Sei sulla pagina 1di 12

Teaching and Teacher Education 36 (2013) 166e177

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Teaching and Teacher Education


journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tate

How different mentoring approaches affect beginning teachers


development in the rst years of practice
Dirk Richter a, b, *, Mareike Kunter a, c, Oliver Ldtke a, b, Uta Klusmann a, d, Yvonne Anders a, e,
Jrgen Baumert a
a

Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Lentzeallee 94, 14195 Berlin, Germany
Humboldt University Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, Germany
Goethe University Frankfurt, Senckenberganlage 15, 60325 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
d
Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Olshausenstrae 62, 24118 Kiel, Germany
e
Free University Berlin, Habelschwerdter Allee 45, 14195 Berlin, Germany
b
c

h i g h l i g h t s
 Mentoring quality can be described as either constructivist or transmissive.
 Constructs are reliably measured in a study with more than 700 beginning teachers.
 Constructivist mentoring improves teacher efcacy, enthusiasm and job satisfaction.
 Constructivist mentoring also reduces emotional exhaustion.
 Transmissive mentoring barely affects the professional development of teachers in these respects.

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 12 April 2012
Received in revised form
26 April 2013
Accepted 17 July 2013

This study examines the extent to which the quality of mentoring and its frequency during the rst years
of teaching inuence teachers professional competence and well-being. Analyses are based on a sample
of more than 700 German beginning mathematics teachers who participated in a pre-test/post-test study
over the course of one year. Findings indicate that it is the quality of mentoring rather than its frequency
that explains a successful career start. In particular, mentoring that follows constructivist rather than
transmissive principles of learning fosters the growth of teacher efcacy, teaching enthusiasm, and job
satisfaction and reduces emotional exhaustion.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Mentor
Cooperating teacher
Mentor support
Beginning teacher induction
Induction support
Professional development

1. Introduction
The rst years of teaching are frequently described as an especially stressful period in the socialization of beginning teachers
(Fantilli & McDougall, 2009; Gold, 1996; Veenman, 1984). Relative
to their more experienced colleagues, beginning teachers tend to
leave the profession at a higher rate (Ingersoll, 2001; KuklaAcevedo, 2009), report lower teacher efcacy (Wolters &
* Corresponding author. Humboldt University Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099
Berlin, Germany. Tel.: 49 30 2093 46522.
E-mail address: dirk.richter@iqb.hu-berlin.de (D. Richter).
0742-051X/$ e see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.07.012

Daugherty, 2007), and perceive higher occupational stress and


emotional exhaustion (Klusmann, Kunter, Voss, & Baumert, 2012;
Tynjl & Heikkinen, 2011). In response to these difculties and
the high degree of teacher attrition among beginning teachers in
the United States, school districts and states have introduced formal
teacher induction programs that include orientation sessions, inservice training, classroom observation, formative assessments,
and the support of colleagues (Barnett, Hopkins-Thompson, &
Hoke, 2002; Gold, 1996; Huling-Austin, 1990). Although the specic
content of induction programs varies, many of them pair up
beginning teachers with experienced teachers, otherwise known as
mentor teachers (Ingersoll & Kralik, 2004).

D. Richter et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 36 (2013) 166e177

The role of mentor teachers and their effects in the induction


process has received much attention in educational research (see
overviews in Hawkey, 1997; Hennissen, Crasborn, Brouwer,
Korthagen, & Bergen, 2008; Hobson, Ashby, Malderez, &
Tomlinson, 2009; Ingersoll & Strong, 2011; Wang & Odell, 2002;
Wang, Odell, & Schwille, 2008). Studies have consistently shown
that novices perceive their mentor teachers to be one of their most
important sources of support during the rst year of teaching
(Carter & Francis, 2001; Lindgren, 2005; Luft & Cox, 2001; Marable
& Raimondi, 2007). Lindgren (2005) reported that mentors provide
crucial practical advice about teaching and teachers roles (e.g.,
cooperating with parents). Furthermore, together with their mentee, they reect on positive and negative occurrences in lessons. In
addition to the qualitative literature on teacher mentoring, quantitative studies have shown that the support of a mentor teacher is
positively associated with teacher efcacy (LoCasale-Crouch, Davis,
Wiens, & Pianta, 2012), teaching commitment (Rots, Aelterman,
Vlerick, & Vermeulen, 2007), well-being (Kessels, Beijaard, Veen,
& Verloop, 2008), and improved instructional practice (Rozelle &
Wilson, 2012; Stanulis & Floden, 2009).
These empirical ndings indicate that mentoring can positively
affect the transition to the teaching profession. However, there is
very little longitudinal research investigating how mentor teachers
impact the development of beginning teachers professional
competence and well-being. In addition, few studies examine differences in the quality of mentoring provided (Kessels et al., 2008;
Rots et al., 2007). Consequently, little is known about which mentoring approaches best support teachers development in the rst
years of practice. Wang et al. (2008, p. 138) note this gap in the
literature and recommend that researchers explore the connections between these mentoring practices and what beginning
teachers think and do.
The goal of this study is therefore to examine whether quality
and frequency of mentoring predict beginning teachers development of professional competence and well-being in the rst two
years of their career. The analyses are based on a framework of
teachers professional competence that differentiates between
professional knowledge, beliefs, motivational orientation, and selfregulation (Baumert & Kunter, 2006). In particular, we investigate
the effects of mentoring on teacher efcacy, teacher enthusiasm,
beliefs about learning, emotional exhaustion and job satisfaction.
The literature review begins with a brief discussion of the goals
of mentoring and its intended outcomes. Drawing on the discussion
on the quality of teacher mentoring, we outline two theoretical
approaches proposed by Cochran-Smith and Paris (1995) and
Feiman-Nemser (1998, 2001). These approaches provide the
foundations for the concepts of constructivist- and transmissionoriented mentoring that constitute the theoretical framework of
this study.
1.1. Goals of mentoring
Our conceptualization of the goals of mentoring is in alignment
with Golds (1996) approach to induction support, which distinguishes between instructional and psychological support. In addition, we draw on literature from organizational psychology, which
describes role modeling as an additional function performed by
mentors (Scandura & Ragins, 1993).
Instructional support fosters the development of the knowledge
and skills needed to succeed in the classroom (Gold, 1996). It includes assistance with lesson planning, advice on classroom management, instruction-related advice and feedback, help with
assessing student work, and other activities that promote beginning teachers instructional knowledge and skills. It can be hypothesized that this type of support impacts not only beginning

167

teachers competence but also the quality of instruction and student learning. Indeed, beginning teachers report that mentoring
improves their instructional skills (Borko & Mayeld, 1995; FeimanNemser & Buchmann, 1987; Fletcher & Barrett, 2004). However,
studies using observer ratings of instructional quality have yielded
mixed results. Stanulis and Floden (2009) compared the instructional quality of beginning teachers who received intensive mentoring with that of a comparison group who did not. Their ndings
showed that mentored teachers outperformed non-mentored
teachers in the areas of classroom atmosphere, instruction, and
student engagement. In contrast, Glazerman et al. (2008) compared
the effectiveness of comprehensive induction programs (developed
by the Educational Testing Service and the New Teacher Center at
the University of California, Santa Cruz) with that of regular district
induction. This study showed that beginning teachers in the
comprehensive programs received more mentoring and participated more frequently in professional development activities, but
that this was not reected in either improved instruction or
increased student-test scores. In conclusion, the subjective
perception of beginning teachers is that mentoring develops their
skills. However, there is no clear evidence that mentoring necessarily leads to observable improvements in the quality of
instruction.
Psychological support includes building condence, encouraging
self-esteem, listening, and enhancing self-reliance (Gold, 1996).
This type of support is especially relevant at the start of the rst
year of teaching, as beginning teachers adjust to their new work
environment. Psychological support is thought to foster individual
well-being in terms of reduced stress levels and enhanced job
satisfaction. Strong psychological support may also reduce attrition.
A number of studies describing the interactions between mentor
and beginning teachers has shown that beginning teachers receive
and value psychological support (Ballantyne, Hansford, & Packer,
1995; Hall, Draper, Smith, & Bullough, 2008; Odell & Ferraro,
1992), but there has been little empirical investigation of its effects on their development. One study investigated the antecedents
of beginning teachers well-being and identied mentor support as
an important predictor (Kessels et al., 2008). Other studies have
investigated the relevance of mentor support for teacher attrition,
but ndings are inconclusive. Results presented by Odell and
Ferraro (1992) and Smith and Ingersoll (2004) indicate that mentoring has the potential to reduce beginning teacher attrition. In
contrast, Glazerman et al. (2008) found no difference in the attrition rates of beginning teachers in comprehensive induction programs and those receiving regular district induction. Organizational
psychologists have examined the effects of mentoring in other
professional contexts (Noe, Greenberger, & Wang, 2002; Wanberg,
Welsh, & Hezlett, 2003). Although the goals of mentoring in the
company context differ, employees who participated in a mentoring program showed greater job satisfaction (Seibert, 1999). This
suggests that mentoring may facilitate individuals well-being,
regardless of the organizational context. However, there is no
clear evidence that mentoring affects beginning teachers development longitudinally.
Role modeling is provided when beginning teachers observe
their mentors teaching. Although beginning teachers were
exposed to thousands of hours of teaching during their own time at
school, they can now use their professional knowledge to reect on
their observations. This gives them the opportunity to analyze
teaching from an external perspective, which can provide new
insightsdfor example, into how to organize instruction and
interact with students. Classroom observation can also serve as a
basis for further discussion with the mentor. By providing a role
model for beginning teachers, the latter can be socialized into the
teaching community and learn how to act as professional.

168

D. Richter et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 36 (2013) 166e177

Therefore, role modeling differs from the two previous goals


because it does not require active support on the part of the mentor.
The empirical literature has shown that beginning teachers draw
conclusions for their own teaching from watching their mentors
teach (Feiman-Nemser & Buchmann, 1987). However, beyond the
nding that some beginning teachers perceive their mentors as role
models, research has not investigated the distinct importance of
role modeling for the development of beginning teachers. It seems
reasonable to hypothesize that role modeling contributes to the
development of instructional knowledge and skills, although
empirical evidence is scarce.
This overview of the three goals of mentoring provides a brief
summary of mentor teachers responsibilities and it identies potential outcomes of mentoring. Our review of the literature
revealed that many studies have investigated the support beginning teachers receive without linking these ndings to beginning
teachers development. Furthermore, no common theoretical
framework of mentoring has yet been developed, and different
measures have been used to assess mentoring experiences. Some
studies have investigated whether mentored and non-mentored
teachers differed from each other (Stanulis & Floden, 2009);
others have examined the activities of mentor teachers (Kessels
et al., 2008; Rots et al., 2007) and related them to external
criteria (e.g., teacher efcacy, well-being). Due to this heterogeneity, caution must be exercised in comparing the results of different
studies. A more insightful understanding of the effects of teacher
mentoring requires more careful differentiation of the quality of
mentoring provided. It is not sufcient to examine whether mentoring is available to beginning teachers. Rather, we need to
investigate the quality and quantity of interactions between mentor
and beginning teachers and to examine which factors predict
professional growth in the rst years of teaching. To this end, we
rst drew on existing theoretical approaches to teacher mentoring
and linked them to the literature on learning theory.
1.2. Models of mentoring
Models of mentoring provide a theoretical distinction between
different (prototypical) styles of arranging mentorenovice relationships (see overview in Wang & Odell, 2002). They normatively describe the roles of mentor and novice, their interactions,
and the way learning is organized in this relationship. A diversity of
such models has been developed in the past two decades; we focus
on two that still receive attention in the literature (Bradbury &
Koballa, 2008; Schwille, 2008; Stanulis & Floden, 2009; Wang,
2002). First, the model proposed by Cochran-Smith and Paris
(1995) characterizes mentoring as either knowledge transmission
or knowledge transformation. Second, the model proposed by
Feiman-Nemser (1998, 2001) introduced the concept of educative
mentoring, which it distinguished from conventional mentoring.
Cochran-Smith and Paris (1995) distinguished two approaches
to mentoring, which they labeled knowledge transmission and
knowledge transformation (Wang & Odell, 2002). According to the
knowledge transmission model, mentors perceive their role as
expert teachers and transmit their knowledge within a hierarchically structured relationship. In this learning environment,
novices are socialized into the prevailing culture of schooling,
which manifests the status quo. In contrast, the knowledge transformation model assumes an asymmetrical but collaborative relationship with the mentor teacher, in which knowledge about
teaching is mutually generated. This approach facilitates the exchange and generation of ideas and may support change and
innovation in classroom practice.
Feiman-Nemser (1998, 2001) coined the term educative mentoring, as distinguished from conventional mentoring. In educative

mentoring, which can be traced back to Dewey (1938), mentors


provide opportunities that foster growth and development. They
interact with their novices in a way that supports inquiry and that
enables them to learn in and from their practice (Feiman-Nemser,
2001). In contrast, conventional mentoring focuses on situational
adjustment to the new school environment, technical advice, and
emotional support. Moreover, conventional approaches view the
beginning teacher as a recipient of knowledge and the mentor as
the expert teacher.
The two approaches proposed by Cochran-Smith and Paris
(1995) and Feiman-Nemser (1998, 2001) show similarities to two
paradigms of learning theory (Sfard, 1998). The knowledge transmission model and conventional mentoring are based on behaviorist theories of learning, which conceptualize learning as the
accumulation of knowledge provided by experts. From this
perspective, learning is a unidirectional process in which learners
are passive recipients of information. We label the mentoring style
that is in line with these ideas of learning transmission-oriented
mentoring.
The knowledge transformation model and educative mentoring
reect a constructivist learning theory. According to this theory,
learners construct their own knowledge by connecting new information to their prior knowledge (Shuell, 2001). Learning is an
active process that takes place in a social community (Brown,
Collins, & Duguid, 1989). Lave and Wenger (1991) described apprenticeships as an example of this form of learning. In apprenticeships, novices are introduced into a community through active
participation in authentic tasks. Novices acquire mastery in skills as
they gradually become more involved in the community and its
activities. A strict hierarchical relationship between expert and
novice is not assumed. In line with these ideas of learning we label
this mentoring style constructivist-oriented mentoring.
In sum, both constructs, constructivist- and transmissionoriented mentoring, can be used to distinguish the quality of
mentoring. They are related to different paradigms of learning
theory (constructivist and behaviorist learning theory) and are in
line with other approaches that describe teacher mentoring.
Moreover, both approaches can be linked to the goals of mentoring
introduced in the previous section. In particular, the descriptions of
constructivist- and transmission-oriented mentoring illustrate two
different forms of instructional support because the primary goal of
mentoring is to foster professional knowledge and skills. However,
emotional support and role modeling of mentors is not explicitly
included in both models. Therefore, both approaches characterize
only one part of all the functions mentors exercise.
Although both constructs have not yet been measured empirically, the theoretical literature on teacher mentoring suggests that
constructivist-oriented mentoring is best suited to foster beginning
teachers development. Carter and Francis (2001, p. 260) pointed
out that mentoring relationships that promote collaborative inquiry, cooperative practice and reection are fundamental to
workplace learning for beginning teachers. Similarly, Edwards
(1998) argued that mentors should help to transform the
learner instead of simply providing knowledge. Finally, Wang and
Odell (2002, p. 490) suggested that mentor[s] should guide novices discovery with principles rather than simply providing a
repertoire of teaching knowledge.
It can be hypothesized that constructivist mentoring represents
a particularly benecial learning environment for beginning
teachers that helps them develop professional competence, i.e.,
professional characteristics which in turn affect their work-related
behavior, well-being and classroom practice (see Desimone, 2009).
A comprehensive model of professional competence proposed by
Baumert and Kunter (2006) distinguishes between professional
knowledge, beliefs, motivational orientation, and self-regulation

D. Richter et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 36 (2013) 166e177

(see also Kunter et al., 2013). Following the theoretical assumptions


pointed out above (Carter & Francis, 2001; Wang & Odell, 2002) and
empirical evidence from student learning (e.g., Hmelo-Silver,
Duncan, & Chinn, 2007; Schwartz, Lindgren, & Lewis, 2009) we
assume that mentoring following constructivist principles of
learning may foster the development of all four aspects: knowledge, beliefs, motivation and self-regulation. In particular, we
expect that successful self-regulation of ones resources may support the well-being of teachers. Empirical studies have already
pointed out that the support of mentors may foster the development of knowledge and skills (e.g., Fletcher & Barrett, 2004;
Hudson, 2013), professional beliefs (e.g., Haser & Star, 2009) and
individual well-being (e.g., Ballantyne et al., 1995; Kessels et al.,
2008). However, evidence that shows what kind of mentoring
may be relevant for a successful development of professional
competence is still lacking.
1.3. The present investigation
The study investigates whether constructivist- and
transmission-oriented mentoring provides teachers at the start of
their career with adequate opportunities to acquire the prerequisites for successful classroom instruction. In this study, we
focus on a set of characteristics that are located in the professional
competence model introduced earlier: Teacher efcacy and teacher
enthusiasm represent indicators of teacher motivation. In particular,
teacher efcacy belongs to this domain because it regulates the time
and effort teachers invest in tasks. Transmissive and constructivist
beliefs about learning can be characterized as teacher beliefs. The
two remaining aspects of teacher competence, professional
knowledge and self-regulation, are not investigated in this study.
Moreover, we examine teachers well-being because the rst years
of teaching are often perceived as highly challenging (Fantilli &
McDougall, 2009; Veenman, 1984). In particular, we chose to focus
on teachers emotional exhaustion as one indicator of burnout
(Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leitner, 2001) and job satisfaction as an indicator of work-related well-being (Locke, 1969). The four constructs of teacher competence and the two constructs of well-being
have been shown to predict teachers instructional quality and can
be expected to be malleable in the rst years of the teaching career
(Dubberke, Kunter, McElvany, Brunner, & Baumert, 2008; Klusmann,
Kunter, Trautwein, Ldtke, & Baumert, 2008; Kunter et al., 2007).
1.3.1. Teacher efcacy
Bandura (1986, p. 391) initially dened self-efcacy in general
terms as peoples judgments of their capabilities to organize and
execute courses of action required to attain designated types of
performances. Transferred to the teaching domain, it describes
teachers individual beliefs about their capabilities to teach difcult
or unmotivated students even in the presence of obstacles
(Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). It has been shown that teacher
efcacy is associated with teacher characteristics including beliefs
about instruction (Woolfolk, Rosoff, & Hoy, 1990), job satisfaction
(Caprara, Barbaranelli, Borgogni, & Steca, 2003), and teacher
burnout (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007), and is positively related to
students sense of efcacy (Anderson, Greene, & Loewen, 1988),
motivation (Midgley, Feldlaufer, & Eccles, 1989), and achievement
(Ashton & Webb, 1986; Guo, Connor, Yang, Roehrig, & Morrison,
2012). Despite the numerous studies, one needs to acknowledge
that teacher efcacy is a subjective measure of competence that
may deviate from assessments based on tests.
Only a few studies investigated the development of teacher efcacy of beginning teachers. Woolfolk Hoy and Spero (2005) found
that teacher efcacy increased during student teaching but
declined signicantly during the rst year of teaching. They

169

speculated that mentoring programs may provide support that


protects and builds teacher efcacy. Another study, conducted by
Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2007), investigated the
impact of different sources of teacher efcacy for novice and
experienced teachers and found that the support of colleagues
negatively predicted teacher efcacy. The authors argued that
teachers who struggle early in the career depend heavily on the
support of their colleagues. Our study thus further investigates
whether mentoring fosters the development of teacher efcacy. We
hypothesize that constructivist-oriented mentoring positively
predicts the development of teacher efcacy because feedback
provided in a constructivist mentoring setting may promote a
positive sense of mastery.
1.3.2. Teacher enthusiasm
Teacher enthusiasm can be described as the degree of enjoyment, excitement and pleasure that teachers typically experience in
their professional activities (Kunter et al., 2008). Enthusiasm is
widely regarded as an important characteristic of teacher quality
(Brophy & Good, 1986; Dunkin & Biddle, 1974; Kunter, Frenzel,
Nagy, Baumert, & Pekrun, 2011) and it has been shown to be
positively related to instructional quality, job satisfaction (Kunter et
al., 2008), student enjoyment (Frenzel, Goetz, Ldtke, Pekrun, &
Sutton, 2009), and students motivation (Patrick, Hisley, &
Kempler, 2000). However, research has not yet determined which
factors support the development of teacher enthusiasm. The Kunter
et al. (2008) described teacher enthusiasm as a stable and trait-like
characteristic. However, there is reason to believe that enthusiasm
for teaching is pronounced at the beginning of the career and decreases thereafter. We hypothesize that mentor teachers can help
beginning teachers to maintain their enthusiasm by providing opportunities for reection and the freedom to explore different
teaching methods. We therefore predict that constructivistoriented mentoring fosters teacher enthusiasm.
1.3.3. Transmissive and constructivist beliefs about learning
Beliefs can be dened as psychologically held understandings, premises or propositions about the world that are
felt to be true (Richardson, 1996, p. 104). Pajares (1992) pointed
out that teacher beliefs lter teachers perceptions and thus inuence their instructional practice and classroom behavior.
Teacher beliefs are therefore regarded as an aspect of teacher
competence (Baumert & Kunter, 2006) and teacher quality
(Richardson, 1996). In particular, we are interested in teachers
transmissive and constructivist beliefs about learning, which are
also reected in different mentoring approaches. Teachers with
transmissive beliefs view learning as a process in which students
accumulate knowledge that is presented by the teacher
(Dubberke et al., 2008). In contrast, teachers with constructivist
beliefs understand learning as individual process that depends
on individuals prior knowledge and characteristics of the environment (Staub & Stern, 2002). Research on the effects of teacher
beliefs has demonstrated that constructivist beliefs are positively
related to students achievement gains in mathematics (Staub &
Stern, 2002), whereas transmissive beliefs are negatively
related to instructional quality (Dubberke et al., 2008; Stipek,
Givvin, Salmon, & MacGyvers, 2001). It has been shown that
teachers adopt constructivist beliefs during their university education, but often revert to transmissive beliefs after they start
teaching (Hoy & Woolfolk, 1990; Veenman, 1984). This effect has
also been called the reality shock. We hypothesize that
constructivist-oriented mentoring reduces the reality shock by
supporting beginning teachers constructivist beliefs. At the same
time, we expect transmission-oriented mentoring to foster the
development of transmissive beliefs.

170

D. Richter et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 36 (2013) 166e177

1.3.4. Emotional exhaustion and job satisfaction


The rst years of classroom teaching are a particularly
demanding time in the teaching career (Fantilli & McDougall, 2009;
Veenman, 1984). The experience of stress has negative consequences for teachers health (Guglielmi & Tatrow, 1998) and classroom practice (Klusmann et al., 2008). Students whose teachers
experience lower levels of emotional exhaustion and higher job
satisfaction perceive instruction to be more structured and the pace
of instruction to be more adequate (Klusmann et al., 2008). It is
therefore important to facilitate teachers occupational well-being,
in particular emotional exhaustion and job satisfaction, during the
induction process. Research on mentoring has shown that beginning teachers value the emotional support they receive from their
mentors (Ballantyne et al., 1995; Hall et al., 2008; Odell & Ferraro,
1992). However, only one study has found positive relationships
between mentor support and beginning teachers well-being
(Kessels et al., 2008). Therefore, more research is needed to document the longitudinal effects of mentoring on well-being. Moreover, research has not yet determined which approaches to
mentorenovice interaction are supportive. We therefore examined
the extent to which constructivist- and transmission-oriented
mentoring predict the development of beginning teachers
emotional exhaustion and job satisfaction. We expect mentoring
based on collaborative inquiry to create a learning environment in
which novices and mentors can reect on instructional problems
together, thus alleviating beginning teachers stress. Therefore, we
hypothesize that constructivist-oriented mentoring is positively
related to job satisfaction and negatively associated with emotional
exhaustion.
2. Methods
2.1. Setting
The data were collected in the COACTIV-R study, which was
designed to assess the development of beginning teachers
competence during the period of practical training (Referendariat)
that is obligatory for obtaining a permanent teaching license in
Germany (Lenhard, 2004). The Referendariat follows directly on
from university training and lasts between 18 and 24 months.
During this time, beginning teachers attend theoretical courses at a
teacher training institution (Studienseminare) and gain practical
teaching experience in a regular school, which includes observing
other teachers, guided teaching (under the supervision of experienced teachers), and independent teaching. In addition, all beginning teachers are assigned to more senior mentor teachers who
supervise some of their instruction and provide feedback and
advice over the Referendariat period (Jones, 2000). In general, the
mentor teachers teach the same subjects as their novices and are
not directly involved in grading their nal exams. They are usually
selected by the principal based on their experience and professional expertise. Mentor teachers can therefore be regarded as a
positive subset of the schools teachers, though they do not
generally receive formal training for their mentorship role.
2.2. Study design and sample
The study used a pre-test/post-test study design with two cohorts and two points of measurement. Beginning teachers in cohort
1 were assessed at the beginning and at the end of the rst year of
practical training. Their counterparts in cohort 2 were assessed at
the beginning and at the end of their second year of practical
training. Thus, both cohorts were assessed at an interval of one
school year. This design enables us to investigate the development

Table 1
Factor loadings from the exploratory and conrmatory factor analysis (two-factor
model).
Item Item Wording

1
2
3
4
5
6

Results of the EFA

Results of the CFA

Factor 1

Factor 1

Factor 2

Factor 2

My mentor.

l (SE)

helps me to improve
independently.
supports me in trying out
different teaching methods.
gives me the opportunity
to draw my own conclusions.
has ideas that prompt
self-reection.
tells me what I need to
improve.
has specic ideas about
how I should
teach the lesson content.
tells me what I have to
do differently
in lessons.

.85* (.03)

.02 (.01) .88* (.03) e

.82* (.03)

.08 (.05) .75* (.03) e

.66* (.04)

.29* (.05) .76* (.03) e

.70* (.04)

.03 (.05) .63* (.04) e

.15* (.06)

.83* (.04) e

.81* (.04)

.11 (.06)

.70* (.04) e

.73* (.04)

.76* (.04) e

.76* (.04)

.00 (<.01)

Note. Items 1 through 4 represent constructivist-oriented mentoring; items 5


through 7 indicate transmission-oriented mentoring. EFA Exploratory Factor
Analysis. CFA Conrmative Factor Analysis. *p < .05.

of teacher characteristics and the relevance of mentoring in this


period of induction.
The sample was recruited from randomly selected teacher
training institutions (Studienseminare) in four federal states in
Germany (Bavaria, Baden-Wuerttemberg, North Rhine-Westphalia, and Schleswig-Holstein). All beginning teachers in the
sample will be teaching mathematics at secondary level. The rst
cohort of beginning teachers included 546 individuals that were
on average 27.4 years old (SD 4.0 years) and predominantly
female (65.4%). The second cohort consisted of 210 individuals
with a mean age of 29.3 years (SD 5.1 years) and 63.3% females.
In total, 756 beginning teachers of both cohorts participated at
the rst measurement point and 551 of them (72.9%) continued
at the second measurement point. The participants in the longitudinal sample were on average 27.5 years old (SD 3.8 years)
at the beginning of the study and the majority was female
(65.9%).1 Participation in the study was voluntary; beginning
teachers who participated in both assessments received a monetary reward of V100.
2.3. Measures
2.3.1. Independent variables
2.3.1.1. Constructivistand
transmission-oriented
mentoring.
We have assessed constructivist- and transmission-oriented mentoring by asking beginning teachers to rate their interaction with
their mentor teacher. This does not include the content of their
interactions. Constructivist-oriented mentoring was measured by
items 1e4 in Table 1; transmission-oriented mentoring by items 5e
7. The assessment format was a 6-point scale ranging from (1)
strongly disagree to (6) strongly agree. A larger set of items was

1
Comparisons between individuals participating only at the rst or both measurement points, respectively, indicated no signicant differences with respect to
gender and socio-economic status but individuals participating at both assessments
were approximately 2 years younger. Furthermore, we found no statistically signicant differences between both groups for the outcome variables teacher efcacy,
teacher enthusiasm, transmissive and constructivist beliefs and emotional
exhaustion. Only teachers job satisfaction was d .20 higher for those individuals
who participated at both measurement occasions.

D. Richter et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 36 (2013) 166e177

used to assess constructivist- and transmission-oriented mentoring


in a pilot study (16 and 15 items respectively); for reasons of
parsimony, a subset of these items was used in the present study.
Because this instrument was newly developed for the purpose
of this study, we carried out additional analyses to test its reliability
and construct validity (Messick, 1989). The scale measuring
constructivist-oriented mentoring revealed an internal consistency
of a .84; the scale tapping transmission-oriented mentoring, a
reliability of a .80. Construct validity was examined through
cross-validation, with half the data being used in an exploratory
factor analysis (EFA) and the other half in a conrmatory data
analysis (CFA). Analyses were conducted with Mplus (Muthn &
Muthn, 1998e2007), using oblique rotation (geomin) to allow
for correlations between factors. The results of the EFA demonstrated high factor loadings for the items designed to measure the
respective constructs and low cross-loadings for all other items
(jlj < .29). Based on this evidence, we tested a two-factor model
using a conrmatory approach with the second half of the data. The
results of the CFA demonstrated a model t of CFI .97 and
RMSEA .08. According to the recommendations of Hu and Bentler
(1999), the CFI value demonstrates a good model t and the RMSEA
value suggests a reasonable model t. The high factor loadings of
the two-factor model demonstrate that all items are suitable indicators of the construct under investigation (see Table 1). The
correlation between the two factors was nonsignicant at r .05
(p .52). In sum, these results suggest that our instrument assesses
two independent factors that reect constructivist- and
transmission-oriented mentoring.
To ensure that beginning teachers ratings were an accurate
representation of mentoring quality and agreed with their mentor
teachers perceptions of beginning teachers learning, we obtained
additional validity data from a second data source. For this study,
we conducted a supplementary study with mentor teachers in
North Rhine-Westphalia whose mentees participated in COACTIVR. All mentees in the participating state North Rhine-Westphalia
were invited to contact their mentor teacher and provide them
with a questionnaire about the mentoring relationship. Among all
231 beginning teachers in North Rhine-Westphalia, 33 mentor
teachers completed this questionnaire. The mentor teachers who
participated in this study were on average 44.1 years old (SD 9.1
years) and 63.6% of them were female. The questionnaire included a
10-item scale tapping the mentor teachers constructivist beliefs
about learning to teach (example item: Beginning teachers learn to
teach best by experimenting with their own solutions to the
problems arising in lessons.). The assessment format was a 6-point
scale ranging from (1) strongly disagree to (6) strongly agree. Scale
scores were aggregated for the analysis (unweighted mean).
Overall, the scale had an internal consistency of a .70.
Results showed that mentor teachers constructivist beliefs were
negatively correlated with transmission-oriented mentoring as
rated by the mentees (r .40, p < .05) and positively correlated
with constructivist-oriented mentoring as rated by the mentees,
although the latter association was not statistically signicant due
to the small sample size (r .32, p > .05). This nding illustrates
indicates that beginning teachers ratings overlapped with their
mentors beliefs about learning to teach, which suggests that the
mentee ratings are useful indicators of the quality of mentoring.
2.3.1.2. Frequency of mentoring. In addition to the quality of mentoring, we assessed its quantity in terms of the frequency of interactions between mentor and beginning teacher. Frequency was
assessed by a single item On average, how often did you talk to your
mentor teacher in the rst year of your practical classroom training?
Responses were made on a 6-point scale ranging from (1) less than
once a month to (6) every day. We dichotomized this item for the

171

purpose of data analysis, because the scale is not equidistant and


therefore cannot be treated as continuous variable. Responses that
indicated mentorementee interactions several times a week or
every day were recoded as 1 and all other responses that indicated less frequent interactions were recoded as 0.
2.3.2. Dependent variables
Teacher efcacy was assessed with an established teacher efcacy scale (Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1999). Beginning teachers were
asked to rate their agreement with 10 statements on a 4-point Likert
scale ranging from (1) strongly disagree to (4) strongly agree (e.g., I
know that I am able to equip even the most problematic students
with the knowledge they need for the exam.). Reliability was
satisfactory at both measurement points (a1 .75; a2 .77).
Enthusiasm for teaching was assessed with a scale developed in
the COACTIV study (Kunter et al., 2008), the precursor to the
COACTIV-R study. Prompted by the instruction How much do you
enjoy your work?, beginning teachers were asked to rate their
agreement with 6 statements (e.g., I teach with enthusiasm.) on a
4-point Likert scale ranging from (1) strongly disagree to (4)
strongly agree. Reliability was good at both measurement points
(a1 .85; a2 .84).
Constructivist- and transmission-oriented beliefs about teaching were measured with two scales developed in the COACTIV
study (Dubberke et al., 2008). Items tapping constructivist beliefs
about teaching measure the conviction that student learning requires cognitively activating tasks and opportunities for students to
converse about and nd alternative solutions to tasks. The scale
consists of 10 Likert-type items, which were rated from (1) strongly
disagree to (4) strongly agree (e.g., Students can nd solutions to
many mathematics problems without guidance.). Reliability was
good at both points of measurement (a1 .79; a2 .82).
The items tapping transmission-oriented beliefs about teaching
assess the conviction that teachers need to provide examples and
solutions to tasks that students can pick up and practice. The scale
consists of 10 Likert-type items which were rated from (1) strongly
disagree to (4) strongly agree (e.g., Teachers should equip students
with detailed procedures for solving problems.). Reliability was
good at both points of measurement (a1 .78; a2 .83).
Emotional exhaustion was measured by a German adaptation
(Enzmann & Kleiber, 1989) of the Maslach Burnout Inventory
(Maslach, Jackson, & Leitner, 1996). The scale comprised 5 Likerttype items that were rated from (1) strongly disagree to (4)
strongly agree (e.g., I often feel exhausted at school.). Reliability
was good at both points of measurement (a1 .77; a2 .82).
Teachers job satisfaction was assessed with a short German
version (Baumert et al., 2008) of the work satisfaction scale from the
Job Diagnostic Survey (Hackman & Oldham, 1975). This scale focused
on the overall satisfaction with work rather than on certain aspects
of the job. Beginning teachers rated 9 items on a 4-point Likert scale
ranging from (1) strongly disagree to (4) strongly agree (e.g., Given
the choice, I would denitely become a teacher again.). Reliability
was high at both points of measurement (a1 .89; a2 .91).
2.4. Statistical analyses
Researchers seeking to predict interindividual differences in
change must bear in mind that unreliability of the measured variables can distort the parameter estimates (Kaplan, 2000). We
therefore used latent variable models to determine the effect of the
different mentoring approaches on the development of beginning
teachers. These models analyze interindividual differences at the
latent level rather than at the observed level. They offer the
advantage of distinguishing structural relationships from error-ofmeasurement components.

172

D. Richter et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 36 (2013) 166e177

Fig. 1 presents the generic model that was estimated separately


for each of the six outcome variables. It consists of a measurement
model that denes the latent constructs and a structural model that
denes the relationships among the latent variables (Bollen, 1989).
The measurement model species the outcomes variables measured
at both assessments (shown as v1 and v2) and constructivist- and
transmission-oriented mentoring (cm and tm) assessed at the second point of measurement. The factor loadings, intercepts, and residual variances were constrained to be invariant over time, in
accordance with the assumption of measurement invariance
(Vandenberg & Lance, 2000). As recommended by Marsh and Hau
(1996; see also Jreskog, 1979), correlated uniquenesses were
included for the matching items administered at both measurement
points. The structural part of the model denes regression relationships predicting the dependent variable (v2) at the second
point of measurement. The score of this construct is controlled for
the score of the same construct (v1) at the rst point of measurement
and additionally regressed on the predictor variables transmissionoriented mentoring (tm), constructivist-oriented mentoring (cm),
and frequency of interaction with the mentor.
The analyses were conducted with the Mplus 5.1 software
package (Muthn & Muthn, 1998e2007) using the Full Information Maximum Likelihood (FIML) estimator. This estimator uses all
available data for each person, estimating missing information from
relations among variables in the full sample (Schafer & Graham,
2002). Hypothesis testing was conducted at signicance level of
p < .05. The correlations of the latent and manifest variables in this
analysis are provided in the appendix.

Table 2
Descriptive statistics of the independent and dependent manifest variables.
Outcome

Teacher efcacy
Teaching enthusiasm
Transmissive beliefs
Constructivist beliefs
Emotional exhaustion
Job satisfaction
Transmission-oriented
mentoring
Constructivist-oriented
mentoring
Frequency of interaction

Cohort

1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2

404
132
405
125
407
127
406
127
409
127
409
127
405
127
407
127
407
127

Time 1

Time 2

M1

SD1

M2

SD2

3.09
3.11
3.55
3.55
2.36
2.34
3.40
3.45
2.04
2.31
3.40
3.35
e
e
e
e
e
e

.37
.32
.44
.39
.46
.47
.37
.39
.61
.64
.50
.54
e
e
e
e
e
e

3.04
3.17
3.53
3.60
2.42
2.37
3.34
3.42
2.20
2.06
3.30
3.44
3.33
3.44
4.53
4.75
.56
.72

.36
.38
.47
.35
.49
.53
.41
.41
.74
.63
.64
.48
1.31
1.27
1.18
1.20
.50
.45

2.59
1.97
1.02
1.65
2.75
.86
3.50
.93
4.82
4.98
4.13
2.60
e
e
e
e
e
e

.01
.05
.31
.10
.01
.39
.00
.36
.00
.00
.00
.01
e
e
e
e
e
e

3. Results
3.1. Descriptive statistics
Table 2 provides the means and standard deviations of the
manifest variables for each cohort at both measurement points. The
results show statistically signicant change in different variables

Fig. 1. Structural equation model investigating the impact of constructivist- and transmission-oriented mentoring.

D. Richter et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 36 (2013) 166e177

and cohorts. Teacher efcacy decreased signicantly (t 2.59,


p .01) in cohort 1 (rst year of training) and increased, though not
signicantly, in cohort 2 (second year of training). There was signicant change in beginning teachers transmissive and constructivist beliefs in cohort 1, but in opposing directions: transmissive
beliefs about learning increased over the rst year of training
(t 2.75, p < .05), whereas constructivist beliefs decreased
(t 3.50, p < .05). Emotional exhaustion and job satisfaction
showed signicant changes in both cohorts. Cohort 1 demonstrated
increased emotional exhaustion (t 4.82, p < .05) and decreased
job satisfaction (t 4.13, p < .05). In cohort 2, in contrast, emotional
exhaustion decreased (t 4.98, p < .05) and job satisfaction
increased (t 2.60, p < .05). The effect sizes of the statistically
signicant differences were small (Cohen, 1988), ranging between
d .14 and d .39. In sum, the results indicate that beginning
teachers developed differently in their rst and second year of
training which may reect differences in the training provided in
each year.
Table 2 also shows descriptive statistics for the two mentoring
approaches. Ratings of transmission-oriented mentoring were
signicantly below the theoretical mean of 3.5 in cohort 1
(t 2.59, p < .05), whereas ratings of constructivist-oriented
mentoring signicantly exceeded the theoretical mean in both
cohorts (cohort 1: t 17.73, p < .05; cohort 2: t 11.72, p < .05).
3.2. Predicting beginning teachers development
The descriptive results showed distinct developmental patterns
for beginning teachers in cohorts 1 and 2. Due to these patterns, we
examined whether the structural equation models (see Fig. 1) need
to be estimated separately for both cohorts. To check for invariance,
we compared an unrestricted model (i.e., different parameters in
both cohorts) with a restricted model that constrained all parameters to be equal in both cohorts. The comparison was conducted
with a likelihood ratio (LR) test, the results of which showed that
the unrestricted model provided a better t to the data. However,
given that the LR test is strongly affected by sample size, we used
the alternative indicators DRMSEA and DCFI to compare the t of
both models (Cheung & Rensvold, 2002). The results of the
invariance tests showed that the restricted model produced only
small changes in the overall model t. The DRMSEA estimates did
not exceed .005; the DCFI estimates did not exceed .02. The
restricted model thus provides an appropriate representation of the
data. Therefore, we can collapse the data from cohorts 1 and 2 and
obtain model estimates that are valid for both groups.
Table 3 shows the regression coefcients from the six structural
equation models (represented in the columns) and their t statistics. The predictors were the baseline measure of the outcome
variable as assessed at the rst measurement point and the three
variables indicating the quality and frequency of mentoring.

173

The regression coefcients of the model predicting the development of teacher efcacy show that the baseline measure strongly
predicted teacher efcacy at the second measurement point
(b1 .64, p < .05), indicating high stability of the construct between
the two measurement occasions. Moreover, beginning teachers
whose mentors exhibited a constructivist-oriented mentoring style
showed a signicant increase in teacher efcacy over the year
(b3 .14, p < .05). No signicant changes in teacher efcacy were
observed for beginning teachers who experienced a transmissionoriented mentoring style or interacted frequently with their
mentor teacher. The model explained a total of 45% of the variance
and exhibited reasonable model t (RMSEA .04). Similarly,
teachers enthusiasm for teaching was strongly predicted by their
baseline enthusiasm (b1 .63, p < .05) and a constructivistoriented mentoring style (b3 .08, p < .05). The model explained
43% of the variance in teacher enthusiasm and it provided a good t
to the data (RMSEA .04).
The models investigating the development of beginning teachers beliefs showed strong stability between the rst and second
measurement point (transmissive beliefs: b1 .70, p < .05;
constructivist beliefs: b1 .63, p < .05). However, whereas a
transmissive style of mentoring positively predicted the development of transmissive beliefs (b2 .09, p < .05), a constructivist style
of mentoring was not signicantly associated with beginning
teachers constructivist beliefs. Only frequent interactions with the
mentor negatively predicted constructivist beliefs (b4 .10,
p < .05) when all other variables in the model were controlled. This
nding indicates that beginning teachers who develop constructivist beliefs interact less frequently with their mentor teacher. The
model explained 53% of the variance in transmissive beliefs and
42% of the variance in constructivist beliefs. The goodness-of-t
indices indicated acceptable model t (transmissive beliefs:
RMSEA .05; constructivist beliefs: RMSEA .05).
The models predicting beginning teachers well-being also
showed high stability coefcients (emotional exhaustion:
b1 .56, p < .05; job satisfaction: b1 .65, p < .05). When
baseline levels were controlled, beginning teachers who experienced constructivist-oriented mentoring showed a statistically
signicant decline in emotional exhaustion (b3 .20, p < .05)
and a statistically signicant increase in job satisfaction (b3 .13,
p < .05). This is clear evidence that constructivist-oriented
mentoring supports beginning teachers well-being. The model
explained 40% of the variance in emotional exhaustion and 48%
of the variance in job satisfaction. Both models showed acceptable model t (emotional exhaustion: RMSEA .05; job satisfaction: RMSEA .06).
In addition to investigating the main effects of quality and frequency of mentoring, we were interested in testing whether
beginning teachers who experience a particular mentoring
approach benet from more interaction with their mentor. In other

Table 3
Results of structural equation models predicting beginning teachers outcomes at the second measurement point.
Predictors
Baseline measurea
Transmission-oriented mentoring
Constructivist-oriented mentoring
Frequency of interaction
Variance explained
R2
Model t
RMSEA
90% Conf. interval

Teacher efcacy

Teaching enthusiasm

Transmissive beliefs

Constructivist beliefs

Emotional exhaustion

Job satisfaction

.63*
.05
.08*
.00

.70*
.09*
.02
.04

.63*
.03
.08
.10*

.56*
.09
.20*
.01

.65*
.05
.13*
.04

.45

.43

.53

.42

.40

.48

.04
.036, .044

.04
.035, .047

.05
.041, .049

.05
.041, .049

.05
.044, .058

.06
.053, .061

b1
.64*
b2
.05
b3
.14*
b4 .04

Note. *p < .05.


a
Baseline measure of the outcome variable assessed at the rst measurement point (v1).

174

D. Richter et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 36 (2013) 166e177

words, we were interested in the interaction effects between the


frequency of interactions and the two mentoring approaches. We
therefore estimated additional structural equation models that
included all mentoring variables as main effects as well as two
variables representing the interaction between frequency of interactions and the two mentoring approaches. However, there were
no signicant interaction terms, which suggests that beginning
teachers do not draw additional benet from more frequent
mentorementee interactions, regardless of the mentoring
approach they experience.
4. Discussion
This study distinguished two mentoring approaches: constructivist- and transmission-oriented mentoring. In contrast to previous research, we developed a theoretically driven instrument to
measure both approaches and evaluated its quality. Having established the reliability and validity of our measure, we predicted
beginning teachers development by reference to qualitative and
quantitative characteristics of the mentoring experience. We were
particularly interested in examining whether empirical evidence
could be found for the theoretically predicted positive impact of
constructivist mentoring. To this end, we used a pre-test/post-test
study design to investigate whether mentoring predicts beginning teachers teacher efcacy, enthusiasm for teaching, beliefs
about learning, emotional exhaustion, and job satisfaction when
the respective baseline levels were controlled.
4.1. Experience of different mentoring approaches
Our preliminary analyses showed that most beginning teachers
in our sample experienced constructivist-oriented mentoring
involving opportunities for reection, experimentation with
different teaching methods, and autonomous decision making. In
other words, many mentor teachers evidently provide a learning
environment that supports individual learning and development.
This tendency toward constructivist mentoring might be considered surprising, because the teachers who serve as mentors are not
professionally trained teacher educators, but regular classroom
teachers selected by the principal. Thus, mentor teachers seem to
naturally select helpful supervision strategies despite their lack of
formal training.
Further the ndings of the descriptive analyses showed that the
two mentoring approaches are not related. In other words, transmission- and constructivist-oriented mentoring represent two
qualitatively different approaches that cannot be described as the
two poles of a continuum. Both forms of mentoring make different
theoretical assumptions about the nature of learning. Therefore, it
would not be warranted to exclude either of them from empirical
investigations (Sfard, 1998).
4.2. Constructivist mentoring explains beginning teachers
development
The study provides evidence that beginning teachers who
experience constructivist mentoring show higher levels of efcacy,
teaching enthusiasm, and job satisfaction and lower levels of
emotional exhaustion after one year of training compared to
teachers without constructivist mentoring. This conrms previous
ndings that mentoring is a crucial source of support for beginning
teachers (see overview in Ingersoll & Strong, 2011). More importantly, however, it showed that different mentoring approaches
differentially predict beginning teachers development. Our ndings supported the theoretical prediction that mentoring based on
collaborative inquiry and critical reection is benecial for the

development of beginning teachers motivation and well-being


(Carter & Francis, 2001; Hudson, 2004; Wang & Odell, 2002). In
contrast, although transmission-oriented mentoring increased
beginning teachers transmissive beliefs, it did not signicantly
affect any other outcome examined in this study. This suggests that
mentors who supervise their mentees closely and convey their
ideas of teaching to their mentee do not successfully foster beginning teachers competence and well-being. Findings also showed
that beginning teachers who interacted frequently with their
mentors showed less constructivist beliefs when the quality of
mentoring (i.e., constructivist and transmissive mentoring) was
taken into account. It may be hypothesized that beginning teachers
who receive constructivist mentoring may not need close guidance
and frequent interaction. The development of the other outcomes
was not associated by the frequency of interaction.
The effects of mentoring observed in this study are small in size
(Cohen, 1988). When interpreting these effects, we need to bear in
mind that beginning teachers are exposed to many other learning
opportunities (e.g., those provided in teacher training institutions,
independent teaching, etc.) that may also inuence their development during their practical training. Further, mentors have limited
time for intensive collaboration with the mentee because their
teaching load is generally not reduced to accommodate their supervisory duties (Jones, 2000). Thus, it is important to highlight
that mentors do facilitate beginning teachers development despite
the limited resources available. It is also important to remember
that the results of this study represent the effects of just one year. In
total, practical training lasts between 1.5 and 2 years. Thus, cumulative effects of mentoring may be even larger than the effects
shown in this study.
4.3. Limitations and future research
Several limitations of the study warrant attention. First, the
study assessed the mentoring of beginning teachers in mathematics. All participants in our study also obtained a teaching license
in one or two additional subjects, and may have received mentoring
in these as well. However, we did not assess this aspect in the
present study. The combined effect of all mentors may be larger
than that indicated by the results of this study. Second, the mentoring variables were assessed through self-report. We chose this
format because we were interested in beginning teachers perceptions and how these relate to their development. Data from our
small validation study showed that mentors and mentees interpretations of the mentoring situation overlap. However, for
further validation, it would be interesting to collect additional data
about the mentoring relationship from mentor teachers and
external observers because they may perceive the mentoring
relationship in a different way. This additional information could be
used to generate additional indicators of mentoring quality. Third,
the instrument was newly developed for the purpose of this study
and was applied in a German sample of beginning mathematics
teachers. Although reliability and validity were established, future
studies need to conrm that the instrument can be used in other
subject areas (beyond mathematics) and other cultural contexts
(beyond Germany). Fourth, beginning teachers reported on the
mentoring they received only once, at the end of their rst or
second year of practical training. Ballantyne et al. (1995) have
indicated that mentoring may change throughout the rst year of
practice; therefore, multiple assessments scattered across the
school year may be better suited to understand the dynamics of
mentoring relationships. Our study design with two points of
measurement did not allow for multiple assessments. Fifth, our
study focused on teacher mentoring as one important learning
opportunity and did not investigate other potential sources such as

D. Richter et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 36 (2013) 166e177

workshops, teaching practice or feedback from colleagues. Therefore, future studies should take into account the complex system of
learning opportunities and analyze their unique effects. Sixth, we
have limited our study to examining the type of mentorementee
interaction. We did not, however, assess the content of their discussions and the initial skills of beginning teachers. Therefore,
future research needs to take a closer look at the topics of the
mentorementee-dialogs and mentees individual prerequisites
that may affect the support that mentors provide. Finally,
constructivist and transmissive mentoring is closely related to the
instructional support of mentoring rather than to the emotional
support and role modeling. Therefore, this study cannot provide
information as to whether mentors actually provided support with
respect to the other two goals of mentoring.

175

opportunities to practice and support them with help if needed,


seem to be more helpful than mentors who closely guide their
mentees. In addition, mentors should participate in trainings to
further develop professional competence as teacher educator.
Acknowledgments
The COACTIV-R research project at the Max Planck Institute for
Human Development was funded by the Max Planck Societys
Strategic Innovation Fund (2008e2010). We wish to thank the
members of the COACTIV team, Susannah Goss and Ricarda Klein
for language editing, and Thilo Kleickmann and Yee Lee Shing for
helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article.

5. Conclusions and practical implications

Appendix. Correlation matrix of the latent and manifest


variables used in the structural equation models

The results of this study inform the discussion about the effectiveness of teacher mentoring. The study provided the opportunity

Variables

1. Transmission-oriented mentoring (time 2)


2. Constructivist-oriented mentoring (time 2)
3. Teacher efcacy (time 1)
4. Teacher efcacy (time 2)
5. Teaching enthusiasm (time 1)
6. Teaching enthusiasm (time 2)
7. Transmissive beliefs (time 1)
8. Transmissive beliefs (time 2)
9. Constructivist beliefs (time 1)
10. Constructivist beliefs (time 2)
11. Emotional exhaustion (time 1)
12. Emotional exhaustion (time 2)
13. Job satisfaction (time 1)
14. Job satisfaction (time 2)
15. Frequency of interaction (time 2)

1
.04
.08
.01
.04
.03
.23
.26
L.16
.08
.07
.13
.04
.09
.02

1
.17
.24
.20
.21
L.20
L.15
.18
.16
L.12
L.26
.20
.25
.16

10

11

12

13

14

15

1
L.46
L.69
L.07

1
.70
.03

1
.05

1
.74
.58
.45
.10
L.13
.19
.17
L.45
L.37
.50
.39
.01

1
.49
.58
.10
L.19
.20
.30
L.37
L.51
.37
.55
.03

1
.66
L.16
L.11
.20
.19
L.53
L.41
.69
.55
.03

1
L.19
L.20
.24
.32
L.36
L.43
.49
.67
.03

1
.77
L.58
L.42
.17
.02
L.11
.08
.04

1
L.48
L.54
.11
.06
.09
.08
.04

1
.68
.09
.06
.12
.14
.02

1
L.13
.09
.15
.18
.01

1
.67
L.63
L.45
.01

Note. Values printed in bold are signicant at p < .05.

to investigate change in beginning teachers over one year, thus


going beyond the limitations of cross-sectional analyses that are
present in many similar studies. The pre-test/post-test study design
was used to examine the extent to which mentoring predicts the
development of beginning teachers motivation, beliefs, and wellbeing. Our main nding was that, over and above the frequency
of mentoring, constructivist mentoring supports beginning teachers development in the rst two years of teaching. Future studies,
however, should consider study designs with multiple measurements over the course of one year and if possible of multiple years
within the induction period.
The study has implications for the theory on teacher mentoring
and practice in schools. Constructivist- and transmissive-oriented
mentoring can be mapped on already existing mentoring concepts and can also be aligned to different paradigms of learning
theory. The proposed constructs can therefore serve as an integrative framework to evaluate previous research and set up future
studies. Due to the diversity of theoretical models currently used in
this area of research (see overview in Wang & Odell, 2002), it is
difcult to compare study ndings and make informed decisions in
the eld of teacher induction. Thus, these constructs can be used as
a framework to successively build up a coherent knowledge base in
this content area.
In regard to the practical implications, the ndings suggest that
mentor teachers should be carefully selected and should receive
training about successful supervision of mentees. Our results
indicate that mentors could be chosen on the basis of their supervision practice. Mentors who provide their mentees with

References
Anderson, R. N., Greene, M. L., & Loewen, P. S. (1988). Relationships among teachers
and students thinking skills, sense of efcacy, and student achievement. Alberta
Journal of Educational Research, 34(2), 148e165.
Ashton, P. T., & Webb, R. B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers sense of efcacy and
student achievement. New York, NY: Longman.
Ballantyne, R., Hansford, B., & Packer, J. (1995). Mentoring beginning teachers: a
qualitative analysis of process and outcomes. Educational Review, 47(3), 297e
307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0013191950470306.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Barnett, B., Hopkins-Thompson, P., & Hoke, M. (2002). Assessing and supporting new
teachers. Lessons from the southeast. Chapel Hill, NC: The Southeast Center for
Teaching Quality.
Baumert, J., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Dubberke, T., Jordan, A., Klusmann, U., et al.
(2008). Professionswissen von Lehrkrften, kognitiv aktivierender Mathematikunterricht und die Entwicklung von mathematischer Kompetenz (COACTIV):
Dokumentation der Erhebungsinstrumente [Professional competence of
teachers, cognitively activating instruction, and development of students'
mathematical literacy (COACTIV): scale documentation]. Materialien aus der
Bildungsforschung, 83. Berlin: Max Planck Institute for Human Development.
Baumert, J., & Kunter, M. (2006). Stichwort: Professionelle Kompetenz von Lehrkrften [Teachers professional competence]. Zeitschrift fr Erziehungswissenschaft, 9(4), 469e520. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11618-006-0165-2.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY:
Wiley.
Borko, H., & Mayeld, V. (1995). The roles of the cooperating teacher and university
supervisor in learning to teach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(5), 501e518.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(95)00008-8.
Bradbury, L. U., & Koballa, T. R., Jr. (2008). Borders to cross: identifying sources of
tension in mentoreintern relationships. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(8),
2132e2145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.03.002.
Brophy, J., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In
M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.). (pp. 328e375)
New York, NY: Macmillan.

176

D. Richter et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 36 (2013) 166e177

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of
learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32e42.
Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Borgogni, L., & Steca, P. (2003). Efcacy beliefs as
determinants of teachers job satisfaction. Journal of Educational Psychology,
95(4), 821e832. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.821.
Carter, M., & Francis, R. (2001). Mentoring and beginning teachers workplace
learning. Asia-pacic Journal of Teacher Education, 29(3), 249e262. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1080/13598660120091856.
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-t indexes for
testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233e255.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Paris, C. L. (1995). Mentor and mentoring: did Homer have it
right. In J. Smyth (Ed.), Critical discourses on teacher development (pp. 181e202).
London, UK: Cassell.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers professional development: toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational
Researcher, 38(3), 181e199.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Collier Books.
Dubberke, T., Kunter, M., McElvany, N., Brunner, M., & Baumert, J. (2008). Lerntheoretische berzeugungen von Mathematiklehrkrften: Einsse auf die
Unterrichtsgestaltung und den Lernerfolg von Schlerinnen und Schlern
[[Mathematics teachers beliefs and their impact on instructional quality and
student achievement]]. Zeitschrift fr Pdagogische Psychologie, 22(3e4), 193e
206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652.22.34.193.
Dunkin, M. J., & Biddle, B. J. (1974). The study of teaching. New York, NY: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.
Edwards, A. (1998). Mentoring student teachers in primary schools: assisting student teachers to become learners. European Journal of Teacher Education, 21(1),
47e62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0261976980210106.
Enzmann, D., & Kleiber, D. (1989). Helfer-Leiden: Stress und Burnout in psychosozialen
Berufen. Heidelberg: Asanger.
Fantilli, R. D., & McDougall, D. E. (2009). A study of novice teachers: challenges and
supports in the rst years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(6), 814e825.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.02.021.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (1998). Teachers as teacher educators. European Journal of
Teacher Education, 21(1), 63e74.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). Helping novices learn to teach: lessons from an exemplary support teacher. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(1), 17e30. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022487101052001003.
Feiman-Nemser, S., & Buchmann, M. (1987). When is student teaching teacher
education? Teaching and Teacher Education, 3(4), 255e273. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/0742-051X(87)90019-9.
Fletcher, S. H., & Barrett, A. (2004). Developing effective beginning teachers through
mentor-based induction. Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 12(3),
321e333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/030910042000275936.
Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., Ldtke, O., Pekrun, R., & Sutton, R. E. (2009). Emotional
transmission in the classroom: exploring the relationship between teacher and
student enjoyment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 705e716. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0014695.
Glazerman, S., Doln, M., Bleeker, M., Johnson, A., Isenberg, E., Lugo-Gil, J., et al.
(2008). Impacts of comprehensive teacher induction: Results from the rst year of a
randomized controlled study (NCEE 2009-4034). Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/
ncee/pdf/20094035.pdf.
Gold, Y. (1996). Beginning teacher support: attrition, mentoring, and induction. In
J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 548e594). New
York, NY: Macmillan.
Guglielmi, R. S., & Tatrow, K. (1998). Occupational stress, burnout, and health in
teachers: a methodological and theoretical analysis. Review of Educational
Research, 68(1), 61e99.
Guo, Y., Connor, C. M., Yang, Y., Roehrig, A. D., & Morrison, F. J. (2012). The effects of
teacher qualication, teacher self-efcacy, and classroom practices on fth
graders literacy outcomes. Elementary School Journal, 113(1), 3e24. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1086/665816.
Hackman, J., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159e170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
h0076546.
Hall, K. M., Draper, R. J., Smith, L. K., & Bullough, R. V., Jr. (2008). More than a place to
teach: exploring the perceptions of the roles and responsibilities of mentor
teachers. Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 16(3), 328e345.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13611260802231708.
Haser, C., & Star, J. R. (2009). Change in beliefs after rst-year of teaching: the
case of Turkish national curriculum context. International Journal of
Educational Development, 29(3), 293e302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedud
ev.2008.08.007.
Hawkey, K. (1997). Roles, responsibilities, and relationships in mentoring: a literature review and agenda for research. Journal of Teacher Education, 48(5), 325e
335. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022487197048005002.
Hennissen, P., Crasborn, F., Brouwer, N., Korthagen, F., & Bergen, T. (2008). Mapping
mentor teachers roles in mentoring dialogues. Educational Research Review,
3(2), 168e186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2008.01.001.
Hmelo-Silver, C., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement
in problem-based and inquiry learning: a response to Kirschner, Sweller, and
Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99e107.

Hobson, A. J., Ashby, P., Malderez, A., & Tomlinson, P. D. (2009). Mentoring beginning teachers: what we know and what we dont. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 207e216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.09.001.
Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk, A. E. (1990). Socialization of student-teachers. American
Educational Research Journal, 27(2), 279e300. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/
00028312027002279.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for t indexes in covariance structure
analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation
Modeling, 6(1), 1e55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.
Hudson, P. (2004). Specic mentoring: a theory and model for developing primary
science teaching practices. European Journal of Teacher Education, 27(2), 139e
146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0261976042000223015.
Hudson, P. (2013). Mentoring as professional development: growth for both
mentor and mentee. Professional Development in Education.
Huling-Austin, L. (1990). Teacher induction programs and internships. In
W. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 535e548).
Reston, VA: Association of Teacher Educators.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: an organizational
analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499e534. http://
dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312038003499.
Ingersoll, R. M., & Kralik, J. M. (2004). The impact of mentoring on teacher retention:
What the research says. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
Ingersoll, R. M., & Strong, M. (2011). The impact of induction and mentoring programs for beginning teachers: a critical review of the research. Review of
Educational Research, 81(2), 201e233.
Jones, M. (2000). Becoming a secondary teacher in Germany: a trainee perspective
on recent developments in initial teacher training in Germany. European Journal
of Teacher Education, 23(1), 65e76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/026197600411634.
Jreskog, K. G. (1979). Statistical estimation of structural models in longitudinaldevelopmental investigations. In J. R. Nesselroade, & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), Longitudinal research in the study of behavior and development (pp. 303e351). New
York, NY: Academic Press.
Kaplan, D. (2000). Structural equation modeling: Foundations and extensions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kessels, C., Beijaard, D., Veen, K. v.,& Verloop, N. (April 2008). The importance of
induction programs for the well-being of beginning teachers. In Paper presented
at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New
York, NY.
Klusmann, U., Kunter, M., Trautwein, U., Ldtke, O., & Baumert, J. (2008). Teachers
occupational well-being and quality of instruction: the important role of selfregulatory patterns. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 702e715. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.702.
Klusmann, U., Kunter, M., Voss, T., & Baumert, J. (2012). Emotional exhaustion and
job satisfaction of beginning teachers: the role of personality, educational
experience and professional competence [[Beruiche Beanspruchung angehender Lehrkrfte: Die Effekte von Persnlichkeit, pdagogischer Vorerfahrung
und professioneller Kompetenz]]. Zeitschrift fr Pdagogische Psychologie, 26,
275e290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652/a000078.
Kukla-Acevedo, S. (2009). Leavers, movers, and stayers: the role of workplace
conditions in teacher mobility decisions. Journal of Educational Research, 102(6),
443e452. http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOER.102.6.443-452.
Kunter, M., Baumert, J., Blum, W., Klusmann, U., Krauss, S., & Neubrand, M. (2013).
Cognitive activation in the mathematics classroom and professional competence of
teachers. Results from the COACTIV project. New York, NY: Springer.
Kunter, M., Frenzel, A., Nagy, G., Baumert, J., & Pekrun, R. (2011). Teacher enthusiasm: dimensionality and context specicity. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 289e301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.07.001.
Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Dubberke, T., Baumert, J., Blum, W., Brunner, M., et al.
(2007). Linking aspects of teacher competence to their instruction: results from
the COACTIV project. In M. Prenzel (Ed.), Studies on the educational quality of
schools. The nal report of the DFG priority programme (pp. S. 39eS. 59).
Mnster: Waxmann.
Kunter, M., Tsai, Y. M., Klusmann, U., Brunner, M., Krauss, S., & Baumert, J. (2008).
Students and mathematics teachers perceptions of teacher enthusiasm and
instruction. Learning and Instruction, 18(5), 468e482. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.learninstruc.2008.06.008.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lenhard, H. (2004). Zweite Phase an Studienseminaren und Schulen [[The second
phase of teacher education in schools and teacher training institutions]]. In
S. Blmeke, P. Reinhold, G. Tulodziecki, & J. Wildt (Eds.), Handbuch Lehrerbildung
(pp. 275e290). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
Lindgren, U. (2005). Experiences of beginning teachers in a school-based mentoring
program in Sweden. Educational Studies, 31(3), 251e263. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1080/03055690500236290.
LoCasale-Crouch, J., Davis, E., Wiens, P., & Pianta, R. (2012). The role of the mentor in
supporting new teachers: associations with self-efcacy, reection, and quality.
Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 20(3), 303e323. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2012.701959.
Locke, E. A. (1969). What is job satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance, 4(4), 309e336. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(69)90013-0.
Luft, J. A., & Cox, W. E. (2001). Investing in our future: a survey of support offered to
beginning secondary science and mathematics teachers. Science Educator,10(1),1e9.
Marable, M. A., & Raimondi, S. L. (2007). Teachers perceptions of what was most (and
least) supportive during their rst year of teaching. Mentoring and Tutoring:

D. Richter et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 36 (2013) 166e177


Partnership
in
Learning,
15(1),
25e37.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
13611260601037355.
Marsh, H. W., & Hau, K. T. (1996). Assessing goodness of t: is parsimony always
desirable? Journal of Experimental Education, 64(4), 364e390.
Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1996). Maslach burnout inventory manual
(3rd ed.). Mountain View, CA: CPP.
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leitner, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52(1), 397e422. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397.
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed.).
(pp. 13e103) New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Midgley, C., Feldlaufer, H., & Eccles, J. S. (1989). Change in teacher efcacy and
student self-related and task-related beliefs in mathematics during the transition to junior high school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(2), 247e258.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.2.247.
Muthn, L. K., & Muthn, B. O. (1998e2007). Mplus users guide (5th ed.). Los
Angeles, CA: Muthn & Muthn.
Noe, R. A., Greenberger, D. B., & Wang, S. (2002). Mentoring: what we know and
where we might go. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management,
21, 129e173. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0742-7301(02)21003-8.
Odell, S., & Ferraro, D. (1992). Teacher mentoring and teacher retention. Journal of Teacher
Education, 43(3), 200e204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022487192043003006.
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers beliefs and educational research: cleaning up a
messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307e332.
Patrick, B. C., Hisley, J., & Kempler, T. (2000). Whats everybody so excited about?:
the effects of teacher enthusiasm on student intrinsic motivation and vitality.
Journal of Experimental Education, 68(3), 217e236. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
00220970009600093.
Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In
J. Sikula, T. Buttery, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education
(2nd ed.). (pp. 102e119) New York, NY: Macmillan.
Rots, I., Aelterman, A., Vlerick, P., & Vermeulen, K. (2007). Teacher education,
graduates teaching commitment and entrance into the teaching profession.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 543e556. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.tate.2007.01.012.
Rozelle, J. J., & Wilson, S. M. (2012). Opening the black box of eld experiences: how
cooperating teachers beliefs and practices shape student teachers beliefs and
practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(8), 1196e1205. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.tate.2012.07.008.
Scandura, T. A., & Ragins, B. R. (1993). The effects of sex and gender role orientation
on mentorship in male-dominated occupations. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
43(3), 251e265. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1993.1046.
Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: our view of the state of the art.
Psychological
Methods,
7(2), 147e177.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1082989X.7.2.147.
Schwartz, D. L., Lindgren, R., & Lewis, S. (2009). Constructivism in an age of nonconstructivist assessments. In S. Tobias, & T. M. Duffy (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? (pp. 34e61). New York, NY, US: Routledge/Taylor &
Francis Group.
Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (Eds.). (1999). Skalen zur Erfassung von Lehrer- und
Schlermerkmalen: Dokumentation der psychometrischen Verfahren im Rahmen
der Wissenschaftlichen Begleitung des Modellversuchs Selbstwirksame Schulen.
Berlin: Freie Universitt Berlin.
Schwille, S. A. (2008). The professional practice of mentoring. American Journal of
Education, 115(1), 139e167. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/590678.
Seibert, S. (1999). The effectiveness of facilitated mentoring: a longitudinal quasiexperiment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 342e363. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1006/jvbe.1998.1676.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just
one. Educational Researcher, 27(4),
4e13. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/
0013189X027002004.

177

Shuell, T. J. (2001). Learning theories and educational paradigms. In N. J. Smelser, &


P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences
Vol. 13. (pp. 8613e8620). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2007). Dimensions of teacher self-efcacy and relations with strain factors, perceived collective teacher efcacy, and teacher
burnout. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 611e625. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.611.
Smith, T. M., & Ingersoll, R. M. (2004). What are the effects of induction and
mentoring on beginning teacher turnover? American Educational Research
Journal, 41(3), 681e714. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312041003681.
Stanulis, R. N., & Floden, R. E. (2009). Intensive mentoring as a way to help
beginning teachers develop balanced instruction. Journal of Teacher Education,
60(2), 112e122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022487108330553.
Staub, F. C., & Stern, E. (2002). The nature of teachers pedagogical content beliefs
matters for students achievement gains: quasi-experimental evidence from
elementary mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 144e155. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.94.2.344.
Stipek, D. J., Givvin, K. B., Salmon, J. M., & MacGyvers, V. L. (2001). Teachers beliefs
and practices related to mathematics instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(2), 213e226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00052-4.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efcacy: capturing an elusive
construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783e805. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2007). The differential antecedents of
self-efcacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 23(6), 944e956. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.05.003.
Tynjl, P., & Heikkinen, H. L. T. (2011). Beginning teachers transition from preservice education to working life: theoretical perspectives and best practices.
Zeitschrift fr Erziehungswissenschaft, 14(1), 11e33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
s11618-011-0175-6.
Vandenberg, R., & Lance, C. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement
invariance literature: suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4e69. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1177/109442810031002.
Veenman, S. (1984). Perceived problems of beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 54(2), 143e178. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543054002143.
Wanberg, C. R., Welsh, E. T., & Hezlett, S. A. (2003). Mentoring research: a review and dynamic process model. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 22, 39e124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0742-7301(03)
22002-8.
Wang, J. (2002). Learning to teach with mentors in contrived contexts of curriculum
and teaching organization: experiences of two Chinese novice teachers and
their mentors. Journal of In-Service Education, 28(2), 339e374. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1080/13674580200200186.
Wang, J., & Odell, S. J. (2002). Mentored learning to teach according to standardsbased reform: a critical review. Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 481e
546. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543072003481.
Wang, J., Odell, S. J., & Schwille, S. A. (2008). Effects of teacher induction on beginning
teachers teaching: a critical review of the literature. Journal of Teacher Education,
59(2), 132e152. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022487107314002.
Wolters, C. A., & Daugherty, S. G. (2007). Goal structures and teachers sense of
efcacy: their relation and association to teaching experience and academic
level. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(1), 181e193. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.181.
Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Spero, R. B. (2005). Changes in teacher efcacy during the early
years of teaching: a comparison of four measures. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(4), 343e356. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.01.007.
Woolfolk, A. E., Rosoff, B., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Teachers sense of efcacy and their
beliefs about managing students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 6(2), 137e148.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(90)90031-Y.

Potrebbero piacerti anche