the basic paradigm of one teacher
working alone in a self-contained
classroom. This paradigm assumes that
once new teachers learn the ropes and
gain some confidence, they can function
on their own.
Schaeffer recognized that beginning
teachers are not finished products and
still have much to learn. He also understood that experience alone—especially
private, unreflective experience—does
not automatically produce growth. All
teachers need to learn throughout their
careers; the problem is that schools
are not organized to support teacher
learning.
Conant foreshadows the idea of
comprehensive induction as a bundle
of components, not a brief orientation
or a stand-alone mentoring program
(Ingersoll & Smith, 2004). Schaeffer
foreshadows the idea of induction as
a lever for transforming the culture of
teaching (Fulton, Yoon, & Lee, 2005).
In recent years, both ideas, supported
by a growing body of research, have
gained the attention of education leaders
and policymakers.
Since the mid-1980s, induction and
mentoring programs have become
familiar features on the education landscape. In the early 1990s, 40 percent
of new teachers reported participating
in a formal induction program. By
2007–08, the number of new public
school teachers receiving either mentoring or induction support had more
than doubled, to 89. 4 percent (personal
communication from Thomas Smith on
February 16, 2012, based on an analysis
of 2007–08 data from the Schools and
Staffing Survey).
Despite this dramatic increase in
interest and activity, however, the
quality and frequency of induction
varies considerably. Although there is
compelling evidence that high-quality,
intensive induction increases teacher
retention, and some evidence that it
contributes to improved teaching, only
a small percentage of new teachers
experience such intensive programs
(Kapadia, Coca, & Easton, 2007;
Smith & Finch, 2010). Like the farmer
who said to the agricultural extension
agent, “I don’t farm half as good as I
know how,” we do not implement the
best that we know about high-quality
induction.
Induction’s Evolving Role
The literature on induction and mentoring over the past 50 years reveals
distinct shifts in thinking about what
induction is and what it should do
(see fig. 1, p. 15). Early advocates
endorsed a view of induction as a temporary bridge designed to ease the new
teacher’s entry into teaching. A second
view—prompted by standards-based
reforms, calls for greater professionalism, and a growing understanding of
teacher learning—saw induction as individualized professional development.
And in recent years, education leaders
have advocated a view of induction as
a process of incorporating new teachers
into collaborative professional learning
communities.
Induction as Temporary Support
Providing support to beginning teachers
seems like a humane response to the
stresses of the first year of teaching.
Why should new teachers struggle
alone behind the closed doors of their
classroom when they could get help
from more experienced colleagues? Why
expect new teachers to know everything
and be able to handle it themselves?
(Breaux & Wong, 2003).
Sensible recommendations like those
of James Conant were intended to ease
the transition from student of teaching
to teacher of students. But such protections and supports (giving new teachers
manageable assignments, providing
access to experienced teachers with
time and advice to share, and so on) are
