. (2003). The wrong solution to the teacher shortage. Educational Leadership 60(8), 30-33. James B. Hunt, Jr. Institute for Educati onal Leadership and Policy. (2004, November). School leadership supporting teacher retention Prepared for the Hunt In stitute by the Southeast Center for Teaching Quality. Johnson, H. (2001). Administrators and mentors: Keys in the success of beginning teachers. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 28(1), 44-49. 137

PAGE 138

Johnson, S., Birkeland, S., Kardos, S., Kauffman, D., Liu, E., & Peske, H. (2001, July/August). Retaining the next generation of teachers: The importance of school-based support. Harvard Education Letter. Retrieved July 17, 2006, from http://www.edletter.org/past/issues/2001-ja/support.shtml Johnson, S., & Birkeland, S. (2003). Pursuing a se nse of success: New teachers explain their career decisions. American Educational Research Journal 40 581-617. Johnson, S., Birkeland, S., & Peske, H. (2005). Life in the fast track: How states seek to balance incentives and quality in alternat ive teacher certification programs. Educational Policy, 19(1), 63-89. Johnson, S., Birkeland, S., Peske, H., & Munger, M. (2005). A difficult balance: Incentives and quality control in alternative certification programs. Project on the Next Generation of Teachers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education. Littrell, P., & Billingsley, B. (1994). The eff ects of principal support on special and general educators stress, job satisf action, school commitment, health, and intent to stay in teaching. Remedial & Special Education, 15, 297-311. MacNab, D., & Payne, F. (2003). Beliefs, attit udes and practices in mathematics teaching: Perceptions of Scottish primary school student teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching, 29 (1), 55-68. Nauta, A., & Kluwer, E. (2004). The use of questionnaires in conflict research. International Negotiation, 9, 457-470 NCES. (1998). Fast response survey system: T eacher survey on professional development and training. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education. NCES. (2000). Executive summary, teacher prepara tion and professional development: 2000 (FRSS Publication No. 2001088). Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education. Norusis, M. J. (1994). SPSS advanced statistics 6.1 Chicago: SPSS. Pajares, M. (1992). Teachers be liefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62 307-332. Ponticell, J., & Zepeda, S. (1997) First-year teachers at risk: A study of induction at three high schools. High School Journal, 81(1), 8-22. Saunders, S., & Pettinger, K. (1995). Prospectiv e mentors views on part nership in secondary teacher training. British Educational Research Journal, 21, 199-219. Shaughnessy, J., Zechmeister, E., & Zechmeister, J. (2000). Research methods in psychology Boston: McGraw Hill. 138

PAGE 139

Singh, K., & Billingsley, B. (1998). Professional support and its effects on teachers commitment. Journal of Educational Research 91 229-240. Southeast Center for Teaching Quality (SCTQ). (2003, April). Teaching Quality Research Matters, Issue 4. Spindler, J., & Biott, C. (2000). Target setti ng in the induction of ne wly qualified teachers: Emerging colleagueship in a context of performance management. Educational Research, 42, 275-286. Stansbury, K. (2001). What new teachers need. Leadership 30(3), 18-21. Tell, C. (May, 2001). Making room for alternative routes. Educational Leadership 58 (8), 38-44. Tetzeli, R. (1993). Whos afra id of a teacher shortage? Fortune, 127(5), 10-11. Torff, B., & Sessions, D. (2005). Pr incipals perceptions of the causes of teacher ineffectiveness. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97 530-537. Tuckman, B. (1999). Conducting Educational Research (5th ed.) Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group. Urzua, A. (1999). The socializati on process of beginning teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 50 231-233. Young, B. (2003). Public school student, staff, and graduate counts by state, school year 200102 (NCES 2003-358). Washington D. C.: National Center for Edu cational Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. Zepeda, S., & Ponticell, J. (1998). At cross-purp oses: What do teachers need, want, and get from supervision? Journal of Curriculum & Supervision 14(1), 68-88. 139

PAGE 140

140BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH James Vincent Russo was born in 1974 in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, to Kathy and Jim Russo. James has one older sister, Jeanmarie, a nd grew up in Fort Lauderdale, graduating from Taravella High School in 1992. He earned a B.A. in psychology from the University of Central Florida in 1996, an M.A. in elem entary education from the Univer sity of Central Florida in 1999, and an Ed.S. in educational leadership from the University of Florida in 2002. Upon graduation in December of 1999 with hi s M.A. in elementary education, James was hired by Seminole County Public Schools (SCPS) as a teacher. During his tenure with SCPS, James assumed the role as a primary and intermediate teacher, administrative middle school dean, and assistant principal. James has been an elementary school assistant principal with SCPS for the past 3 years. After completing his Ed.D. program, James plan s to continue to work for SCPS as an assistant principal. James has been married to Le sley Russo for seven years. They have one son: Parker, age 11 months.