A r c h i v e d I n f o r m a t i o n

From Students of Teaching to Teachers of Students: Teacher Induction Around the Pacific Rim - January 1997

Chapter 2 (continued)

Teacher Induction Policy and Practice Among APEC Members: Results of the Exploratory Survey

Maria Stephens and Jay Moskowitz

New Zealand

New Zealand has a well-established system of teacher induction. All schools in New Zealand are required to provide advice and guidance to beginning teachers. However, these programs of teacher induction are locally developed and may vary in intensity from location to location and from individual to individual.

Upon graduation from teacher training, teachers are provisionally licensed by the national Teacher Registration Board (TRB). The TRB strongly urges that, during a two-year period, schools and early childhood centers provide and teachers participate in a program of advice and guidance. Teachers also must comply with additional criteria specified by the TRB and teach the full two years, at which time provisional registration may be converted to full registration.

Basic Features

The TRB publishes a booklet, entitled Advice and Guidance Programmes for Teachers (1994), which offers examples of successful induction programs in place around New Zealand. The TRB further specifies the necessary attributes for an acceptable Advice and Guidance Program. In short, the school and early childhood center must provide new teachers with:

Resource and personal support from colleagues working in the same curriculum area, school, or center;
Classroom visits and written lesson appraisals on progress toward meeting the criteria for registration;
An opportunity to visit and observe other teachers;
An opportunity to meet with senior staff and other teachers to clarify the wider aspects of the beginning teacher's work and responsibilities, including professional development; and
A written record of the program, containing the advice and guidance received and the extent of participation in planning the corporate life of the school or center.

Because these guidelines are broad and because programs are implemented on a school-to-school, person-to-person basis, programs vary, although overall patterns are similar.

In all programs, new teachers are assigned an experienced tutor who then serves as a mentor. During the two-year period, the new teacher and tutor teacher meet, regularly at first and then tapering as time progresses, to review and document the new teacher's progress and to set new goals for their program of advice and guidance. The principal receives the reports compiled by the new and tutor teachers, through which he or she monitors the new teacher's achievement of the registration criteria.

The close involvement of new teachers with their tutor teachers is the main activity of teacher induction. However, new teachers receive further support and training during their induction period. Generally, new teachers in schools, though not in early childhood centers, carry a lighter teaching load with smaller, carefully selected classes and reduced time. They are expected to spend 80 percent of their time (the equivalent of four days per week) on full-time teaching responsibilities and 20 percent of their time (the equivalent of one day per week) on induction activities--although schools vary in the extent to which they "formally" use the induction hours. The induction time may be spent in or out of school for activities such as in-services, lectures, or classroom observations (at the teacher's own or other schools). Programs provide release-time for when induction activities take new teachers away from the classroom. In some cases, tutor teachers may also receive release-time for their supervisory role.

Financing

The member government funds teacher induction--new teacher salaries, the "point 2" release-time for induction, and support services. The support services are provided by teacher support centers at the teacher training institutions, which receive funding, as above, from the Ministry of Education and also offer special programs for boards of trustees and supervising teachers who may be involved in teacher induction activities in their school.

Evaluation

Those new and tutor teachers in the advice and guidance programs who have participated in formal evaluations support the program and state that it meets their needs. The TRB is currently conducting a member-wide survey of all Year 1 and Year 2 teachers to determine the quality of induction programs. The results of this should be available by mid-1996. Also, the Advisory Service collects both qualitative and quantitative data for quarterly reports to the Ministry of Education. Furthermore, individual schools review their own programs, and may amend or adapt them as necessary. The TRB is at present negotiating with the Education Review Office for that agency to provide information to the Teacher Registration Board on the quality of programs being delivered in individual schools. This and the results of the member-level survey may result in changes to the guidelines set down by the TRB.

Papua New Guinea

In Papua New Guinea, there are both formal and informal structures that help new teachers to adapt to the school and classroom environment during the first few years of teaching. The main structure is the Inspection Program, the member-run system that licenses teachers. Other induction activities vary among schools but may include various in-services, consultations, and visitations. Teacher induction programs are implemented in Papua New Guinea for several reasons: to increase the supply of teachers at a particular level; to increase the retention rate of teachers by reducing their first-year frustrations and displaying the incentives of teaching; and to open avenues for professional development.

Basic Features

Beginning teachers are inducted and evaluated in a variety of ways during the first year of teaching. First, the beginning teacher works under a subject master, who monitors the new teacher's progress by reviewing lesson plans, observing the classroom, and offering general assistance in the areas of planning, curriculum content, teaching strategies, and professional conduct. These senior teaching masters who serve as mentors help determine the needs of the particular new teacher, and, therefore, they adapt their advice, emphasis, and monitoring to the teacher's requirements. Second, the beginning teacher works in association with senior teachers and staff in extracurricular activities, such as sports and special events. Third, the beginning teacher attends in-service training at the school, department, and provincial levels. There also is a member-level "Provincial In-Service Week," during which schools and provincial-level education authorities offer special classes for new teachers.

These induction activities are closely linked to the inspection system. All new teachers must participate in induction activities to: (1) be inducted into their new areas of responsibility and (2) meet the requirements of the inspection system. As the year progresses, senior staff and mentors compile an inspection report based on their interaction with and observation of the new teacher. The Inspector (a national figure) also observes the new teacher and writes a report recommending the teacher for full registration into the teaching force. The induction period is terminated when, at the end of the first year of teaching, the individual is fully registered--although regular professional development continues to take place.

Induction activities occur mostly after school hours and during term breaks. Beginning teachers do not receive release-time or lighter workloads for induction activities. However, the senior staff involved in induction receive several benefits or incentives: training for involvement in the inspection system and points toward promotion and consequent salary increase.

In Papua New Guinea, the National Department of Education funds teachers' salaries and also finances the inspection program. Schools and provinces, however, bear the costs of the induction activities.

Future Directions in Teacher Induction

Teacher induction is viewed as successful for its purposes. Teachers become licensed and secure permanent employment, senior teachers earn promotions, and the supply of in-demand high school teachers increases. However, administrators and policy makers in Papua New Guinea are exploring ways to expand their teacher induction program. One reform under consideration is increasing the involvement of the National Department of Education in funding, selecting, and directing a "master teacher" program. Other reforms include up-grading teacher levels, introducing induction to all levels of teachers, and generally improving the effectiveness of those already being served.

Singapore

The Ministry of Education (MOE) in Singapore requires that all schools plan for the arrival of new teachers. The purpose is to welcome new staff to the school, make the new teachers feel like members of the school community, introduce new teachers to the school environment, and build new teachers' confidence. In the Principal's Handbook, issued by the MOE as a manual of recommended practices, school principals are responsible for planning teacher induction activities. They also are expected to provide for adequate briefings, for access to relevant documents, for meetings with key personnel, and for provision of professional guidance by staff.

Basic Features

Though all schools are required to provide teacher induction, schools vary in the degree to which they fulfill that requirement. Most schools provide a half day for orientation, which may include briefings by senior teachers on student profile and curriculum and question-and-answer sessions.

Many schools follow this session with other induction activities such as mentoring, distribution of handbooks, and observations. Recently, the Ministry of Education formalized the mentoring arrangement by requiring that beginning teachers have mentors during their first year (a period of probation). Reporting officers should preferably be the mentors, although the principal may assign an experienced teacher or department head to serve as an assistant mentor. Mentors are required to meet with new teachers at least once in the first three months to find out how the teacher is coping with teaching and other assigned duties, to give feedback on performance, and to give guidance and advice accordingly. They may also share lesson plans and materials, though no observation of model classrooms or team teaching is done.

Also, nearly all schools provide new teachers with detailed handbooks containing information on the school's history and mission, the history of student performance, the curricular options, the administrative structure, and school rules. Finally, principals review the performance of new teachers during formal and informal observations. If teachers are deemed lacking in pedagogical skills, then the principal may provide feedback and guidance.

The informality of some aspects of the induction system may be attributed to the fact that, in Singapore, new teachers are viewed as capable, fully salaried teachers who have completed a rigorous and practical teacher education program. Their responsibilities are the same as their more experienced colleagues (although sometimes they are not given examination classes).

Financing

Schools fund any induction activities undertaken, with no outside supports. Because teacher induction directly benefits the individual and the school where he or she teaches by easing the transition and increasing effectiveness or productivity, schools accept the responsibility of financing and implementing induction programs for their staff.

Chinese Taipei

Teacher induction and many other aspects of education and other domestic policy, are in transition as a result of the changing political situation in Chinese Taipei. Following the lifting of Martial Law in 1987, the nation has undergone deregulation and reform. One of these reforms is the 1994 Teacher Training Act, which restructured teacher preparation and professional development. There are implications in the new law for many features of the teacher induction program as well as the general climate in which it exists. Formally, teacher education was a five-year program, for which the government paid, and teacher induction was a mandated, full-time internship preceding graduation. Now, teacher education is a four-year program with a one-year internship following graduation. From now on, most students will fund their preservice education, with free teacher education limited to certain subject areas in which there are teacher shortages and to geographic areas where teachers are difficult to recruit. The reformed teacher induction system intends to emphasize devolving control to the localities, increasing assistance to and assessment of teachers, and establishing member-wide licensing systems.

Basic Features

Teacher induction in Chinese Taipei consists of a teaching practicum and an internship. The teaching practicum takes place during the conventional four years of pre-service education. Following pre-service education, students are then placed in schools for internships (discussed in further detail below). Formerly, the Taipei government was responsible for placing teachers; now, control of this aspect of the internship is shifting to universities. In order for the internship to function well, students must be placed in schools with good reputations, enough qualified teachers, and geographic proximity to teacher training institutions. When the internship is completed, those students who received a government-funded education are required to serve four additional years in the school. Whereas those who paid for their own education find teaching jobs by themselves.

Formerly, all fifth-year teaching students were required to participate in the internship as a prerequisite to graduation. The interns assumed the same workload and schedule as experienced teachers. Now, students who complete preservice education and intend to become teachers are required to take part in the internship after graduation and prior to licensing. Moreover, the interns assume, at most, half of the teaching load as qualified teachers and spend the rest of their time participating in workshops and observing experienced teachers. The assistance and support in place during the internship year is threefold: workshops by the local government, involvement of university professors, and guidance of other school teachers. Each will be considered in turn.

Workshops. Before beginning the internship, inductees participate in workshops sponsored by the local government. The general purpose of the workshops is to introduce interns to the local education system, to clarify the rights and obligations of teaching, and to explain school policy.

Professors. University professors are expected to guide interns in a variety of ways: over the phone, through the mail, face-to-face, and in seminars. As a result of the reforms, the number of students professors oversee decreased from 40 or 50 to 25. The main purpose of this interaction is for the professor to see how the intern is adjusting, to provide assistance where needed, and to evaluate performance. University professors who assist with the induction of secondary school teachers receive lighter university loads in exchange for their commitment to the interns.

School Guidance Teachers. School guidance teachers are the on-site personnel designated to provide moral support and day-to-day guidance. They are especially qualified to provide advice on curriculum design, teaching methods, school policies, student work and management, and administrative tasks. Like the university professor, the guidance teacher also assesses the intern. School guidance teachers who assist secondary teachers used to receive a stipend for their participation. Now, the issue of providing stipends is still under discussion. Previously, university professors and school guidance teachers were mainly evaluators. However, they currently are expected to play a role as supporters and guides as well as evaluators. A more detailed description of the challenges and solutions to developing an effective internship programs follows.

Future Directions in Teacher Induction

Reforms in teacher induction are attempting to remedy the image that teacher induction in Chinese Taipei is a program in name only. Educational administrators and policy makers have identified five challenges and solutions to the transitioning teacher induction program, many of which are being currently implemented. Three of these are sampled below:

The assistance provided by university professors and school guidance teachers was not sufficient to meet the needs of inductees. Because interns worked independently the entire day, and because professors were geographically inaccessible and guidance teachers were often busy, the interns often relied on "trial-and-error" to solve their difficulties with classroom management, student guidance, and selection of teaching method. Reforms will include reducing the ratio of professors to students and establishing a one-to-one mentor relationship.
The internship did not currently screen candidates as effectively as expected. The intern failure rate was extremely low, despite the stated screening purpose. Administrators believe that this was because of the need to fill vacant positions and the lack of local discretion in hiring teachers. Reforms include a localization of control. "Without government involvement, universities and schools are expected to have freedom to screen out incompetent teachers."
There was alienation between the universities and schools. Because there were no incentives for universities to participate in induction and there were inherent geographic difficulties of connecting universities to schools where students were placed, there were few close ties of these two important institutions. Recent reforms dictate that teacher training institutes and localities take responsibility for the placement of students in internships. The reforms are intended to foster the geographic and practical ties of schools and universities and to encourage the exchange of services between institutions.

United States

There are no member-level standards for teacher induction in the United States. Teacher induction--and all aspects of education--are the constitutional responsibility of the individual states. This responsibility is often is even further devolved to the school district (or local) level. With approximately 15,000 districts in 50 states and the District of Columbia, U.S. teacher induction programs vary widely in both intensity and content.

Systematic teacher induction programs began in the United States in 1980, when Florida mandated induction programs for all its beginner teachers. Throughout that decade and into the 1990s, the number of states implementing teacher induction policies and practices has increased rapidly. Currently, 21 states have teacher induction programs, with an additional 5 states piloting or planning programs. Individual districts in the remaining states may implement their own teacher induction programs, as well.

The rise of teacher induction programs in the United States may be attributed to several factors. First, many teachers experience "reality shock" or "burn-out" during their first years of teaching. Some of the reasons that it is especially difficult for beginning teachers to transition successfully into their new careers are: the lack of interaction among practitioners during the actual workday (i.e., teachers are isolated in their classrooms), the competing professional demands placed upon practitioners from the outset, and the dearth of practical training during preservice education. Second, the first few years of teaching are seen as a time critical for developing one's teaching style and one in which, if left to "sink or swim," teachers are especially likely to leave their new profession. Attrition rates among new teachers are often five times higher than those of more experienced teachers. This, coupled with fear of teacher shortages, makes attracting and retaining new teachers especially important. Teacher induction programs are increasingly seen as a way to provide new teachers with support necessary to ease their transition, help them develop professionally, and retain them in the profession.

The main purpose of teacher induction in the United States is to help ease the transition from "student of teaching" to teacher. Other objectives include:

Improving teacher performance;
Increasing the retention of teachers;
Promoting the personal and professional well-being of beginning teachers and reinforcing positive attitudes toward themselves and their new profession;
Satisfying mandated requirements related to teacher induction and certification; and
Transmitting the culture of the educational system to beginning teachers.

Basic Features

The practice of teacher induction varies widely in the United States. Generally, states that require teacher induction programs issue a provisional license valid from one to three years, under the condition that the individual will go through a beginner teacher program before qualifying for full certification or continued employment.

Teacher induction programs in the United States are undergirded by one or both of the following principles: assist and assess. Assistance describes guidance, feedback, and emotional or professional support provided to new teachers. Assessment is the monitoring and evaluation of beginning teachers against certain criteria, the achievement of which are necessary for licensure.

Teacher induction in the United States traditionally has focused most heavily on assessment; and assistance where it exists is strongly linked to aiding new teachers to achieve the assessment criteria. For instance, both Florida and Connecticut have teacher induction programs that require new teachers to meet with mentor teachers who help them prepare for observations by administrators and achieve the state criteria for certification. Experts criticize these models--assessment and assistance for assessment--because they discourage "reflective, context-specific" teaching and seldom address teacher-initiated professional development issues.

In more recent years, however, several states have developed induction programs with an assistance component only. Michigan, Maine, and New York have implemented programs that require a personally developed professional growth plan, attendance in 15 days of in-service training, and participation in a mentor relationship, respectively. A few other states have implemented programs that have both the assist and assess components, with the assistance provided for its own sake and the assessment conducted for the teachers' own information rather than for licensure.

States employ varied strategies to accomplish their goals. Some of the most common strategies include: observing exemplary teaching practices; participating in in-service training; attending summer training; and attending certification programs conducted through collaboration of school districts and universities. The most commonly used strategy, which is in place in nearly all existing teacher induction programs, is mentoring.

In most states with induction programs, new teachers are matched with a more experienced teacher whose role it may be to: discuss school policy, curriculum, and discipline; evaluate and monitor the new teacher's progress; or allow the new teacher to observe his or her classroom. The dominant characteristic of all mentoring is assisting new teachers to understand the culture of their school, in addition to preparing new teachers for the assessment process.

Some states require that mentors have a minimum level of experience; other states reward mentors with a small stipend. Generally, however, the teachers who serve as mentors volunteer and receive no extra rewards. Several states (California, Connecticut, and Florida, for example) require that mentors be provided training for their roles as support providers or assessors.

Participation

It is difficult to gauge the overall participation in teacher induction. Roughly half the states have no direct involvement in teacher induction programs, and for those states that do have direct involvement, five are in the pilot or planning phase and at least two have not yet implemented their programs for all teachers. Thus, it is likely that less than 50 percent of all new teachers in the United States participate in teacher induction programs that are more than a brief school orientation.

Financing

Data are similarly sparse on the financing of teacher induction programs. A key variable in the method of funding is whether or not the program is mandated. Several states with mandated programs provide state money to the districts for program implementation, with districts supplying the rest. For instance, Indiana provides $600 of state money for each new teacher-mentor team, and the school districts supply up to $400 more for other induction activities. Voluntary teacher induction programs are often funded by state grants or by individual school districts. In Minnesota, districts currently apply to the state for a funding grant--which they must match--to implement a state-recommended induction program. In general, statewide teacher induction programs do not exceed the cost of $1,000 per inductee. Programs that are implemented on a smaller scale may cost $4,000 to $6,000 per inductee.

The costs of teacher induction are mainly the compensation provided to mentors or administrators participating in the program. Another main cost is relief-time for new teachers and mentor teachers to participate in in-service and other professional development activities.

Future Directions in Teacher Induction

There have been few evaluations of teacher induction programs in the United States. The evaluations that have been conducted generally are confined to privately conducted studies of individual programs. For instance, one of the few studies that has been conducted concluded that a successful teacher induction program emphasized structure, careful selection of mentor teachers, and assistance, rather than the assessment of new teachers. This conclusion has important implications for U.S. programs that currently are assessment-focused.

It is difficult to discuss future plans as the system is decentralized and state programs vary widely. However, in general, in education, there is growing attention to the issue of the "professionalization of teaching" and to the idea of the school-university partnership, which aims at improving pre-service teacher training, new teacher induction, and in-service teacher education. One type of partnership receiving attention is Professional Development Schools, ". . . analogous to teaching hospitals, in which expert teachers join with university faculty to provide a structured internship for new teachers . . . ." This idea was originally proposed in the mid-1980s by the Carnegie Task Force and the Holmes Group. Although there is wide support for such schools, progress in this arena is slow.

References

Darling-Hammond, Linda, and Cobb, Velma L. (1995).: Teacher Preparation and Professional Development in APEC Members, A Comparative Study. Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Education Forum and the U.S. Department of Education.

Australia

Department of Employment, Education, and Training (1995).: Exploratory Survey of APEC Members on Teacher Induction: Teacher Induction in Australian Schools. Canberra, Australian Capitol Territory, Australia.

Brunei Darussalam

Ministry of Education, (1995).: Responses to the Exploratory Survey of APEC Members on Teacher Induction. Bandar Seri Begawan, Negra Brunei Darussalam.

Canada

Burghardt, Fred (1995 May).: Personal communication, Comparative Study of Teacher Training and Professional Development, APEC Education Forum. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Direction générale de la formation et des qualifications (1992).: Teacher Probation, The Probation System and a Procedural Guide. Québec, Canada: Ministry of Education.

Chinese Taipei

Fwu, Bih-jen (1995).: Chinese Taipei's Teacher Induction Programs. Taipei, Taiwan.

Indonesia

Office of Educational and Cultural Research and Development (1995).: Responses on the Exploratory Survey Concerning Teacher Induction. Senayan, Jakarta, Indonesia: Ministry of Education and Culture.

Japan

Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, and Culture (1995).: Induction Training for Beginning Teachers. Tokyo, Japan.

Republic of Korea

International Education and Cooperation Division (1995).: Responses to the Exploratory Survey of APEC Members on Teacher Induction. Seoul, Korea: Ministry of Education.

New Zealand

Philips, David (1995).: Responses to the Exploratory Survey of APEC Members on Teacher Induction: New Zealand. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning and Evaluation Policy, Ministry of Education.

Papua New Guinea

National Commission for UNESCO (1995).: Responses to the Exploratory Survey Of APEC Members on Teacher Induction. Waigani, Papua New Guinea: Department of Education.
Staff Development and Training Division (1995).: Responses to the Exploratory Survey Of APEC Members on Teacher Induction. Waigani, Papua New Guinea: Department of Education.

Singapore

Gopinathan, S. (1995).: Teacher Induction in Singapore: An Exploratory Account. Singapore: Nanyang Technological University, National Institute of Education.

United States

Grinder, Elisabeth, and Gordon, Pamela (1995).: Current Teacher Induction Practices in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Pelavin Research Institute for the U.S. Department of Education.

-###-

[Chapter 2 (part 2 of 3)]

[Chapter 3: Strangers in Their Own Country]