Why is a teachers first year in the classroom important?

An ineffective teacher impacts student achievement in ways that are lifechanging. Initial Findings from the Measures of Effective Teaching Project (2010) states, For four decades, educational researchers have confirmed what many parents know: childrens academic progress heavily depends on the talent and skill of the teacher leading their classroom. Considering that teachers are often assigned to students through a random process, the following observation is particularly disconcerting: Students who have several effective teachers in a row make dramatic achievement gains, while those who have even two ineffective teachers in a row lose significant ground. A student who is taught by an ineffective teacher for two years in a row can never recover the learning lost during those years. (Wong, 2009). The purpose of this study is to support new teachers as learners when they begin their professional journey. How do experienced teachers reach out to new teachers in ways that will embrace them as members of the collegial club of educators? After all, teachers are teachers first, and when a new teacher joins that club, master educators must step into their role as mentors. My role as a professional development specialist is to assist principals in assigning master educators to mentor each new teacher. Potential mentors who are able to provide the best support for a new teacher are those who teach the same grade level and content area, and whose classrooms are close in proximity (Brewster & Railback, 2001). Mentoring, as defined by Jonson is the professional practice that provides support, assistance, and guidance to beginning teachers to promote their professional

growth and success (2002, p. vii). District mentors must be able to assist new teachers in their transition to the profession. They should be instructional leaders who are strong in the areas of instruction, best practice, curriculum, and class management. They should also have an understanding of building and district cultures. In my role as a professional development specialist, my charge is to supervise a mentor program that has been in existence for 15 years. This program will soon be under review. To identify the driving factors for how the existing program might be improved and strengthened, I pose the guiding question: How do first year teachers describe the support they received from their mentors? The challenges new teachers face include pedagogical knowledge and skills, classroom management, and content knowledge. Auxiliary questions will be posed to elucidate the initial responses from the new teachers. Questions will also be submitted to the mentors. These questions will cover the following issues: How do new teachers describe the first year in the classroom? How does an experienced mentor describe relationships with new teachers? How does an experienced mentor describe relationships with students? What commonalities are discovered in the last two questions? What differences emerge as mentors and new teachers describe their experiences? An effective mentor program would establish a strong relationship between the mentor and mentee that would last for many years. As a new teacher gains experience and builds relationships with instructional leaders, they will be inspired to give back to

the profession by serving as a mentor in the future. According to Wong (2005, June), the two factors that have the greatest influence on student achievement, are the teachers knowledge of the content area and their understanding of the most effective way to deliver that information. Training a new teacher to become highly effective requires an investment of four to six years. New teachers need support not only for their professional survival, but also to teach them how to thrive as instructional leaders. Why qualitative research? To better understand the work of mentors and how mentors interact with new teachers, a qualitative approach will provide the most comprehensive explanation of how these dyads (mentors and new teachers) work together. Because qualitative observation is richly descriptive (Merriam, 2009 p. 16), a picture of the successful mentor model will emerge through observations of dyads working together, using interviews with mentors and new teachers, and new teacher reflections. research focused on discovery, insight, and understanding from the perspectives of those being studied offers the greatest promise of making a difference in peoples lives (Merriam, 2009, p. 1). Through this program improvement initiative, we can better serve new teachers as they make the transition to the classroom by providing them continuous professional development that fosters a culture of life-long learning as they travel along their professional journey. This case study is designed to take a particular case and to come to know it well, not primarily as to how it is different from others but what it is, what it does (Stake, 1995, p. 8). The present mentor program has not been evaluated since 2000. In program evaluation, the most common model is to organize around a program goal statement. The

formulation of a goal statement will move research away from puzzlement toward understanding and explanation (Stake, 2009, p. 16). A qualitative approach is most appropriate for this research because the nuances of these experiences would be difficult, if not impossible to capture through qualitative methods. Through careful observation, narratives, and interaction with new teachers and their mentors I intend to gain a better understanding of the role of the mentor and how it impacts the growth of the new teacher as a professional. This understanding will come through descriptions of new teacher and mentor experiences. Statistical methods involving predicting the outcome, controlling one of the groups, and testing a hypothesis is not appropriate in this inquiry. The design of this study is also emergent in nature. Making sense of the experiences that are shared with me will evolve as I work with a small sample, purposefully chosen to illuminate the dynamics of each dyad. As the researcher, I am the primary instrument (Merriam, 2009) as I will look across a variety of data in search of patterns as instruments of measure rather than scales or tests. I expect the narrative to be a rich description rather than a numerical representation (Merriam, 2009, p.18). The process I am adapting is modified from the grounded theory approach (Glaser &Straus 1967). In searching for patterns in the information I collect, I will return to my research questions. The answers to those research questions will allow me to identify categories or themes that will eventually be described in the findings of the study. Any bit of information I glean, that I find interesting, or that describes the phenomena about which I am inquiring will become a category and theme of interest. I do not expect to know what those themes might be in the beginning of my inquiry. The categories and

themes will eventually be identified as units. Each unit could be as small as one word or as large as the field notes taken that describe an incident that occurred during an observation. Units consist of two parts, according to Lincoln and Guba (1985). The unit must be heuristic, and reveal information relevant to the study and stimulate the reader to think beyond the particular bit of information. The unit should be the smallest piece of information about something that can stand by itselfthat is, it must be interpretable in the absence of any additional information other than a broad understanding of the context in which the inquiry is carried out (p. 345). As I compare the units I have established I expect to assign more detail to each unit by creating subcategories as I look for reoccurring regularities in the information. Making notations next to the narrative as it appears in the text of the transcripted interviews and field notes will be the first step in the coding process. This is often referred to as open coding (Merriam, 2009). Constructing coding categories by being open to anything and everything the data tells me is how I will start the open coding process. The next step will require the grouping of comments and notes I have taken that seem to work well together with the goal of finding patterns that emerge across all of the information collected.

What is your case? This is a case of first year teachers and the mentors who have been assigned to them by their building principals. This is a case of new teachers and how they describe their experiences and relationships during the first year of teaching. This qualitative case study is a particularistic (Merriam, 2009), in-depth description and analysis of new

teachers and their mentors. It is time bound to the 2013-2014 school year, starting with a pre-service, four-day, paid professional development opportunity and will come to a close at the end of the school year. This case study is multisite, as it will be conducted in elementary schools, middle schools, and high schools across the district. It is a multicase, case study as it will include a dyad (new teacher and mentor) from each building (Merriam, 2009). Participants Participants will include five new teacher and mentor pairs (dyads) at each level: elementary, middle school and high school. The fifteen dyads I have chosen are a unique, purposeful sample of convenience (Merriam, 2009, p.78-79) because I serve new teachers in the district and supervise the mentor program. This sample is unique because I have chosen mentors I have worked with and built relationships with over five years. These teachers are comfortable sharing the weaknesses and strengths of the program. One dyad at each level includes a mentor who does not follow the mentor program protocol but seems to build strong relationships with new teachers and have previously provided me with rich narratives (Merriam, 2009) from the new teachers about their experiences over the first year. This is a sample of convenience because they are easy for me to access due to my supervision of the program. Recruiting I have supervised the mentor program for six years. During this time I actively recruited mentors to serve new teachers. Previously trained mentors were not interested in formally mentoring new teachers due to pejorative training sessions and copious documentation required to earn a small stipend. By holding face-to-face meetings and

supporting master teachers in their efforts with new teachers I have built strong relationships and, as a result of those relationships, the mentor pool has doubled. At the beginning of each school year I will visit all buildings with new teacher/mentor dyads to explain the program. Previous to my tenure, mentors met with the supervisor at each of the high schools with nearby elementary and middle level mentors commuting to the meeting. Because there were only six meetings, each meeting consisted of approximately 60-70 mentors. The meetings were held in auditoriums and were impersonal. By meeting in individual buildings, before or after school and during teacher planning times with a small number of dyads at one time, I am able to have a more focused, relationship-building conversation with each dyad. That will offer time for questions from the dyads and deeper explanations of the program and the support available from me for new teachers.. It is at this initial meeting I will give each dyad consent forms to participate in the study. Blanketing all dyads will ensure proper documentation for all new teachers and mentors during the 2012-2013 school year since I will be surveying all new teachers, not just the dyads I am investigating. I have chosen to examine K-12 dyads to see how the work is similar and how it is different depending on the ages of the students and the effectiveness of the teachers at those grade levels. The preliminary expectation is that the work of an elementary dyad will look much different than the secondary dyad based on professional development attendance trends. Research Site The research site is located in the plains states within a large, growing district serving between 30,000 and 40,000 students. District statistics in the areas of poverty

(43%), ELL (7%), special education (15%), and mobility (6%) are higher than those at the state level. Annual yearly progress reports posit it is a district in need of improvement. The district has more than fifty sites K-12, with approximately 2,400 teachers. Each year the district hires between 200-300 teachers. This study will take place in the classrooms of new teachers and their mentors classrooms in K-12 buildings across the district. Data Collection Because I serve as the professional development specialist assigned to new teachers and mentors, I have access to this group of participants as a function of my responsibilities. A letter of approval from my institution and an Institutional Review Board (IRB) will be obtained in the summer of 2013 prior to the new teacher orientation. Information will be collected in three ways: Field notes and observations of dyads working together on site; face-to-face interviews with individual participants and dyads during critical times of the first year teacher cycle (Moir, 1999); reflections from new teachers.

As a participant observer (Schwandt, 1997) I will take field notes when meeting with the dyads and investigating their work together. The observations and interviews will occur in August, October, December, February, April. and June to follow the Phases of the First Year Teacher (Moir, 1999) for a total of six times. Reflections and attitudinal surveys will occur three times during the year: August, December, and June. These meetings will take place in classrooms where I will have an opportunity to explore how new teacher classrooms are set up, how and why they were set up that way, and who was instrumental in helping the new teacher with that task. Data will be constructed (Schwandt, 1997) from buildings determined by teaching assignments of the new teachers with an ideal total of fifteen dyads. Face-to-face interviews with individual participants and dyads will be held in teacher classrooms, conference rooms, and administrator offices. I have chosen field notes/observations, interviews, reflections, and narrative surveys to provide enough information to search for patterns (Yin, 2009, p.136) and to ensure I have multiples sources of evidence (Yin, 2009, p. 114) as a way to build an explanation regarding what happens when new teachers and mentors work together (Yin, 2009, p. 141). My Role As Researcher As the supervisor of the mentor program, I will be wearing a number of different hats depending upon the task of the day. I am a researcher as evaluator, paying close attention to the cases merits and short comings (Stake, 1995, p. 105) with the intention of designing a program that strongly supports new teachers and the work of mentors. At

times, this may require me to take the role of the teacher (Stake, 1995) when mentors need support and need assistance in supporting new teachers. It is important for me to mention my experience as a mentor to new teachers in the district 15 years ago, as it is one of the reasons I am evaluating the program. As a mentor I was not pleased with the program but participated because I felt a strong need to give back to the profession. At that time mentors were required to attend training sessions. Mentors were not treated as professionals. The implementation of the program required a burdensome amount of paperwork documenting each contact with the new teacher. More time was spent documenting what was accomplished during the times new teachers and mentors worked together than the actual time spent together. Neither mentor nor new teacher respected or understood the intent of the paperwork. Many changes have been made in the past ten years. Data Analysis It is my intent to adapt a constructivist approach to grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) in the effort to explain and understand the experiences of new teachers and their mentors as they spend (Charmaz, 1994) the first year in the classroom together. I have a hunch that the work of the dyads at elementary, middle level, and high schools look very different. Merriam (2009, p. 169) describes qualitative data analysis as, Hunches, working hypotheses, and educated guesses direct the investigators attention to certain data and then to refining or verifying the hunches. Pseudonyms will be chosen by each participant during the first meeting. Face-toface, semi-structured interviews (Merriam, 2009, p. 89) will be conducted with mentors and new teachers individually, as well as in dyads. Following the Phases of the First

Year Teacher (Moir, 1999) teaching cycle will serve as another source of information. I am following the Phases of the First Year Teacher because I have a hunch (Merriam, 2009) that the challenges and successes of new teachers will follow that pattern. I will begin analyzing the data by reading the transcript of the interview. The second reading of the transcript will include notes in the margins of emerging themes. Those themes will be openly coded (Merriam, 2009) because at this level of coding I am looking for anything and everything that relates to my research questions. Codes will be four to six word phrases of interest to my research questions or that might be useful (Merriam, 2009, p. 178). These codes will assist me in constructing categories for grouping themes and subthemes. In a separate document I will group categories, and expect the lists to be quite long in the beginning since I will need to refine them. The next set of data will be analyzed in the same way. Field notes and observations of dyads working together is where I will begin searching for common emerging patterns in new teacher and mentor experiences (Merriam, 2009). Field notes will be organized in a spreadsheet that includes a physical description of the observation location description, quotes and events that occur during the observation and my thoughts as I observed. These three areas combined will provide the information needed to look for patterns and eventually provide a rich, detailed narrative. For each observation I will be sure to secure time to reflect and capture the observation immediately following the observation in the margins of my field notes to better understand the phenomena (Merriam, 2009). The information from the interviews and field notes will eventually be compared with the interviews. These two lists will merge into one master list of data derived form both lists (Merriam, 2009, p. 180).

New teacher reflections as part of the requirements for the mentor program will be coded in the same manner as the interview field notes and observations and follow the same process of categorization and analyses. Validation Knowing that people tend to present what they think you want to hear (Swidler, 2012), interviews individually and as dyads will be cross-analyzed. Face-to-face interviews in dyads and as individuals, field notes, observations, new teacher reflections, and an attitudinal survey will determine the authenticity of the experiences shared by new teachers and mentors in an effort to triangulate the data (Merriam, 2009, p. 229). I will share all of the data collected with the participants, ensuring I have represented them well as a member check (Merriam). Because I am so close to the information and the members, it is important I check my biases and my personal investment in the study through peer review and examination. Richly descriptive narratives will enable readers to determine if the findings are valid.

References Brewster, Cori & Railsback, Jennifer. (2001). Supporting beginning teachers: How administrators, teachers, and policymakers can help new teachers succeed. Northwest Regional Education Laboratory. Portland, OR. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Glaser, B.G. & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine. Jonson, K. F. (2002). Being an effective mentor. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistc inquiry. CA: Thousand Oaks. Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Moir, E. (2009, October). Accelerating teacher effectiveness: Lessons learned from two decades of new teacher induction. Kappan, 91(2), 15-21. Schwandt, T. A. (2007). The Sage dictionary of qualitative inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Stake, R.E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Thomas, K. J., & Steven, C. (Eds.). (2010, September 15). Learning about teaching: Initial findings from the measures of effective teaching project. Retrieved from Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation website: http://www.gatesfoundation.org/.../preliminary-findingsresearch-paper.pdf Wong, H. K., & Wong, R. T. (2009). How to be an effective teacher: The first days of school. Mountainveiw, CA: Harry K. Wong Publications.

Yin, R.K. (2008). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.