Novice Teacher Learning Communities: An Alternative to One-on-One Mentoring

ABSTRACT This paper is for district administrators and lead teachers who are eager to support the development of novice teachers. The term novice refers here to teachers in the first two years of their careers-many of whom, the literature tells us, will either leave the profession or migrate to different schools (Ingersoll, 2001). Novice teachers frequently participate in a variety of induction programs, that pair the novice with a mentor teacher. Mentor teachers are often chosen by their district because of their teaching excellence and paid small stipends. Although the novice-- mentor arrangement offers promise, it can be compromised by a variety of factors. The author argues that novice teachers could benefit from belonging to a learning community. Learning communities are groups of teachers voluntarily gathered for the purpose of learning about teaching and learning. Based on a study drawing on observation and interview data, this paper reports on one such novice teacher learning community, STEP+. Participants met for several years. The purpose of this paper is to address the following question: how did novice teachers describe and assess their lengthy experience in a learning community? MENTORING IS A PROBLEMATIC FORM OF INDUCTION Due to increasing enrollments and the simultaneous retirement of veteran teachers from United States schools, it has been estimated that 2 million teachers will be needed in the next decade (Bradley, 1999). However, 30-50% of new teachers can be expected either to quit or move to different schools within five years of entering the field (Ingersoll, 2001). Because the shortage is acute, and the teachers' turnover and migration predictable, many states now provide induction programs. Induction programs aim to support and retain promising novice teachers. The assumption is that if novice teachers are offered support, they will teach better, feel a greater sense of efficacy and self-confidence, and as a result, rates of attrition will decrease (Huling-Austin, 1992). Policy support for induction has increased as research has convincingly portrayed the difficulties that novices experience and the expenses associated with the continual cycle of hiring. Bendixon-Noe and Giebelhaus (1997) reported that 28 states had beginning teacher programs in 1997. California, for instance, allocated $76 million to the Beginning Teacher Support & Assessment Program in 1998-1999. Many induction programs place novice teachers with building or district mentors, sometimes called buddies. In theory, the new teacher has someone to turn to for help. Mentoring programs, however, are uneven and problematic (Little, 1990). Unfortunately, the existence of a mentor program does not guarantee the frequency or quality of the mentor-novice interaction. These haphazard arrangements may or may not be effective. Some mentor teachers have nothing other than the title to support them in their efforts. Successful teaching of children or seniority cannot predict a mentor's skill at working with novice teachers (Feiman-Nemser, 1995). Without adequate resources, institutional support, and deliberate planning, the success of mentoring often rests on mentors' good will, intuition, and commitment (Denbale & Feiman-Nemser, 1995). Mentors could help novices if their schedules were compatible and the mentor had preparation to enact successful mentoring practices. Research suggests that collaborative development of curriculum helps novices learn from mentors (Feiman-Nemser, 1995). In co-planning, novice teachers learn from hearing and seeing how their mentors articulate buried, practical knowledge. Conversely, as they work to develop a unit of instruction, a mentor can learn about new curriculum materials or pedagogy from the novice. Peer observation and subsequent coaching also supports teacher learning and can effect changes in instruction (Showers, Bennett & Joyce, 1987). …