tseunis transformative teacher induction plan, t3ip ...€¦ · connie harris arizona state...
TRANSCRIPT
Tseunis Transformative Teacher Induction Plan, T3IP:
TTTIPing the Scale in Favor of Reform
Arizona State University
by
Paula Tseunis
A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Education
Approved March 2011 by the
Graduate Supervisory Committee:
Kathleen Puckett, Chair
Teresa Foulger
Connie Harris
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY
May 2011
i
ABSTRACT
Facing a teacher shortage in math, science, and language arts secondary courses,
a suburban, unified, K-12 district partnered with a university in the southwest to create a
program for alternatively certified teachers. This specialized program permitted
candidates to teach with an intern certificate while completing university coursework
leading to certification. During this timeframe, the researcher-practitioner of this study
created an alternative teacher induction program focused on cycles of action research.
The model was created to capitalize on the content knowledge and work experience of
alternatively certified teachers in order to inspire innovation by offering a district-based
induction centering on cycles of action research. In the teachers' third year, each teacher
conducted action research projects within the framework of Leader Scholar Communities
which were facilitated by mentor teachers from the district with content expertise.
This study examines the effects of such a model on teachers' identities and
propensity toward transformative behaviors. A mixed methods approach was used to
investigate the research questions and to help the researcher gain a broader perspective on
the topic. Data were collected through a teacher efficacy survey, questionnaire, focus
groups, semi-structured interviews, observations, and electronic data.
The results from the study indicated that the participants in the study exhibited
signs of professional teaching identity, especially in the constructs of on-going process,
relationship between person and context, and teacher agency. Additionally, the
participants referenced numerous perspective transformations as a result of participating
in cycles of action research within the framework of a Community of Practice
framework. Implications from this study include valuing alternatively certified teachers,
creating outcome-based teacher induction programs, and replicating the T3IP model to
include professional development opportunities beyond this unique context.
ii
DEDICATION
This degree was made possible due to the love and support of my husband, Trent
Tseunis. Thank you for your solitude and devotion over the past three years. I owe you
more than a “thank you.” My sweet girls, Mallory and Summer, were inspirational in
their own way, making me smile and remember to laugh along the way. Thank you to my
parents for always encouraging me to pursue my goals. The constant support of my
family and friends, who always offered words of encouragement along my journey, gave
me the strength to finish. And, a special appreciation is offered to anyone who ever asked
me how I was doing, edited one of my papers, encouraged me to continue, or simply
made me smile over the past three years.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
My doctoral studies were guided by intelligent, caring, and devoted mentors.
Dr. Chris Clark taught me to learn for the sake of learning. In my terminal
degree, I finally realized the joy of gaining knowledge beyond earning an 'A'. Thank you
for encouraging all of Cohort 3 to make a difference within our communities.
Dr. Kathleen Puckett led our diverse LSC, allowing us the freedom to create our
own projects and the parameters to finish.
Dr. Teresa Foulger offered thoughtful questions that made me look beyond
details and consider broader possibilities.
Dr. Connie Harris gave me my first teaching position and always asked me to
reach for positions beyond what I felt capable. She has served as a role model in
leadership and character throughout my career. Thank you for your never-ending support.
Cohort 3 embraced the concept of a Community of Practice. We learned together,
laughed frequently, sought out one another for support, and finished together. Thank you
all for brightening my life. I would like to extend a special thank you to my carpool gang.
Although our drives were short, our conversations were rich.
My current and past students, who were simultaneously pursuing their own
careers in education, provided me with constant affirmation and reminders of the reason I
entered the profession.
Thank you to the six mentor teachers who shine as examples in the field and
agreed to engage in professional conversations with some incredible new teachers.
Finally, thank you to the nine teachers who chose to stay with me for three years,
while I asked them to do more than their peers and to engage in classroom research.
Thank you for trusting me, embracing one another, and choosing to positively impact
students.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES .........................................................................................................vi
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................vii
CHAPTER
1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 1
Tseunis Transformative Teacher Induction Program, T3IP ...................... 3
Research Question ................................................................................. 4
Definition of Terms ............................................................................... 5
2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE.............................................................. 8
Transformative Learning Theory and Teacher Induction ......................... 8
Theory and Definition of Transformative Learning ................................. 9
On Learning.............................................................................. 9
Reflection and Making Meaning ............................................... 10
Instrumental Learning, Communicative Learning,
and Validating Learning............................................... 12
Critical Reflection Leading to Perspective Transformation ......... 13
Implications for Transformative Learning in Teacher Induction .............. 14
Exploring Professional Teacher Identity ................................................ 15
Overview of Professional Teaching Identity .............................. 15
The Effect of Personal Identity on Professional
Teaching Identity ......................................................... 16
Professional Teaching Identity Defined .................................... 17
Gaining a Sense of Professional Identity
through Action Research .............................................. 18
v
CHAPTER Page
Creating Collaborative Environments and Supports
through Communities of Practice ................................. 19
Self-Efficacy in Alternatively Certified Teacher………………20
Action Research as it Relates to Reflection................................ 21
Relating Professional Teaching Identity to Transformative
Learning, Efficacy, and Reflection ............................................ 22
T3IP Conceptual Framework ................................................................ 24
Conclusion ........................................................................................... 25
3 METHODS .............................................................................................. 26
Tseunis Transformative Teacher Induction Plan, T3IP ........................... 26
Previous Cycles of Action Research ...................................................... 26
Year One of T3IP ................................................................................. 26
1st Cycle of Action Research ..................................................... 26
2nd
Cycle of Action Research .................................................... 27
Year Two of T3IP ................................................................................ 28
3rd
Cycle of Action Research .................................................... 28
Year Three of T3IP ............................................................................... 28
4th Cycle of Action Research .................................................... 28
Research Questions .............................................................................. 29
Situated Context ................................................................................... 29
Intervention .......................................................................................... 29
Roles ....................................................................................... 30
Intervention Plan ...................................................................... 31
CHAPTER Page
vi
Participants .......................................................................................... 32
Data Collection and Procedure .............................................................. 34
Instruments .............................................................................. 34
TSES .......................................................................... 34
T3IP Questionnaire ...................................................... 35
Reflection ....................................................... 36
Reliability of the T3IP Questionnaire ............... 37
Focus Group ............................................................................ 38
Observations ............................................................................ 39
Electronic Data ........................................................................ 39
Semi-Structured Interviews ...................................................... 40
Researcher Journal ................................................................... 41
Data Analysis ....................................................................................... 41
Validation of Data Analysis .................................................................. 43
4 FINDINGS ............................................................................................... 45
Research Question 1 ............................................................................. 45
T3IP Questionnaire Results ...................................................... 45
T3IP Questionnaire:
Professional Teaching Identity ......................... 46
T3IP Questionnaire: Reflection .................................... 47
Professional Teaching Identity Results by Construct .............................. 47
(C) 1: On-Going Process .......................................................... 47
Efficacy ...................................................................... 48
Curriculum ..................................................... 49
CHAPTER Page
vii
Research ......................................................... 49
Clear Definition of Self ................................... 49
(C) 2: Relationship Between Person and Context ....................... 50
Dedication to Collaborating for the Greater
Good in Educational Reform ........................... 50
(C) 3: Role of Sub Identities ..................................................... 50
(C) 4: Teacher Agency ............................................................. 51
Research Question 2 ............................................................................. 51
Qualitative Findings ................................................................. 52
Critical Reflection ....................................................... 52
Processing the What, How,
and Why in Education ........................ 53
Considering Teacher Professionalism .............. 53
Instrumental Learning and
Communicative Learning ................................ 54
Meaning Perspectives .................................................. 54
Perspective Transformation .......................................... 55
Shift in Perceptions of Teaching ...................... 55
A Science Teacher Example ............................ 55
A Math Teacher Example ................................ 56
A Language Arts Teacher Example.................. 56
Cycles of Action Research ........................................... 56
Research Question 3 ............................................................................. 57
Alternatively Certified Teachers' Perspectives ........................... 57
CHAPTER Page
viii
Being Valued .............................................................. 57
Becoming Action Researchers...................................... 57
Appreciating Community ............................................. 58
Mentor Teachers' Perspectives .................................................. 58
Action Research .......................................................... 58
Appropriate Mentors.................................................... 59
Embedded Training ..................................................... 59
Researcher/Practitioner's Perspectives ....................................... 59
Mentor Teachers .......................................................... 60
Expectations ................................................................ 61
5 DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS...................................................... 63
Discussion of Professional Teaching Identity ......................................... 64
Discussion on Transformative Behaviors ............................................... 67
Implications ......................................................................................... 69
Working with Alternatively Certified Teachers ......................... 69
Suggestions for Replication ...................................................... 70
The Role of the Induction Coordinator ......................... 70
Purposefully-Selected Mentor Teachers ........................ 70
A Focus on Action-Research through
Communities of Practice ................................. 71
A Model for Professional Development .................................... 72
Conclusion ........................................................................................... 72
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................... 74
ix
APPENDIX Page
A YEAR 1: T3IP TIMELINE ................................................................... 81
B YEAR 2: T3IP TIMELINE .................................................................. 84
C T3IP ROLES AND TASKS .................................................................. 87
D YEAR 3: T3IP TIMELINE ................................................................... 89
E PARTICIPANTS‟ RESEARCH PROJECT TITLES ........................... 91
F TEACHER RECRUITMENT LETTER ............................................... 93
G MENTOR TEACHER RECRUITMENT LETTER ............................. 95
H TEACHER SENSE OF EFFICACY SCALE ....................................... 97
I TSES (2001) CRONBACH‟S ALPHA RELIABILITY RESULTS ..... 99
J T3IP QUESTIONNAIRE ..................................................................... 101
K PILOT RELIABILITY: T3IP QUESTIONNAIRE .............................. 105
L MENTOR FOCUS GROUP: MODERATOR GUIDE (PRE) ............. 107
M MENTOR FOCUS GROUP: MODERATOR GUIDE (POST) ……. 110
N SEMI-STRUCTURED TEACHER INTERVIEW QUESTIONS ....... 113
O DATA SOURCES COMPREHENSIVE CHART................................ 115
P IRB APPROVAL LETTER................................................................... 117
Q TSES APPROVAL LETTER................................................................ 119
x
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Professional Teaching Identity as it Relates to Reflection,
Efficacy, and Transformative Learning ….……………………...… 23
2. Participant Teaching and Background Information .................................. 33
3. T3IP Questionnaire Sample Questions .................................................... 37
4. Methods Correlation Chart ……………………………………………… 42
5. T3IP Questionnaire Results ……………………………………………… 46
6. TSES Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale, TSES (2001) Pre/Post Results …. 48
7. Frequency of Transformative Learning Constructs from
Qualitative Data ………………………………………………………….. 52
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Tseunis Transformative Teacher Induction Program, T3IP, Concept Map ... 25
1
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
In 2010, U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan called for educational reform
by encouraging states and school districts to increase expectations and make meaningful
change in teacher training and school accountability (U.S. Department of Education,
2010). Reports on the cumulative and residual effects on future academic achievement
clearly show differences between an ineffective and effective teacher, resulting in a 54%
differential in academic achievement over a three-year period of time in the area of
mathematics (Sanders & Rivers, 1996). With headlines such as these that are constant
and demanding, America‟s leaders are increasingly concerned about the ability of the
United States to compete in a global world where much focus is placed on science,
technology, engineering, and math (BHEF, 2006).
In the midst of increasingly high expectations on teachers and schools, the United
States faces a critical shortage of highly qualified mathematics and science teachers.
Public schools frequently confront the harsh reality of not being able to find certified
teachers with strong content backgrounds in math and science (BHEF, 2006; Feistritzer,
2009; Moin, Dorfield, & Schunn, 2005; National Science Board 2006). “The United
States will need an additional 283,000 teachers in secondary school settings by 2015”
(BHEF, 2006, p.2). Furthermore, schools have difficulty retaining those who are trained;
nine percent of alternatively certified math and science teachers leave the field before
their fifth year of teaching (National Center for Education Statistics, 2008). And even
though the job of recruiting and retaining quality science and mathematics teachers
remains constant, the pressure to provide quality learning situations for students has not
decreased. Furthermore, hard-to-staff schools report vacancies in general elementary,
2
special education, and core subject areas such as English and language arts, social
studies, mathematics, biology and life sciences, and physical sciences (Cohen-Vogel &
Smith, 2007).
One solution to the teacher shortage problem is through alternative routes to
certification. By creating options for people initially trained for private-sector jobs to
enter the teaching profession, schools are able to fill positions and may also gain insight
from these individuals‟ real-world experiences and depth of content knowledge. Career
changers (Allen, 2007) come to the field with both benefits and drawbacks. On one hand,
they have experience in their content areas and have chosen teaching as a second career;
on the other hand, most of these applicants have never taught and have limited time to
adjust to the demands of the profession. In addition to teaching, teachers have roles in
curriculum, leadership, counseling, community outreach, and assessment. These varied
roles come with requirements for professional knowledge and implications for the
development of a conscious awareness of teachers‟ roles in the profession, both
personally and socially (Carlgren, 1996).
In an effort to adapt to these roles, new teachers often blend into the cultures and
expectations prescribed by those who have already established situational norms in the
workplace (Reynolds, 1996; Britzman, 1991). In doing so, however, new teachers may be
at risk of being acculturated to the point that they cease to venture beyond the current
reality. In other words, without appropriate guidance, new teachers might assume the
status quo without considering new possibilities for their classrooms, schools, or districts.
While this assimilation is harmless, reform requires novice teachers to develop their own
professional teaching identity in an environment that fosters transformative thinking: the
ability to critically reflect, reconsider personal meaning schemes, and question social
norms in education (Mezirow, 1990).
3
Alternatively certified teachers typically go through a teacher induction phase
based on survival. Induction programs can, however, provide more if they include an
opportunity to help alternatively certified teachers develop a professional teaching
identity within collaborative environments that foster transformative thinking. The goal
of the Tseunis Transformative Teacher Induction Program, (T3IP), is to validate these
teachers‟ experiences from the field and capitalize on their strengths while preparing
them for the reality of the classroom. A model focused on identity and transformative
learning may allow alternatively certified teachers not solely to adopt the norm culture,
but to maintain their own identity in a reflective, open-minded, and outcome-based
manner.
Tseunis Transformative Teacher Induction Program, T3IP
Facing a teacher shortage in math, science, and language arts secondary courses,
a suburban, unified, K-12 district partnered with a university in the southwest to create a
program for alternatively certified teachers. This specialized program permitted
candidates to teach in their own classrooms with an intern certificate while completing
university coursework leading to certification. At the end of the two-year program the
teachers were provisionally certified and earned master‟s degrees in secondary education.
The partnership benefited the district in filling hard-to-fill positions, and the university by
creating a network of current and future students.
The K-12 district served more than 36,500 students. The researcher-practitioner
in this study served as both the university and district coordinator for the program. The
job duties for this position included recruiting applicants, screening possible candidates,
contacting principals with information on viable candidates, communicating with the
university advisor to facilitate registration and certification procedures, working with the
university program director to provide students with support through university mentor
4
teachers, supporting teachers through university coursework, and implementing a district-
based teacher induction program. The role of the university was to prepare the
alternatively certified teachers to become effective classroom teachers. The university
provided coursework on curriculum, instruction, and assessment and focused its program
on teacher preparation. Additionally, the university assigned content mentor teachers to
observe and support the new teachers in the classroom in the first two years. With the
university focus on content and process reflection, the district teacher induction was able
to offer extra support in these areas, as well as create opportunities for the teachers to
explore premise reflection, by asking teachers to consider why they teach the way they
teach (Kreber & Cranton, 2000), possibly leading to transformative behaviors and a
heightened sense of teacher identity.
The T3IP was designed to support a group of alternatively certified teachers as
they developed a professional teaching identity by involving the teachers in the act of
problem-solving in their own field through teacher action research. The innovative
approach paired alternatively certified math, science, and language arts teachers with
veteran mentor teachers who worked together throughout the semester, developing and
reflecting on classroom problem-solving. The teachers met in leader-scholar communities
(Clark & Olson, 2010) to create, implement, and reflect on classroom action research.
Furthermore, the action research structure allowed teachers to make changes in their
practice and to become innovators while delving into the science of teaching. The goal of
this project was to create habits of mind, where critical analysis of teaching was a daily
practice (Mezirow, 1990).
5
Research Questions
Three research questions were explored in this study:
1. In what ways are alternatively certified teachers‟ professional teaching
identities affected as a result of participating in the T3IP?
2. To what extent do the alternatively certified teachers exhibit transformative
behaviors within and beyond their classrooms as a result of participating in
action research through leader scholar communities?
3. What aspects of the T3IP model influenced the development of the
alternatively certified teachers‟ identity and propensity toward transformative
behaviors within the profession?
Definition of Terms
Alternative certification program: Pre-service teacher preparation that allows highly-
qualified individuals to complete a teacher certification program while teaching full-
time and receiving payment (Darling-Hammond, 1990).
Alternatively certified teacher: A career changer who is enrolled in an alternative
certification program.
Career changer: A teacher who holds a bachelor's degree in a field outside of
education and has chosen to become a certified teacher (Allen, 2007).
Communicative learning: The process of tying new understandings to the bigger
picture of a pre-existing knowledge base in a community of peers that validate ideas
(Mezirow, 1991).
Critical reflection: The act of questioning what is known to be true. Critical reflection
is also known as premise reflection and focuses on questioning the why of current
practices (Mezirow, 1990).
6
Highly qualified: A teacher who has passed the required state assessments in the
specific subject area in which the individual is teaching.
Instrumental learning: A process wherein learners engage in task-oriented problem-
solving (Mezirow, 1991).
Meaning perspectives: Beliefs, theories, propositions, goal orientations, and
evaluations which serve as criteria for making value judgments and belief statements
(Mezirow, 1991).
On-Going process: Reflects teachers‟ current self images as well as how they might
envision their professional role in the future (Beijaard, Meijer, &Verloop, 2004).
Perspective transformation: A reformulation of assumptions to allow for a more open
and integrative perspective when making decisions, accompanied by action on these
new understandings (Mezirow, 1990).
Professional teaching identity: A conscious awareness of the teacher‟s role in the
profession, both personally and socially.
Reflection (R): For the purposes of this study, reflection (R) will be defined as the act
of analyzing past, present, and future experiences (Killion & Todnem, 1991) based
on content and process (Mezirow, 1991).
Relationship between person and context: Refers to the process of teachers who
struggle to adhere to professional norms, while exploring their own place in the field
(Beijaard et. al., 2004).
Role of sub-identities: Teachers who can identify core professional roles related to
teaching.
Teacher agency: The active process of professional development, allowing teachers
to form and reform identities both individually and collaboratively (Beijaard et. al.,
2004).
7
Traditional teacher education program: Preparation of pre-service teachers who do
not already hold a degree in education. Students complete all coursework, including
student teaching, prior to being hired by a school district (Fenstermacher, 1990).
Transformative behaviors: Behaviors that are inclusive, discriminatory, open,
reflective, and emotionally able to change (Mezirow, 1991).
Transformative learning: A process that centers on adult learns‟ habits of mind,
meaning perspectives, and mindsets. The goal of transformative learning is for adult
learners to exhibit transformative behaviors (Mezirow, 1991).
8
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The following literature review explores transformative learning theory and
professional teaching identity in relationship to teacher induction. Collectively, the body
of work supports the notion of using a process, such as action research cycles in teacher
induction for alternatively certified teachers, as a viable means of developing
transformative behaviors and professional identity.
Transformative Learning Theory and Teacher Induction
Teacher induction plays a large role in determining the type of teacher one will
become as well as whether or not one will remain in the profession (Adelman, 1991;
McDonald, 1980). Most school districts offer some form of novice teacher support, either
in the form of traditional monthly meetings or mentoring. Studies have found, however,
that when induction is offered for a short duration or focused mainly on teacher survival
in the first year, the opportunities for affecting long-term outcomes or quality teaching is
diminished (Feiman-Nemser, Carver, S., Carver, C., & Yusko, 1999).
The term induction has a variety of meanings in the literature, many of which
vary considerably. Induction may refer to the beginning stages of learning to teach
characterized by a period of anxiety and intense learning. It can also mean the
socialization into the profession that occurs in the initial years of teaching. Induction is
also the name given to a formal program for beginning teachers, usually developed in and
conducted by the hiring school district and involving a series of meetings held over the
course of one to two years that address classroom issues (Feiman-Nemser et. al., 1999).
A growing body of literature criticizes this traditional induction model and calls for a
recasting around leadership, critical capacity building, rational discourse, and policy
activism (Brown, 2004; Fullan 1993; Mezirow, 2003; Murphy, 2001). A new perspective
9
on teacher induction comes in the form of incorporating transformative learning theory
into teacher induction programs.
Theory and Definition of Transformative Learning
Transformative learning theory has roots in Habermas‟ critical theory about three
types of knowledge: instrumental, communicative, and emancipatory (Kreber & Cranton,
2000). Instrumental knowledge refers to the human interest in controlling personal
environments and focuses in large part on cause-effect relationships and task-oriented
problem solving (Mezirow, 1991). The second area of learning, communicative
knowledge, is practical and involves the understanding of others as well as social and
cultural norms. The final component, emancipatory knowledge, is based in the root word
„emancipation.‟ Emancipatory knowledge uses critical reflection and rational action to
free one‟s self from coercion and self-imposed restraints (Kreber & Cranton, 2000).
Emancipatory knowledge can be developed by challenging presuppositions and
exploring, transforming, and acting on new perspectives (Mezirow, 1990).
Transformative learning centers on adult learners‟ habits of mind, meaning-
perspectives, and mindsets. The goal is for the adult learner to exhibit transformative
behaviors by becoming more inclusive, discriminatory, open, reflective, and emotionally
able to change. According to Mezirow (1991), these frames of reference are more likely
to generate beliefs and opinions that will lead to action. Transformative learning
challenges the basic assumptions of learners through the process of critical reflection
(Brown, 2004). To truly embrace critical reflection, one must first consider the role of
learning, reflection and meaning, and the validation of learning through instrumental and
communicative learning (Mezirow, 1990).
On learning. Learning is a process of continually interpreting experiences to
guide understanding, appreciation, and action (Mezirow, 1991). Because perceptions are
10
influenced by expectations, perceptions influence the way experiences are interpreted.
Mezirow highlights two key features in the process of learning: meaning schemes and
meaning perspectives.
Meaning schemes refer to the way habitual expectations influence assumptions
that are made about if-then, cause-effect, and category relationships (Mezirow, 1991).
For example, “If you go swimming, you expect to get wet” and “You can expect that
water will quench your thirst.” Meaning perspectives, on the other hand, refer to beliefs,
theories, propositions, goal orientations, and evaluations; they are the criteria for making
value judgments and belief statements (Mezirow, 1991). Meaning perspectives are
primarily created in childhood through emotional experiences with influential adults such
as parents, teachers, or other mentors. The experiences and perspectives are reinforced
through experience, thus reinforcing expectations of how things ought to be. Meaning
schemes and meaning perspectives affect learning. How one interprets information or
new situations is grounded in his or her expectations and perceptions.
Reflection and making meaning. Reflection involves the process of balancing
new learning with prior experiences to determine how the new material or process will be
interpreted; the act of reflection allows teachers to challenge assumptions. Argyris and
Schön‟s (1974) double loop theory suggests that people learn in cycles, moving naturally
between action, reflection, activity, and repose. Applying these cycles to the activity of
teachers, during the first phase, teachers observe a previous action, reflect on what was
done, decide how to change the action, and apply their decision to another action. During
the second loop of reflection, teachers reconsider basic assumptions, conclusions and
reasoning, reconnect to new possible approaches, and reframe and articulate new ideas.
Schön (1983) expands on the idea of reflection with the term reflection-in-action. A
practitioner can be described as reflecting in action when he is able to recognize a current
11
action as similar to a past action instead of continuing with the same past action. During
reflection-in-action, the practitioner pays attention to the case, uses intuition, and then
experiments and explores to test a new hypothesis to create a new and enhanced
experience. Similarly, Killion and Todnem (1991) address three phases of reflection:
reflection-on- practice, reflection-in-practice, and reflection-for-practice. Reflection-on-
practice is closely aligned to the action in which alternatively certified teachers need to
participate in order to survive their first few years of teaching. Reflection-in-practice
involves the act of adjusting one's instruction in real-time and is similar to Schön's (1974)
original work. When a teacher notices that half of the class is lost ten minutes into the
lesson, reflection-in-practice allows the teacher to realize the error and to adjust for
maximum student gain. Finally, reflection-for-practice refers to the times when teachers
consider what they will do with their new information as it relates to future teaching
moments. The act of self-reflection in any of these stages allows teachers to feel a greater
sense of control in the classroom, which may lead to a greater sense of self-efficacy in the
educational field (Killion & Todnem, 1991).
Mezirow (1991) constructed three levels of reflection, based on Habermas‟
critical theory of instrumental, communicative, and emancipatory knowledge. The three
levels of reflection in transformative learning theory are content, process, and premise.
Content reflection is primarily based on instructional knowledge; what we know about
what we teach. The second stage, process reflection, questions the adequacy of the
aforementioned instructional knowledge. How well did we implement what we know and
what was the effect? Finally, premise reflection questions the merit and relevance of
specific practice; asking us to consider why we teach the way we teach (Kreber &
Cranton, 2000). Following Dewey‟s (1933) lead, reflection can lead to the assessment of
12
one‟s beliefs. Teachers must learn to listen to themselves as well as others as they
construct their own beliefs about teaching and learning.
Instrumental learning, communicative learning, and validating learning.
Instrumental learning is a step beyond reflection where learners engage in task-oriented
problem-solving. Through the act of looking at options, challenging hypotheses, making
inferences from evidence, and interpreting feedback on the new process, learners are
involved in active processes that challenge assumptions and expectations. After the act of
problem-solving through instrumental learning, it is important for learners to reflect via
communicative learning in order to make sense of what has been learned.
Communicative learning ties new understandings to the bigger picture of a pre-existing
knowledge base and validates ideas. Finding metaphoric labels for these new
understandings is another method of bringing coherence to the meaning perspective
(Mezirow, 1991).
In order to validate new meanings derived from the process of communicative
learning, teachers typically look to a peer consensus of beliefs. Because “empirical tests
of truth” (Mezirow, 1991, p.10) do not exist, teachers look to one another for acceptance
and validation of ideas. To gather a true consensus, each group member must be free to
fully participate in critical and reflective dialogue. Group members must create an
environment where each member feels free to speak, challenge, critique, and defend a
position.
As teachers share with others, a common group can begin to process the
complexity of teaching (Richert, 1992). Together, the group processes and reflects, both
internally and socially, negotiating meaning about the given topic. Individuals discuss,
debate, and negotiate meaning about ideas and events, participating in the social
construction of knowledge similar to that described by Vgotsky‟s social constructivist
13
theory (1991). The result is the creation of a small culture of shared artifacts with shared
meanings. By funding the community on the premise that something of value, whether
social, personal, intellectual or ethical, can be gained, members will be able to feel
support while co-exploring the phenomenon of education. As the members commit to
each other and listen to experiences, inquiry can be fostered (Oja, Diller, Corcoran &
Andrew, 1992).
Critical reflection leading to perspective transformation. Critical reflection is
more than reflecting on practice, in practice, or for practice (Killion & Todnem, 1991).
Instead, critical reflection, also known as premise reflection, involves the process of
questioning what is known to be true. Through critical reflection, one looks at habitual
patterns of expectation and meaning perspectives and considers whether they still align
with new learning (Mezirow, 1991). The act involves challenging one‟s beliefs and may
even lead to a paradigm shift (Kuhn, 1970) in how the current reality is viewed. While
reflection focuses on how something was done or how to do something better, critical
reflection embraces the why and includes the reasons and consequences of why
something is done (Mezirow & Associates, 1990). Freire sees the purpose of critical
reflection as a means of rediscovering power from learners in order to transform their
own reality and society (as cited in Taylor, 1998). As teachers embrace critical reflection,
they are more likely to experience perspective transformation: the process of becoming
critically aware of why one looks at the world in a particular way and how information is
perceived and understood. A perspective transformation is a reformulation of
assumptions to allow for a more open and integrative perspective when making decisions
accompanied by action on these new understandings (Mezirow, 1990).
14
Implications for Transformative Learning in Teacher Induction
A transformative approach to teacher induction would embrace the above
concepts in an attempt to “foster the learner‟s skills, habit of mind, disposition, and will
to become a more active and rational learner” (Mezirow, 1991, p. 62). In addition to
helping alternatively certified teachers survive the first years of teaching, the role of the
adult educator can be to bridge theory with practice, foster the ability to reason and
critically examine practice, and encourage the critical reflection of assumptions about
education, as well as current practices for the betterment of the profession.
As was mentioned at the beginning of this section, the induction years are
crucial. Teachers' beliefs are developed during their apprenticeship years as a student
(Lortie, 1975). For the alternatively certified teacher, this apprenticeship occurs in real
time while the teacher simultaneously acts as student and teacher. In an apprenticeship
situation, the community uses apprentices to grow their own masters. During the process,
however, learning and knowledge is negotiated and the craft is transformed as a result of
having apprentices. In other words, while the apprentices are learning from masters, they
are also bringing new expertise to the field. Lave and Wenger (1991) would suggest that
new teachers are negotiating meaning as well in these first few years, struggling to grasp
what teaching really is and where they fit as teacher leaders. A transformative induction
program may also encourage teachers to become change agents in the system along with
“creating a long-term commitment to teacher leadership, particularly in culturally diverse,
low socioeconomic schools” (Harris, Lowery-Moore & Farrow, 2008, p. 325). Because
they learn in the field and education is a complex field, teachers must learn to employ
these forms of thinking and act accordingly. Reflection on action and in action (Killion &
Todnem, 1991; Schön, 1974) are necessary steps for understanding teaching, but
15
reflection for action (Killion & Todnem, 1991) accompanied by communicative learning
and rational discourse within a safe learning community (Mezirow, 1990) ignites change.
Exploring Professional Teacher Identity
As learning is so closely tied to personal expectations, meaning schemes, and
meaning perspectives (Mezirow, 1991), one result of a transformative teacher induction
program may be an identity shift in new teachers. Because meaning perspectives are
created in part by cultural beliefs and assimilation, the current view of education is a
factor in a teacher‟s identity. Teacher education seems unable to shake the condition of
status deprivation (Goodland, 1990). For over a century, teaching has been seen as a
craft, rather than a profession. Critics have argued that teachers are born and not made
and that teaching is an intuitive art (James, 1983). Those in the field understand the
intensity and intricacies of education and see that teaching is a meaningful profession.
Effective teachers juggle many roles daily. They analyze data; serve as counselors; adapt
and adopt new practices; know each child individually in regards to academics and
behaviors; understand and apply knowledge of learning styles, cultural background,
interest and abilities to instruction; help students integrate social, emotional, and
intellectual growth; develop and implement standards-based instruction and assessment;
and inspire passion for learning in their students. New teachers must weigh perceptions of
education with reality in order to decide their roles in the profession.
Overview of professional teaching identity. In order to measure professional
teaching identity, the concept must be considered and defined. The research on teacher
professionalism is as varied as its definition (Beijaard et. al., 2004). However, three
themes that occur regularly in the literature are teachers‟ professional knowledge, the
professionalism of teaching, and teacher professionalism (Carlgren, 1996). Teachers‟
professional knowledge includes experience-based tacit knowledge as well as formal
16
knowledge; knowledge of curriculum and pedagogy falls into this category. The
professionalism of teaching is both historical and social, including accepted societal
images of what teachers should know and do as well as what teachers see as important in
their professional work (Beijaard et. al, 2004). Finally, teacher professionalism is defined
as the quality in teacher work, referencing the precise balance of theory and practice;
teachers know what good practice is and use this knowledge in the correct situations
(Carlgren, 1996).
The effect of personal identity on professional teaching identity. Personal
teaching identity is closely related to professional teaching identity as teachers‟ self
concepts influence their professional identities. A teacher‟s sense of self plays a
significant role on action in the classroom, school community, and the broader
educational community (Beijaard et. al, 2004). What teachers view as vital for teaching is
a basis for meaning making and decision making (Bullough, 1997; Mezirow, 1990).
Beijaard et. al. (2004) posit that what the profession sees as current and relevant may
conflict with teachers‟ personal desires and experiences of what they know to be good,
thus conflicting with meaning perspectives. Additionally, teachers‟ views of external
changes in education as well as personal development are influenced by context. The
general expectations by those who surround a teacher as well as how the teacher ascribes
to those expectations affects personal identity (Reynolds, 1996). In the end, the varying
schools of thought on professional identity point out that the concept is dynamic and
anything but stable; as teachers learn and experience, their perceptions change and
develop over time. Components of personal identity are embedded in the following four
constructs of a professional teaching identity.
Professional teaching identity defined. For the purposes of this study,
professional identity will be broadly defined as a conscious awareness of the teacher‟s
17
role in the profession, both personally and socially. Based on Beijaard et. al.‟s (2004)
research, four constructs will be used to create a working definition. The constructs are
further delineated below based on work found within and outside of Beijaard et. al.‟s
study (2004). First, professional identity is viewed as an on-going process. This concept
embraces the idea of teachers‟ current self images as well as how they might envision
their professional role in the future. Second, identity is viewed as a relationship between
individuals and their context. Teachers are expected to adhere to some professional
norms while exploring their own place in the field. Teachers attach value to certain norms
depending on their experiences and beliefs (Mezirow, 1990). This negotiation process, in
part, helps to develop a teaching culture based on contextual experiences. Third, teachers‟
identities consist of multiple sub-identities. The extent to which these sub-identities work
in concert is essential to the creation of a well-balanced individual. Finally, teacher
agency refers to the active process of professional development (Coldron & Smith, 1999).
As the teachers develop and experience, they also form and reform identities; this process
takes place both individually and collaboratively through learning activities. Below is a
working definition of professional identity under the above constructs ((C)= Construct).
(C)1: On-Going Process. Teachers…
have a clear definition of who they are.
are efficacious in instruction, management and assessment
(Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001).
are committed to the profession.
view the profession of teaching as important.
can envision a future desired sense of self.
(C)2: Relationship between Person and Context. Teachers…
18
view their role as important, attractive or in harmony with other roles
(Moore and Hofman, 1988).
are dedicated to collaborating for a greater good in educational reform
(Mitchell, 1997)
(C)3: The Role of Sub-Identities. Teachers…
can identify core professional roles related to teaching.
balance sense of self with educational changes- curriculum, instructional
(Brooke, 1994).
are aware of what is important to the profession and how this relates to
self (Paechter & Head, 1996).
balance assimilated knowledge of the field with opportunities for change
(Brooke, 1994).
(C)4: Teacher Agency. Teachers…
embrace relationship of aspects of teaching common to all teachers:
knowledge of subject matter, didactic and pedagogical expertise
(Beijaard, Verloop & Vermunt, 2000).
view their roles in the future (Conway, 2001).
are active in the process of professional development (Coldron & Smith,
1999).
reflect on practice, in practice and for practice (Schön, 1983).
Gaining a sense of professional identity through action research. One method
of creating an authentic context for new teachers to embrace agency (Conway, 2001) and
develop their identities in a transformative manner is to learn and process the daily
inquiries of teaching through action research. Similar to Mezirow‟s (1990) stage of
instrumental learning, action research focuses on the following characteristics: change,
19
reflection, participation, inclusion, sharing, understanding, repetition, practice, and
community (Stringer, 1999). As a result of participating in action research, teachers feel
more confident in their research skills and showcase a sense of pride by validating
student data through reliable methods. Additionally, teachers indicate a stronger sense of
professionalism and an elevated awareness of their own teaching practices. The act of
reflecting on their own data encourages teachers to make immediate changes in
instruction (Atay, 2007).
Teachers who participate in action research are transformed in their roles of
educator, finding themselves self-confident as researchers, empowered as teachers, and
engaged in their profession with purpose (Shockley, Bond, & Rollins, 2008). Action
research, as a form of professional development, allows teachers to process discrepancies
between theory and reality and to problem-solve within the field and within their own
classrooms in order to create solutions. As a result of grappling with data and exploring
new techniques, teachers gain greater professional self-determination through the
heightened consciousness and understandings that result from conducting research in
their own classrooms (Carr and Kemmis, 1986). Action research carries possibilities of
innovation, enlightenment, and newly-formed identities.
Creating collaborative environments and supports through communities of
practice. When conducted through a community of practice (CoP), action research can
allow for collective inquiry and in-depth analyses of curriculum and student work
(Goodnough, 2008; Watt and Watt, 1999; Wenger, 1998a). CoPs are collaborative
environments that foster growth. As new teachers often feel isolated, the importance of
creating a community of learners is evident. A cohesive group, experiencing similar
situations, joys and hardships, can share stories and create solutions. During their first
years, alternatively certified teachers are learning the craft while simultaneously
20
experiencing the craft; their learning is situated within their work (Lave and Wenger,
1991). Because alternatively certified teachers are learning in real-time, supportive
environments are necessary to create a safe and inspiring home base. Participants of CoPs
are inclined to develop collegial relationships and support each other‟s growth in the
practice. Additionally, teachers develop a heightened sense of identity as they move from
a self-perception of „new‟ teacher to one of legitimate practitioner, reflecting on current
and future practices. The most salient feature of CoPs comes in the evolution of
developed professional relationships (Goos & Bennison, 2008). Together, as a unified
team, teachers can provide support and inspiration to transform their classrooms through
the support of communities of practice.
Self-efficacy in alternatively certified teachers. One of the common predictors
of teacher success, whether alternatively or traditionally prepared, is self-efficacy
(Pajares, 1996), one's ability to succeed on a task within a specific context (Bandura,
1997). Direct correlations between teacher self-efficacy and student achievement exist in
educational research (Pajares, 1996). When teachers experience success in their
classrooms, they feel a sense of relief and a boost of energy to carry them to the next task.
If teachers feel capable in their classrooms, their confidence will lead to successful
teaching moments and positive student gains.
The research on self-efficacy in alternatively certified teachers is divided. Some
research concludes that teacher confidence and efficacy may be negatively affected by
entering the field in a nontraditional fashion. The premise of the data is that alternatively
certified teachers are less efficacious in the field as a result of feeling less prepared than
traditionally-prepared teachers (Darling-Hammond, Chung, & Freelow, 2002).
Other researchers assert that alternatively certified teachers have a high sense of
self-efficacy. Many alternatively certified teachers are career changers (Allen, 2007)
21
who have chosen teaching as a second career and already possess authentic experience in
the content area; their intentional choice of the teaching profession coupled with their
ability to make learning relevant in the classroom allow for positive classroom
experiences and teacher success (Malow-Iroff, O‟Connor, & Bisland, 2004). There
remains "an intricate pattern in (the fact that) alternatively certified novice teachers who
possess high self-efficacy are more susceptible to be innovative in their instructional
strategies, their pedagogical techniques and they are more receptive to student ideas"
(Malow-Iroff, O‟Connor, & Bisland, 2004, p. 1-2). Specifically, alternatively certified
novice teachers with higher science knowledge and a positive attitude toward science
teaching continue to produce high scores in the area of self-efficacy (Tekkaya, Cakiroglu,
& Ozkan, 2002).
While the research remains in conflict about alternative pathway teachers in
relation to efficacy, it is collectively agreed that teachers who possess a high sense of
self-efficacy will approach difficulties as challenges, set challenging goals for
themselves, endure in trying times, search out new avenues to defy failure, and recover
quickly from setbacks (Bandura, 1993; Berman, McLaughlin, Bass, Pauly, & Zellman,
1977; Guskey, 1984). Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk- Hoy, and Hoy (1998) suggest that
teacher efficacy directly correlates with teacher actions and outcomes received within
specific contexts.
Action research as it relates to reflection. Action research can be a catalyst for
challenging professional development by allowing teachers to participate in an in-depth
process of analysis about their own teaching. Action research is comparative research or
social action that leads to further social action through a spiraling of steps including
planning, action, and determining results of the action (Lewin, 1944; Gay, Mills, &
Airasian, 2009; Stringer, Christensen, & Baldwin, 2010). In education, the primary
22
purpose of action research is to improve one‟s own practice in the classroom and to foster
growth (Ariizumi, 2005; Gall, Gall & Borg, 2003). Action research gives teachers the
tools to reflect on their own practice and to make data-based decisions for change.
Teachers are able to understand their actions and the reasons behind their actions; as a
result, teachers realize the cause and effect of their own instruction and take deliberate
actions to continue with their success or to improve upon shortcomings (Gauthier, 1963;
Gay et. al., 2009; Stringer, 2004). Once committed to action research teachers may see
educational research as a method of engaging in systematic inquiry with the expected
outcome of improvement in pedagogical practices or solving professional quandaries
from the field (Gay et. al. 2009; Stringer, 2004).
Relating Professional Teaching Identity to Transformative Learning, Efficacy, and
Reflection
Table 1 illustrates the constructs of professional teaching identity and their
relationship to the constructs of transformative learning (TL), efficacy (E) and reflection
(R). As defined above, on-going process involves teachers with a clear definition of who
they are and who are efficacious in instruction, management, and the profession. Under
this construct, teachers are committed to the profession and can envision a future desired
sense of self. Bandura‟s (1997) definition of efficacy as one‟s belief in his or her ability
to succeed on a task within a specific context strongly relates to this construct of
professional teaching identity. The second construct, relationship between person and
context, involves teachers being dedicated to collaborate for the greater good of
educational reform (Mitchell, 1997). Recall that critical reflection is the process of
challenging beliefs and communicative learning centers on making sense of things and
creating new themes for learning through problem solving. The role of sub identities is
closely aligned with the transformative learning principles of meaning perspectives,
23
instrumental learning, and perspective transformation (Mezirow, 1990). As teachers
negotiate meaning in the profession, perspectives may change and transformations may
occur which affect the sub identities or balance of self with education changes a teacher
encounters (Brooke, 1994). Finally, as teachers reflect on, in, and for practice (Killion &
Todnem, 1991; Schön, 1983), they embrace relationships of teaching, are active in
professional development, and view their roles in the future.
Table 1
Professional Teaching Identity as it Relates to Reflection, Efficacy, and Transformative
Learning
Professional Teaching Identity Constructs
(C)1:On-Going Process (Beijaard et. al., 2004) E: Efficacy (Bandura, 1997)
(C)2: Relationship between Person and Context
(Beijaard et. al., 2004)
TL: Critical Reflection (Mezirow,
1990)
TL: Communicative Learning
(C)3: Role of Sub Identities (Beijard et. al.,
2004)
TL: Meaning Perspectives (Mezirow,
1990)
TL: Instrumental Learning
TL: Perspective Transformation
(C)4: Teacher Agency (Beijaard et. al., 2004) (R): Reflection on and in Practice
(Schön, 1983)
(R): Reflection for Practice (Killion &
Todnem, 1991)
E= Efficacy TL= Transformative Learning
(R)= Reflection
24
T3IP Conceptual Framework
Figure 1 illustrates the development of professional teaching identity as it relates
to the development of transformative behaviors in a teacher induction program. The first
column depicts the developmental stages of a professional teaching identity. Throughout
the program, teachers developed their identity while weighing their commitment to the
profession and defining their roles within the profession. The second column illustrates
the stages of transformative learning as they are related to a CoP framework. The
intervention was enveloped in a CoP framework, which was important for a true
communicative learning experience. For teachers to feel free to express ideals and beliefs
and to challenge one another, they must embrace the characteristics and purposes of a
CoP: identity, learning as becoming; practice, learning by doing; meaning, learning as
experience; and community, learning as belonging (Wenger, 1998b). Communicative
learning, the act of making sense of new learning through group reflection, allows for the
validation of meaning through critical reflection and rational discourse (Mezirow, 1990).
During these events, the teachers‟ professional identities are challenged as they negotiate
their role in the field and experience teacher agency, the active process of professional
development. By creating communicative learning opportunities for teachers within the
framework of a CoP, professional teaching identity and transformative behaviors are
fostered.
25
Figure 1
Tseunis Transformative Teacher Induction Program, T3IP, Concept Map
Conclusion
The induction years are a critical time in the development of a teacher‟s
professional identity. A transformative learning induction program allows
teachers to challenge assumptions through critical reflection and rational
discourse. Meaning perspectives may alter during this period and perspective
transformations may occur (Mezirow, 1990). As a result, teachers can develop
habits of mind that allow them to critically examine practice, listen to others, and
make positive changes in their classrooms, schools, and districts.
26
Chapter 3
METHODS
Tseunis Transformative Teacher Induction Plan, T3IP
The T3IP is a model for teacher induction of alternatively certified secondary
teachers. The model was created to capitalize on the content knowledge and work
experience of alternatively certified teachers in order to inspire innovation by offering a
district-based induction that centers on cycles of action research. The primary focus of
the first year is to develop a CoP and guide teachers through mini action research projects
within the framework of a CoP. During the second year, the teachers conduct action
research projects through university coursework, while still meeting monthly in the
district teacher induction to support each other in their research. In the third year, teachers
conduct a third round of action research within the framework of Leader Scholar
Communities (LSC's) (Clark & Olson, 2009); the LSC's are facilitated by mentor teachers
from the district with content expertise.
Previous Cycles of Action Research
The T3IP method of induction is influenced by previously conducted research that
examined the extent to which alternatively certified teachers reflected on practice, in
practice, and for practice. It explored the teachers‟ sense of efficacy as well as their sense
of belonging within a CoP.
Year One of T3IP
1st cycle of action research. In the first semester, the researcher-practitioner met
monthly with the group of alternatively certified teachers to provide support and to help
bridge theory with practice through a CoP framework. Additionally, the researcher-
practitioner observed teachers in their classrooms and provided feedback on instruction.
The first cycle of action research investigated the ways in which a teacher induction
27
program based on a CoP framework supported alternatively certified teachers. Through
questionnaires, interviews, and observations, the teachers reported that they were inspired
by their peers, felt a sense of belonging, and looked forward to the intellectual stimulation
that occurred during each meeting. See Appendix A for a detailed timeline.
2nd cycle of action research. While the teachers bonded as a group in the first
semester through a CoP environment, the degree to which they reflected on classroom
practice and made informed decisions was not documented. Therefore, the next cycle of
action research focused on the alternatively certified teachers conducting their own
classroom-based action research projects as a means of increasing efficacy and reflection
in practice. Questionnaire responses from the semester activities indicated that as a result
of conducting action research in their own classrooms, the teachers became highly
reflective in their practice. Efficacy was also high. On a 9 point Likert scale for Teacher
Efficacy (Tschannan-Moran et. al., 2001), the teachers rated themselves moderately high
in the areas of classroom management, instruction, and student engagement: 7.33, 6.81,
and 6.44 respectively. Qualitative data showed that teachers had the most efficacious
moments through mastery experiences, moments where they experienced success in the
classroom (Gibbs, 1997). Within this theme, data was collected from observations and
artifacts where teachers shared stories about teaching experiences that exemplified pride
in their work, self-perceptions of themselves as professionals, and successes with
students.
The focus on action research during this cycle seemed to add a structure to the
group meetings that allowed the teachers to move from discussions about anxiety into
dialogue about classroom practice and student achievement. As opposed to first semester,
where the group spent time bonding and talking about classroom issues, during the
second semester the talk moved more from a stage of venting frustrations to a problem-
28
solving lens. The common purpose of the action research project led to teacher reflection-
on- practice and reflection-for-practice (Killion & Todnem, 1991). The discussions about
in-class experiences fell primarily into three categories: instruction, assessment, and
classroom community. The level of discussion was generally focused on cause and effect
and possible controllable solutions versus uncontrollable variables. One teacher noted
that conducting the action research project was the best professional development she had
experienced all year. Another teacher concluded that the action research process forced
her to challenge assumptions and stereotypes and provided her with a “valuable long-
range perspective that she didn‟t expect.”
Year Two of T3IP
3rd
cycle of action research. During the second year, the focus shifted to
supporting the teachers within their settings as they delved into the second year of
university coursework. The teachers completed a second round of action research, this
time through a university lens. On the district side of year two, the induction was
organized in a way to support the university focus on innovation through action research
(see Appendix B).
Year Three of T3IP
4th cycle of action research. After two years of participation in an alternative
teacher induction program, the next step in the T3IP model was to measure the sense of
the teachers‟ professional identity and the extent to which alternatively certified teachers
exhibited transformative behaviors within and beyond their classrooms. Therefore, the
third year of T3IP, the focus of this study, centered on transformative learning and the
continued development of the teachers‟ professional identities.
29
Research Questions
The T3IP was developed as a model to support the induction process of alternatively
certified teachers. The following section outlines the research questions, situated context,
intervention, participants, data collection, and data analysis portions of this study. The
following research questions were explored:
1. In what ways are alternatively certified teachers‟ professional teaching
identities affected as a result participating in the T3IP?
2. To what extent do the alternatively certified exhibit transformative
behaviors within and beyond their classrooms as a result of participating
in action research through leader scholar communities?
3. What aspects of the T3IP model influenced the development of the
alternatively certified teachers‟ identity and empowerment in the
profession?
Situated Context
As outlined in the introduction, a unified K-12 school district in the southwest
partnered with a state university to create a program for alternatively certified math.
science, and language arts teachers. The socio-economic status of the district varied from
Title 1 schools to schools located within high income brackets based on house prices. All
schools in the district had been rated as highly performing or above based on the state
formula concerning student achievement. The graduation rate for the district, 84.3%, was
higher than the state average, 80%. The drop-out rate was 1.9% in comparison to the 6%
average in the state.
Intervention
The teachers, who were in the third year of the teacher induction program,
completed a third round of action research under the guidance of the Induction
30
Coordinator/Researcher-Practitioner and two veteran mentor teachers within the
framework of Leader Scholar Communities (LSCs) (Clark & Olson, 2009). In these
groups, the teachers created and implemented classroom action research projects and
reported on their findings during Research Day, an event sponsored by the school district
where the teachers shared their findings with peers, administrators, and future teachers.
Roles. The roles and tasks for the induction coordinator, LSC mentor teachers,
and alternatively certified teachers are outlined below. A more detailed explanation can
be found in Appendix C:
Induction Coordinator/Researcher-Practitioner- Coordinate and plan initial and
final group meetings; promote opportunities for teacher leadership; plan, observe
and co-facilitate LSC meetings; and provide feedback and direction to LSC
mentor teachers and alternatively certified teachers. Outside of the LSC
meetings, the coordinator communicates with mentor teachers and the
participants through face to face meetings, emails, and by phone.
LSC Mentor Teacher- Work collaboratively with alternatively certified teachers
and induction coordinator; guide teachers through an action research project;
facilitate LSC meetings; establish a safe environment for critical dialogue about
practice; encourage critical reflection on action research as it applies to the
teaching profession; and encourage teachers to reflect on their professional
identities as they move through the varied stages of action research.
Alternatively Certified Teacher- Create, implement and discuss action research
projects; critically examine teaching practice; critically examine action research
projects as they apply to the teaching profession; critically examine their
professional identities as they move through the varied stages of action research;
and critically examine belief systems in relation to teaching and learning.
31
Intervention Plan. In August 2010, the teachers and mentor teachers met with
the induction coordinator to discuss the induction model for the fall semester. During this
time, the group connected socially, explored its own definition of professional teaching
identity, discussed assumptions about current educational practices, and searched for
innovations. The induction coordinator provided the group with materials to explore and
consider, including national and international examples of innovative practices, current
educational research, and educational technologies. The teachers brainstormed ideas for
innovations and were provided with a framework and timeline for the fall semester.
For the remainder of the semester, the LSCs met every three to four weeks to discuss
possible research topics, develop methods, plan interventions, provide support for one
another, and reflect on the progress within their innovations. Each meeting was scheduled
with enough time for members to collaborate and connect professionally, while still
accomplishing the task of the innovation. The LSC group meetings loosely followed the
following steps:
1. Teachers discussed their current stage in the action research process. The
teachers completed the applicable section on the group Wiki before each
meeting.
2. The LSC mentors asked the teachers to share what they had learned about
themselves in the process since the last meeting.
3. The LSC group examined research plans from the group during each meeting and
offered feedback and support.
4. The LSC mentors offered guidance and assistance. The members responded to
discussion board posts on the. In their responses, members examined new
insights regarding their professional identities, teaching practice, and their belief
systems about education.
32
Through the use of a group Wiki, the teachers reported out on their projects throughout
the semester. Each teacher had his/her own page within the Wiki and included the
following pieces of information: research question, literature review, intervention plan,
methods, and results. The LSC mentor teachers and induction coordinator/research
practitioner communicated with the teachers between meetings as needed. At the end of
the teachers‟ six-week innovations, the teachers shared their results with a group of
district administrators, principals, in-service teachers, and a current cohort of pre-service
master's students. Appendix D provides a detailed intervention timeline. The teachers‟
research focused on topics such as goal-setting, building relationships with at-risk
students, deliberate development of the right side of the brain, and the effect of mastery
learning on student motivations, perceived abilities, and achievement. A complete list of
the teachers' action research projects can be found in Appendix E.
Participants
This study focused on nine alternatively certified math, science, and language
arts teachers who were hired in August 2008 and who completed certification
requirements in May 2010. The teachers were assigned to three types of schools in the
same district: a Title 1 middle schools, a suburban high school, and suburban K-8
schools. As noted in Table 2, the teachers in this study possessed varied degrees of real-
world experiences. Pseudonyms have been assigned to protect the teachers‟ anonymity.
33
Table 2
Participant Teaching and Background Information
Name School Teaching
Assignment
Prior Degree Prior Experience
Trent HS Bio & Forensic
Science
Life Sciences Nursing Assistant
Julie HS Medical &
Forensic Science
Neuroscience;
Biology
Pathology Assistant
Karen MS 8th Grade
Science
Kinesiology Recruiting Manager
Brianna MS 8th Grade Math;
Algebra;
Algebra H
Mechanical Engineering
International Airline Manager; Product Support
& Applications Engineer
Madison MS 8th Grade Math Political Science Director of Training and
Team Development
Christopher K-8 7th Grade Math Sociology Police Captain
Mallory MS 7th Grade
Language Arts
Child
Development
Kindergarten Teacher;
Librarian
Courtney K-8 8th Grade
Language Arts Urban, Peace, & Justice Studies
Case Manager for Homeless Outreach
Summer MS 7th Grade
Language Arts
English
Literature
Instructional Assistant
The teachers in this study were chosen based on a common entry date into the
field and district as alternatively certified science, math, and language arts teachers. The
teachers were recruited in person for the study in the spring of 2010 during a group
meeting and were given the option of entering the district‟s new teacher induction
program or remaining in the T3IP for the fall of 2010. A recruitment letter was dispersed
and collected at the end of the meeting (see Appendix F). All participants were reminded
that their participation was voluntary and that any decisions to participate or not
participate was not evaluative in any manner.
Mentor teachers were chosen based on content expertise, high student
achievement, open-mindedness, experience with action research, respect within the
district, and use of innovative classroom practices. The math mentors were district
34
curriculum specialists; the science mentors were a K-8 math and science teacher; and the
language arts mentors were a district curriculum specialist and a high school language
arts teacher. All of the mentor teachers were well respected on their respective campuses
and in the district by students and staff. Mentor teachers were invited to participate and
given recruitment letters (see Appendix G) in person by the researcher-practitioner. A
stipend of $500.00 was paid to the mentor teachers by the district.
As explained earlier, the researcher-practitioner served as the T3IP coordinator.
In addition to working with the alternative certification program, the researcher-
practitioner coordinated and instructed courses for an elementary master‟s and
certification program as well as a dual certificate special education and elementary
education program. Prior to working with new teacher programs, the researcher-
practitioner served as a high school assistant principal in the areas of curriculum and
assessment and taught high school Spanish.
Data Collection and Procedure
This study employed a mixed methods approach to assess the intervention
(Stringer, 2007). Data were gathered throughout the intervention beginning in August
2010 and ending December 2010 and consisted of the following: Teachers‟ Sense of
Efficacy Scale (2001), T3IP Questionnaire, focus groups, observations, electronic data,
semi-structured interviews, and a researcher journal.
Instruments. Two instruments were used during this study: the TSES and the
T3IP Questionnaire. Below is a description of each instrument.
TSES. Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001) created the Teachers‟ Sense
of Efficacy Scale (TSES) to measure efficacy in the following areas: student engagement,
instructional strategies, and classroom management (see Appendix H). The scale is based
in part on Bandura's social cognitive theory and his construct of self-efficacy (1997) by
35
measuring a teacher‟s belief in future capabilities. The social cognitive portion refers to
outcome expectancy, or the teacher‟s ability to visualize results. Each sub-scale includes
4 items. In previous studies, the reliability has ranged from .92 to .05 overall and from
.86 to .90 within the subscales (Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). These items
are assessed along a nine-point continuum: 9- A great deal, 7- Quite a bit, 5- Some
degree, 3-Very little, and 1-None at all. Because efficacy is one of the indicators of
professional teaching identity, the Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale, TSES, (2001) was
administered at the end of the participants‟ first year of teaching and again at the end of
the study via Survey Gizmo. The Cronbach Alpha scores for engagement, instruction,
and management (see Appendix I) on the post-test administration factored above the
score of .70, indicating a strong reliability (Nunnally, 1978).
T3IP Questionnaire. A questionnaire, developed by the author, measured the
teachers‟ sense of professional teaching identity, levels of reflection, and critical
reflection (see Appendix J). The questionnaire measured each of the constructs presented
in the literature review under professional teaching identity. As reflection is an indicator
of „teacher agency,‟ a section of the questionnaire directly measured the teachers‟ levels
of reflection. The critical reflection section aligns with the constructs of transformative
learning. Because reflection (reflection on the "what" and "how") and critical reflection
(reflection on "why") are so closely intertwined, it was important for the T3IP
Questionnaire to differentiate between the two areas by devoting a section to each.
The T3IP Questionnaire consisted of 46 Likert questions (strongly agree, agree,
somewhat agree, disagree, and strongly disagree) and 7 open-ended questions. The
second half of the questionnaire provided demographic information on the teachers'
current teaching assignment, type of school, gender, and ethnicity. Sample questions, and
a breakdown of questions by construct, can be found in Table 3.
36
Reflection. The reflection portion of the T3IP questionnaire was based on
proposition 4 from the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, NBPTS.
Proposition 4 states that "teachers think systematically about their experience and learn
from experience" (NBPTS, 2010). Proposition 4 was created around the premise that
excellent teachers are current in educational literature and question innovations, yet are
willing to try new things. The NBPTS describes excellent teachers as those who are
familiar with the science of teaching and take time to critically and regularly reflect on
practice.
37
Table 3
T3IP Questionnaire Sample Questions
Construct
# of Likert
Questions
# of Open-
Ended
Questions Sample Questions
Professional
Teaching
Identity
(C)1: On-
Going
Process
6 1 I see myself in the education field
10 years from now.
I view teaching as a valuable
profession.
(C)2:
Relationship-
Person & Context
8 1 I defend my teaching methods to
other teachers.
I believe I can and do make an
impact on the community in which I
teach. (C)3: Role of
Sub-Identities
8 0 I am an expert teacher in my content
area.
My personal beliefs align with what
is viewed as important in the
profession of teaching.
(C)4: Teacher Agency
6 1 It is important for me to continually
learn and grow in my content area.
Reflection 11 1 I think systematically about my
practice and learn from experience.
I have developed a way to listen to
students in order to reflect on
teaching and improve instruction.
Critical
Reflection
7 2 Through my participation in this
LSC I have reflected critically about
my own preconceived notions of education.
Reliability of the T3IP Questionnaire. The questionnaire was piloted in the
spring of 2010 and was adjusted according to the results of the pilot (See Appendix K). A
reliability analysis was conducted following the post administration; the overall alpha-
coefficient was .778, indicating a strong reliability. The constructs under professional
38
teaching identity were below the desired norm of .700, ranging from .471 to .635. The
sub-category of reflection rated high at .770. The construct of critical reflection from the
transformative learning framework reported the highest reliability (.906).
Focus groups. The researcher-practitioner conducted a focus group with the LSC
mentor teachers in August 2010 to gather information about previous leadership
experiences and to gain a perspective on the LSC mentors' beliefs about the teaching
profession and teacher induction. The focus group was held at a central location for all
mentor teachers, at a local school in a classroom. The focus group allowed for a free-
flowing discussion in a safe atmosphere. Shared discourse allowed participants to reveal
important clues to understanding, and exploration of new innovations, including concerns
and barriers to implementation (Basch, 1987). To facilitate this environment, the
researcher-practitioner began with introductions and stated the purpose of the focus
group. A script guided the focus group (see Appendix L). The researcher-practitioner
stated the group norms which encouraged participation and open dialogue from all
participants; the mentors were reminded that there were no “wrong answers” and that
they should not feel swayed by the opinion of others. The focus group meeting was
video-taped and transcribed to promote accuracy.
For the first focus group, the initial questions were general and focused on the
mentor teachers‟ previous leadership experiences and background information. The
second section of questions asked the mentors to reflect on the ways in which they
formed their beliefs about teaching and learning; to discuss their perceived roles within
the profession; and to give feedback about the concept of using action research as a tool
for teacher induction. The third section asked teachers to give insight into their
experiences with classroom research and to highlight areas in which they might need
39
assistance. Finally, participants were asked to discuss the three most important things that
they believed teacher induction programs should offer alternatively certified teachers.
A second focus group was held with the LSC mentor teachers following the
treatment to determine the mentors‟ perspectives on the teacher induction program (see
Appendix M). During the second focus group, the mentor teachers were asked to give
insight into any impact the program may have had on their practice as well as that of the
alternatively certified teachers. The same format and procedures were followed for both
focus groups.
Observations. The researcher-practitioner observed two LSC meetings for each
content group and recorded observations from each gathering. The researcher particularly
noted the teachers‟ attitudes and behaviors during each meeting. All meetings were
videotaped and transcribed. The transcriptions were used to analyze the teachers'
thoughts and actions throughout the intervention.
Electronic data. Electronic, collaborative documents were used to document
evidence of the progress of the action research as well as teacher reflectivity. A group
Wiki showcased the teachers' action research plans and findings. Teachers responded to a
discussion board prompt at the conclusion of each LSC meeting. The prompts were
designed to inform the research questions regarding transformative learning and
professional teaching identity. After the first meeting, the teachers were asked to state
what they would do in the upcoming semester and how their work would positively affect
the profession. Participants responded to the following prompts throughout the semester:
State your research topic. How have your views on this topic expanded or
changed as a result of today's meeting?
How has your research question or focus changed or evolved as a result of
reviewing the literature?
40
Have your perceptions about teaching in general or in your content area
expanded or shifted this semester as a result of meeting in your LSC groups?
Why or why not?‟
The electronic data were asynchronous and allowed for insight into the teachers‟
progress throughout the project (Suzuki, Ahluwalia, Arora, & Mattis, 2007). Other
artifacts produced through normal work-related activities considered in the data
collection included teacher emails and texts.
Semi-structured interviews. At the conclusion of the LSC meetings and
Research Day, the researcher-practitioner conducted individual interviews with a math,
science, and language arts teacher from the study (see Appendix N). The semi-structured
interview was based on research questions exploring teacher identity, transformative
learning, and the impact of the T3IP in general. The interview aligned with each of the
research questions to support findings from other data sets.
The interview began with an introduction stating the purpose of the interview,
which was to gain a better understanding of the teacher's journey to and within the
profession over the past two and a half years. The first section of the interview addressed
the first research question, ways in which the teachers‟ sense of professional identity has
developed as a result of participating in T3IP. Sample questions included: “Please
describe your thoughts about the teaching profession before you began this program.
Have you changed any assumptions or beliefs as a result of participating in this induction
program? Please explain.” The second section addressed the second research question,
the extent to which the teachers exhibit transformative behaviors. Sample questions
include: “Do you critically examine your practice more or less as a result of participating
in this induction program?" In the closing section of the interview, teachers described the
ways in which their participation in the T3IP had influenced their practice. Teachers were
41
also given an opportunity to present disconfirming evidence (Erickson, 1986) by
describing any ways in which the T3IP could have been improved to better support their
development as a teacher. The researcher-practitioner debriefed the interview by thanking
the interviewee, reviewing main points, and allowing for additional comments to relieve
any anxiety or tension (Suzuki et. al., 2007). Each of the interviews was conducted in the
teachers‟ individual classrooms before or after school to promote a safe environment. The
interviews were video recorded for accuracy and then transcribed.
Researcher journal. The researcher-practitioner recorded reactions and thinking
in a researcher journal following each event in the intervention. The researcher journal
allowed the researcher-practitioner to reflect on data, the method, dilemmas or conflicts,
the observer‟s frame of mind, and points of clarification throughout the study (Glaser &
Strauss, 1967).
Data Analysis
Table 4 outlines the measures that were used to answer each research question. A
mixed methods approach was used in this study (Stringer, 2007); quantitative and
qualitative data carried equal weight in order to validate findings from each data set (Gay
et. al., 2009) and allowed for a more comprehensive view of the study.
42
Table 4
Methods Correlation Chart
Research
Question
Construct Data Collection Mixed Methods
Purpose
RQ1 Identity
Efficacy
TSES, T3IP Questionnaire, Observations, Semi-Structured
Interviews, Electronic Data,
Researcher Journal
Triangulation
RQ2 Transformative Learning
Reflection
T3IP Questionnaire, Observations, Semi-Structured Interviews,
Electronic Data, Researcher
Journal
Complementarity
RQ3 Transformative
Learning
CoPs
T3IP Questionnaire, Observations,
Semi-Structured Interviews,
Electronic Data, Mentor Teacher
Focus Group, Researcher Journal
Complementarity
The T3IP Questionnaire was administered to all nine participants at the end of
the study. As explained earlier, the questionnaire measured elements of reflection,
professional teaching identity, and critical reflection. The Likert data were analyzed
through a Predictive Analytics Software Statistics Package, PASW 18. The mean and
standard deviation were computed along with frequency counts. To examine reliability
and interrelatedness among items within each construct, an analysis was conducted to
determine Cronbach‟s (1951) alpha coefficient for internal consistency among each of the
subsets: reflection, professional teaching identity ((C)1-(C)4), and critical reflection. Case
summary reports were run to analyze discrepancies in the aggregate scores amongst the
participants within each content area (math, science, and language arts). The open-ended
questions were analyzed using open coding (Corbin & Strauss, 2008) to determine
themes within responses.
The TSES (2001), which measured teacher efficacy in the areas of engagement,
instruction, and classroom management, was administered to all participants, pre and post
43
treatment. The researcher used PASW 18 to determine how the teachers rated themselves
in the following areas: efficacy in student engagement, efficacy in instructional practices,
and efficacy in classroom management. Descriptive statistics, including the mean and
standard deviation were used to analyze each subcategory and a reliability analysis was
run for each section of the questionnaire. To examine reliability, an analysis was
conducted to determine Cronbach‟s alpha coefficient. A t-test was also conducted to
determine any significance in the teachers‟ scores from pre to post administration.
Qualitative data were used to develop a grounded interpretation of the experience
(Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Scriven, 1983). Selective coding was used to determine two
overlying themes: transformative learning and professional teaching identity. The
overlying themes were then subdivided through the process of axial coding (Glaser &
Strauss, 1967). This process allowed for the generation of categories and subcategories to
help make connections between each data set. The initial codes used for professional
teaching identity were on-going process, (C)1; relationship between person and context,
(C)2; role of sub-identities, (C)3; and teacher agency(C)4. The initial codes for
transformative learning were critical reflection, communicative learning, meaning
perspectives, instrumental learning, and perspective transformations. After the first pass
of analysis, the data were re-coded using an open coding system (Glaser & Strauss, 1967)
to identify new concepts within each of the initial codes. HyperRESEARCH 2.8.3, a
qualitative analysis tool, was used to sort and manage the data sets. Appendix O provides
a description of the amount of data that was captured from each source in the study.
Validation of Data Analysis
The analysis included triangulation of data to evaluate professional teaching
identity (Gay et. al., 2009) and a complementary approach to measure overlapping facets
of transformative learning and the effectiveness of the T3IP (Greene, Caracelli, &
44
Graham, 1989). To decrease bias, the researcher-practitioner used varied types of data
and member checking to promote reliability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Following each
event in the intervention, the researcher-practitioner documented thoughts and reactions
in a researcher journal in addition to collecting documents and artifacts to create an audit
trail (Bowen, 2009). An audit trail allowed the researcher-practitioner to establish
trustworthiness and confirm dependability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The researcher-
practitioner dialogued with colleagues in the field who work in K-12 and university
settings as critical friends during the data analysis process in order to interpret findings
from a new perspective. These professionals had a strong understanding of the context of
the situation and helped the researcher-practitioner with co-analysis of qualitative data
(Foulger, 2009).
45
Chapter 4
FINDINGS
Research Question 1: In what ways are alternatively certified teachers’ professional
teaching identities affected as a result of participating in the Tseunis
Transformative Teacher Induction Program, T3IP?
For the first research question, separate sources were used to triangulate the data
in order to establish a reliable conclusion (Gay et. al., 2009). An analysis of observational
data, the T3IP Questionnaire, electronic data, and teacher interviews was conducted and
each source was used to capture the constructs embedded within professional teaching
identity. The researcher looked for evidence of the four constructs described in the
literature review. The data sources mirrored one another, yielding similar results within
each construct. Overall, the teachers showed signs of on-going process, (C)1;
understanding of the relationship between person and context, (C)2; and teacher agency,
(C)4. Less prevalent in the data was the role of sub-identities, (C)3.
T3IP Questionnaire results. Table 5 displays the results of the T3IP
questionnaire that measured the four main constructs from professional teaching identity
in addition to reflection and critical reflection. Recall from the literature that reflection is
a descriptor of teacher agency and critical reflection is a construct from transformative
learning. The results from critical reflection will be discussed under the second research
question. Table 5 details the mean and standard deviation for each construct in its entirety
as well as by content area (science, math, and language arts).
46
Table 5
T3IP Questionnaire Results
Overall Average Math Science Language Arts
(C)1: On-Going Process Mean 4.222 4.333 4.167 4.167
SD .456 .289 .726 .441
(C) 2: Person and Context
Mean 4.056 3.833 4.375 3.958 SD .319 .144 .331 .191
(C)3: Role of Sub-Identities
Mean 3.667 3.667 3.542 3.792 SD .354 .402 .260 .473
(C)4: Teacher Agency
Mean 4.575 4.500 4.833 4.389
SD .222 .167 .000 .096
Reflection(R)
Mean 4.333 4.333 4.455 4.212 SD .276 .139 .396 .292
Transformative Learning
Critical Reflection Mean 4.302 4.333 4.143 4.429
SD .625 1.155 .143 .378
T3IP Questionnaire: Professional teaching identity. The highest mean for
professional teaching identity occurred under the construct of teacher agency, (C)4. In
this area, the science teachers reported the uppermost scores with no variation in their
responses. Each of the science teachers agreed that they based instruction on knowledge
of content, students, and what they know about good teaching. They also consistently
scored high on the importance of continually learning and growing in the areas of
instruction, content, and student learning. In the open-ended question all of the teachers
overwhelmingly responded that they were reflective on daily practice and that they made
changes based on their reflection.
The participants' responses were also high in the area of on-going process, (C)1,
(M=4.222) and relationship between person and context, (C)2, (M=4.056). For the
47
construct, relationship between person and context, (C)2, the majority of the responses
were agree or strongly agree to questions that asked the teachers if they defend their
teaching methods to other teachers; share stories of teaching experiences with other
teachers; believe they can impact the community in which they teach; or believe it is
important to make a positive difference in the lives of teachers within the school, district
and greater educational community.
The teachers reported the lowest mean in role of sub identities, (C)3, (M=3.667).
The most dissonance in this section occurred with the teachers‟ personal beliefs aligning
to what is viewed as important in the teaching profession and curriculum or with
structural changes in the school or district.
T3IP Questionnaire: Reflection. The area of reflection served as a sub-category
of the teacher agency, (C)4, construct from the professional teaching identity working
definition. Teachers reported that they frequently and systematically reflected on their
practice in the T3IP Questionnaire. In addition to self-reflection, they also referenced
obtaining input from students, colleagues, administrators, and educational readings.
There was minimal variation in the teachers‟ responses on reflection and the mean was
consistent, with only a .243 variation between the content groups.
Professional Teaching Identity Results by Construct
The following section outlines the quantitative and qualitative results of the four
main constructs for professional teaching identity beyond the T3IP Questionnaire. Data
were collected and analyzed through observations, semi-structured teacher interviews, a
research journal, and electronic data.
(C)1: On-Going Process. Recall from the literature review, that on-going
process is defined by teachers who have a clear definition of self, are efficacious and
committed to the profession, view the profession of teaching as important, and can
48
envision a future desired sense of self (Beijaard et. al., 2004). Of these indicators, the
most prominent in the data sets was efficacy. Curricula, research, and clear definition of
self emerged as themes within efficacy.
Efficacy. Both quantitative and qualitative data sources indicated high levels of
efficacy in the teachers. The TSES (2001) showed higher post-test mean scores in each
area of the assessment: engagement, instruction, and management (see Table 6). The
paired samples test showed there was a significant difference in the teachers‟ scores from
pre to post in the areas of engagement and instruction (with p=.000 and .001
respectively), but the difference was not statistically significant in the area of classroom
management. A strong positive correlation did exist for each area, indicating that
respondents were consistent in their answers for each of the test administrations. The
results of the TSES (2001) indicate that overall, the participants in this study had a high
sense of self-efficacy.
Table 6
TSES Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale, TSES (2001) Pre/Post Results
Construct Pretest Post-
test
M2-
M1
p t Std.
Dev.
Correlations
Engagement M
SD
6.444
.716
7.250
.637
.806 .000* -5.633 .429 .805
Instruction M
SD
6.806
1.095
7.639
.761
.833 .001* -5.345 .467 .936
Management M
SD
7.333
.935
7.667
.791
.333 .176 -1.486 .673 .708
Note: N = 9
* mean difference is significant at p < 0.05
49
The data from the qualitative analysis corroborated the quantitative results,
showing a total of 65 incidents of teachers making statements noting efficacy in their
work. An open-coding analysis revealed that teachers most often reported feeling
efficacious about curriculum, research, and clear definition of self.
Curriculum. While all groups focused on curriculum at various times in their
LSC groups, the most prevalent discussions occurred within the math group. On more
than one occasion, the group members described the current middle school math
curriculum in detail by quarter and topic. Additionally they discussed the curriculum at
the primary and elementary grade levels in math and how previous instruction may have
affected student learning. Many of the conversations referencing curriculum were
grounded on the teachers‟ research topics.
Research. The data collection captured fifteen incidents of teachers making
efficacious statements about their research. Within these reports, the teachers described
confidence in the process and their ability to gather, collect, and report data. Additionally,
the teachers, repeatedly referred to mastery experiences (Bandura, 1997), reporting many
cases where students experienced success as a result of the intervention.
Clear definition of self. The most frequent sub-category within efficacy was clear
definition of self, with half of the statements belonging to the math teachers and the other
to the science teachers; only one incident was captured within the language arts group. In
this sub-category, the teachers referred to themselves as leaders, professionals, and
innovators. The following quote serves as an example for this area:
I think with our group of nine, just the day we stepped on campus we raised the
bar and it ruffled a lot of feathers. The, with our group we're not the type to just
sit and be stagnant so we're all going to be looking for more new things so we are
all going to be constantly raising the bar.
50
(C)2: Relationship between person and context. The second construct under
professional teaching identity, relationship between person and context, describes
teachers who view their roles as important, attractive or in harmony with other roles
(Moore and Hofman, 1988), and who are dedicated to collaborating for a greater good in
educational reform (Mitchell, 1997). The qualitative findings supported the quantitative
results. A frequency report extracted from HyperResearcher documented forty-three
incidents with statements describing the teachers‟ relationships between person and
context. The data were coded a second time using a priori coding. In the second pass at
the data, the researcher looked for incidents where the teachers indicated the importance
of collaborating for the greater good in educational reform. The results showed twenty-
six incidents in the data.
Dedication to collaborating for the greater good in educational reform. The
data revealed that the teachers in all content areas were dedicated to collaborating for
educational reform. The teachers referred to their support of department and school
initiatives, examples of how their research affected school systems, and their roles as
leaders in educational reform. When asked to respond to the question of whether or not
the teachers considered themselves educational reformers, the responses were mixed.
Five of the teachers felt they were reformers citing examples of leadership and innovation
in the classroom. A language arts teacher stated his colleagues came to him for advice as
he was leading a new instructional reform on his campus; likewise, a science teacher
reported she tried to influence her colleagues with her research findings. Conversely, a
math teacher felt she had no influence with her peers as a new teacher.
(C)3: Role of sub identities. This construct describes the extent to which
teachers‟ sub-identities work in concert with their abilities to balance their sense of self
with educational changes and to seek out opportunities for change (Beijaard et. al., 2004).
51
A frequency report from HyperResearcher documented thirty-eight incidents where
teachers described their roles and sub identities. Within these conversations, the teachers
most commonly referred to how they balance their sense of self with educational change,
the role of providing students with social and emotional support, and the role of leading
change. The qualitative data show frequent reports of teacher frustration with state and
district mandates and instructional changes on their campuses. The math and language
arts teachers often mentioned the pressures of meeting expectations on the state mandated
test in the core content areas, as well as complying with district and school requirements
while still trying to implement innovations in the classroom.
(C)4: Teacher agency. Teacher agency, the fourth construct under professional
teaching identity, is seen when teachers embrace the relationship of aspects of teaching
common to all teachers, are active in professional development, and reflect on their
practice (Beijaard et. al., 2004). In the qualitative findings, the transcripts revealed 81
incidents of the teachers reflecting on or for practice (Killion & Todnem, 1991). Only
two incidents were captured where teachers discussed moments of reflecting in practice
and changing instruction in the moment. Through open-coding, the researcher found that
moments of reflection were primarily based on instruction, curriculum, students‟
attitudes, school systems, research, and assessment, respectively.
RQ 2: To what extent do the alternatively certified exhibit transformative behaviors
within and beyond their classrooms as a result of participating in action research
through leader scholar communities?
Recall from the literature review, that indicators of transformative behaviors
include teachers who are more inclusive, discriminatory, open, reflective, and
emotionally able to change (Mezirow, 1990). The constructs of transformative learning
52
include critical reflection, communicative learning, meaning perspectives, instrumental
learning and perspective transformations.
To answer the second research question, the T3IP questionnaire, teacher
interviews, observational, and electronic data were used in a complementary approach
(Greene et. al., 1989), allowing the researcher to use multiple methods in order to gain
varied perspectives on each of the questions. The T3IP questionnaire measured critical
reflection via seven Likert questions and two open-ended questions. The teacher
interview focused on perspective transformations, and the observation and electronic data
were used to capture information on all of the remaining constructs.
Qualitative findings. Table 7 reveals the frequency of incidents within each
construct of transformative learning. Based on the data it is clear that the teachers
exhibited many signs of perspective transformations.
Table 7
Frequency of Transformative Learning Constructs from Qualitative Data
Construct Frequency
Critical Reflection 33
Communicative Learning 45
Instrumental Learning 36 Meaning Perspectives 23
Perspective Transformations 83
Critical reflection. In contrast to reflection, which was a part of teacher agency
from professional teaching identity, critical reflection is an integral part of the
transformative learning framework. Whereas reflection primarily focuses on teaching
moments, critical reflection involves the process of questioning what is known to be true.
When teachers are participating in critical reflection, they question habitual patterns of
expectations and meaning perspectives and consider whether these preconceptions still
align with new insights or learning (Mezirow, 1991). As indicated in Table 5, the average
53
mean in the area of critical reflection on the T3IP Questionnaire was 4.302. The majority
of the teachers agreed or strongly agreed that through their participation in the leader
scholar communities they reflected critically about preconceived notions of education.
Additionally, the teachers reported that their participation in the leader scholar
communities helped them consider what, how, and why they teach the way they do.
There was one outlier in this section who reported only somewhat agreeing with most of
the statements. The language arts teachers had the highest mean for this section
(M=4.429).
Processing the what, how, and why in education. The observational data captured
several incidents of critical reflection. In some cases the teachers were frustrated with
new changes on their campuses, and they saw hope in other incidences. At one of the
math meetings, the teachers began a conversation about why certain practices are adapted
in schools and challenged their validity. The conversation also turned to the teaching
profession and evaluation of teachers. One teacher wondered why evaluators of math
teachers were not required to have content knowledge of the math curriculum or
methodological instruction. Another math teacher asserted that the responsibility lies on
the supervisor and that other systems would not accept this lack of knowledge in
leadership positions.
Considering teacher professionalism. Another theme the researcher constructed
was professionalism. Teachers reflected on the degree of professionalism in their schools
and offered suggestions for increasing professionalism within education. The teachers
expressed feelings of dismay with what they termed as the „unprofessionalism‟ seen on
their campuses. A science teacher commented that some teachers did not seem dedicated
to the field and were unwilling to take on new challenges. She told of how the „business‟
world expected more of employees with little room to challenge authority and suggested
54
that education take a more top down approach in some areas. Some of the suggestions for
increasing professionalism included requiring all teachers to obtain a master‟s degree
before teaching, raising the level of expectations for substitute teachers, and
communicating more with the public about the daily workings of schools and teachers.
Instrumental learning and communicative learning. Instrumental learning
goes beyond rhetoric to involve task-oriented problem-solving. Instrumental learning
involves teachers looking at options, challenging hypotheses, making inferences, and
interpreting feedback. Communicative learning, then, is the next step where teachers tie
new understandings to the bigger picture, find metaphoric labels for new understandings,
and look to the group for consensus (Mezirow, 1991). The qualitative analysis revealed
fairly equal occurrences of both instrumental and communicative learning. One example
of instrumental learning included a language arts teacher discussing a new system in her
department. In the system, the department gives weekly formative assessments, students
set goals, and students are then assessed the following week. This teacher realized that
each assessment covered a new skill and that re-teaching, the desired outcome of
formatively assessing students, was not occurring. As a result, she decided that she
needed to find a way to differentiate for her students between the pre and post summative
assessment. Both instrumental and communicative learning occurred primarily during the
LSC meetings.
Meaning perspectives. There were 23 incidents of teachers discussing their
meaning perspectives. The teachers described their backgrounds, explaining in part, their
belief systems. Five of the teachers mentioned they were rooted in education, having
come from families of educators. Others based beliefs on their previous occupations as
coaches and public servants. During one LSC meeting, a language arts teacher admitted
55
she easily found fault with new changes in her department because she preferred rules
and parameters instead of dealing with the ambiguity of change.
Perspective transformations. Perspective transformations occur when teachers
embrace critical reflection in order to become critically aware of why they look at the
world in a particular way and how information is perceived and understood. A
perspective transformation allows for a more open and integrative perspective when
making decisions accompanied by action on these new understandings (Mezirow, 1990).
Incidents of perspective transformations were recorded during LSC meetings, in
interviews, in the T3IP questionnaire, and electronically.
Shift in perceptions of teaching. An analysis of the open-ended question relating
to perspective transformations revealed shifts in the teachers‟ perceptions of the teaching
profession as a result of participating in the T3IP. Some of the changes the teachers cited
included a new found respect for the profession with the realization that education is a
research-based, multi-layeredm and honorable profession that impacts society. Other
teachers were surprised by the difficulty of the profession accompanied with a heavy
burden of responsibilities; they reported that their eyes were opened to the daily balance
between teaching content and teaching students. A few of the teachers cited that they
were more resilient than they thought and attributed their success and longevity thus far
to the support they have received from the induction coordinator, peers, and mentor
teachers within the T3IP program. Finally, a science teacher, who initially thought
secondary teaching was mostly about the content, stated she now finds herself thinking
much more about how she teaches, versus what she teaches.
A science teacher example. Julie revealed perspective transformations throughout
the semester. Following the first meeting, she wrote on the group WIKI that the
discussions with the mentors helped her find a direction she would not normally have
56
taken. At the fourth LSC meeting, she discussed how different she was this year, finding
herself tapping into the social-emotional realm of teaching with her students more so than
the content. In the final speech on research day, she noted how she had changed when she
said, “In the last 3 years I've done 3 different research projects that have all focused on a
different aspect of where I think I might want to go as a teacher and this year has really
changed my life.”
A math teacher example. Madison communicated a change in her perspective on
using writing in math. As a result of having students explain their thinking in writing, she
was able to see their thinking; because of this, she changed her instruction to meet
students‟ needs. She reported that student behaviors had changed as a result of the
intervention and that her instruction had changed as well.
A language arts teacher example. Courtney reported a change in her perspective
of teaching vocabulary. Having previously believed students had to use the vocabulary in
context to get to deep meaning, her research led her to believe that students can also
attach meaning to words through the use of mnemonics therefore achieving deep
meaning. During her speech at research night, Courtney admitted the following:
“So, I came in thinking I knew a lot more. When I was in 6th grade, I had
conversations with researchers about phonemic awareness. I thought I knew
everything and really what I've discovered over the last three-plus years of
teaching is that I know very, very little.”
Cycles of action research. The data revealed teachers referred to previous cycles
of action research. In many cases, the teachers explained how their current project was
informed by experiences in the past. One teacher touched on the idea of doing three
cycles of action research and how she learned from each project. At the end of her first
cycle, she better understood the importance of relevancy in the content area, her second
57
cycle taught her the importance of using technology that students enjoy and know, and
her final cycle brought her outside of the content area to realize the importance of
teaching students life skills that would ensure success in her students‟ futures.
RQ 3: What aspects of the T3IP model influenced the development of the
alternatively certified teachers’ identity and propensity toward transformative
behaviors within the profession?
Three perspectives were reviewed to answer the third research question:
researcher/practitioner, alternatively certified teachers, and mentor teachers. Different
sources were used in a complementary manner (Greene et. al., 1989) to assess the ways in
which the T3IP model may have influenced the teachers‟ identities and propensity toward
transformative behaviors.
Alternatively certified teachers’ perspectives. Responses to an open-ended
question on the T3IP questionnaire, interviews, and observations were used to construct
teachers‟ perspectives. In an open-coding analysis of the data, the following influential
aspects emerged: value, participation in action research, and community.
Being valued. All of the teachers chose to participate in the T3IP model over a
traditional induction model. The teachers repeatedly stated the value they found in the
T3IP. When asked why they chose the T3IP, the teachers responded that they felt the
model valued their current level of knowledge and challenged them in a way the
traditional program would not have done. Multiple teachers uttered sentiments similar to
Mallory‟s throughout the semester when she said, “What I love about this (action
research) is that it‟s kept me from being bored and it‟s kept me thinking about how I can
improve not just myself, but my students.”
Becoming action researchers. The teachers reported that the process of
participating in action research was one of the reasons they found value in the T3IP. As a
58
result of participating in 3 cycles of action research over a period of the same number of
years, the teachers came to an understanding that research was a tool to help them in the
classroom. The teachers reported they referred to peer-reviewed educational journals for
new innovations and had become more critical of their practice. The teachers described
themselves as critical thinkers, capable of solving problems within their classrooms
through action research. Additionally, the teachers stated they felt pride as a result of
participating in action research as well as being part of a research-based profession.
Appreciating community. Finally, the teachers made multiple references to the
importance of community. First, the teachers recognized the value in the bonds that had
been made in whole group over the past two and a half years. Common themes
discovered within community were support, love, respect, family, and knowledge-
sharing. In addition, the data revealed that the teachers found value in having mentor
teachers within their content by describing their presence as supportive, yet challenging.
The math and language arts teachers, having had worked with district content specialists,
added that the model allowed for relationship building and access to local experts.
Mentor teachers’ perspectives. The mentor teachers‟ perspectives were
constructed from their responses in the pre and post focus groups. All six mentor teachers
were present for the first focus group. Three of the six mentor teachers were present for
the second focus group. None of the math mentors were able to attend the post meeting.
After analyzing the data, the three absent members were given a copy of the findings and
asked to present any disconfirming evidence or to add any relevant contributions. All
responses are included below. Open coding revealed the following themes: action
research, appropriate mentors, and embedded training.
Action research. In both the pre and post focus groups, the mentor teachers
posited that action research is a valuable tool to promote reflection and critical analysis of
59
practice. They reported seeing the value in focusing on a gap, and going through the
process of analyzing one‟s practice within the confines of a support team. One mentor
noted, “I think they‟re doing a more advanced step that would not come naturally in the
progression of most teachers.” All mentors agreed that the teachers were more likely to
think about the process of teaching as a result of thinking through classroom problems
using action research.
Appropriate mentors. While the teachers expressed appreciation for the content
knowledge of their mentor teachers, one of the science and one of the language arts
mentors felt they would have been more beneficial to the teachers had they been assigned
teachers within the same grade level. Although they were able to provide structure to the
meetings, they felt less supportive during the initial phases when the teachers were
searching for an area of study.
Embedded training. All of the mentor teachers expressed the need to embed
training into the structures that already existed within the schools and district, as opposed
to requiring additional hours from new teachers. They referred to the stresses involved in
the first few years of teaching and noted that all of the teachers, at one time or another,
appeared overwhelmed with the realities of teaching. One mentor suggested streamlining
the research by narrowing topics and providing staples of research from which the
teachers might draw. Another mentor wondered if the induction could be embedded into
existing structures and requirements for teachers.
Researcher/practitioner’s perspective. A researcher journal was used to
provide a perspective on various aspects of the T3IP from the researcher‟s point of view.
An analysis of the journal was conducted using open-coding, revealing mentor teachers
and expectations as two areas that may have influenced the outcomes in the project.
60
Mentor teachers. An analysis of transcripts from the mentor teacher focus groups
revealed the mentor teachers exhibited signs of possessing strong professional teaching
identities and exhibiting transformative behaviors. In the first focus group, the mentor
teachers were asked to describe their current roles in the profession, explain how their
belief systems were formed, describe ways in which their beliefs were guided over time,
and discuss their initial thoughts about using action research in a mentoring model for
alternatively certified teachers. Within their responses, the mentor teachers frequently
displayed a clear definition of self and efficacy in their work, relating back to
professional teaching as an on-going process. Unlike the teachers in the study, the
mentor teachers were better able to identify how the core professional roles, role of sub
identities, related to teaching and referred often to how they balance self with educational
change. One example of this is when Tommy stated the following:
I look at education as a circle, a big giant wheel and trends come along and what
you do is you try to pick out of those trends, your style of teaching. That‟s how I
look at it. So you pick the things that you like that you think will make you a
better teacher and they all do make you a better teacher.
The mentor teachers also cited many examples of how they were involved in professional
development and the ways in which they reflected teacher agency. In addition to signs of
professional teaching identity, the mentor teachers could recall several incidences in
which they participated in critical reflection, communicative learning, instrumental
learning, or experienced perspective transformations.
The fact that the mentor teachers in the T3IP possessed the characteristics of
professional teaching identity and transformative learning allowed them to model the
desired behaviors. The mentor teachers repeatedly made statements that served as
examples for each of the constructs. They possessed a clear definition of self, understood
61
their role and sub identities, were able to balance their relationship between person and
context, and acted as teacher agents. These mentor teachers had multiple years of
experience in the profession in which they chose to engage in a positive and productive
manner. They exuded the elements of the professional teaching constructs, staying true to
themselves, yet still striving to collaborate for educational reform through professional
development, strategic relationships with colleagues, and engaging in meaningful
positions in the field.
In the area of transformative learning, the mentor teachers had experienced
perspective transformations throughout their tenure and could recognize those moments
and the experiences through which they were achieved. The mentor teachers‟ rich history
and experiences allowed them to facilitate their LSC meetings from an informed, yet
interested position. The mentor teachers were excited about helping new members in the
field, and they also hoped to grow professionally as leaders.
Expectations. The teachers were required to attend the initial whole group
meeting, five LSC meetings, and Research Night. In addition, teachers were asked to
respond to discussion board prompts following each LSC meeting, to record the progress
of their research on a group WIKI, and to create a two page handout for Research Night.
The researcher observed that all of the teachers had one absence over the course
of the semester. The WIKI also provided a glimpse into the body of work created
throughout the program. All of the nine participants responded to the first discussion
board prompt, seven replied to the second prompt, six replied to the third prompt, and
two replied to the final prompt. Realizing that the teachers were overwhelmed and that
the requirement to respond to discussion board prompts at a live meeting seemed forced,
the researcher/practitioner did not post a question for all of the meetings and did not
follow-up with those who did not respond at the meetings. Three of the nine participants
62
completed their personal WIKI pages with each step of the research project, an additional
three completed every section but the results section, and two participants had limited
activity on the page. Each of the nine participants did, however, create a handout for
Research Night with information from each section of the project.
Based on the limited activity on the WIKI, it was difficult for the researcher to
decipher if the teachers were indeed progressing and engaged in meaningful action
research projects toward the beginning of the treatment. Notes in the researcher-
practitioner‟s journal revealed emotions were high and positive following the initial
whole group meeting, yet the participants seemed a bit deflated following the second
LSC meeting. An analysis of the journal revealed an upswing in teacher emotions from
the third meeting, lasting until the end of the intervention. It was evident, based on
conversations the teachers were engaging in research as they shared results and learning
even though their written documentation was limited throughout the semester.
63
Chapter 5
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
The purpose of this study was to determine if an alternative approach to teacher
induction using action research would heighten the level of professional teaching identity
in the participants and encourage transformative behaviors. The findings in this study
support the idea that alternatively certified teachers' professional teaching identities can
be affected from a teacher induction program focused on action research in supportive
learning communities. The data also revealed that the teachers exhibited transformative
behaviors, many of which could be ascribed to the T3IP. The study reinforces the idea
that action research within the structures of a learning community can be used as a tool
for developing professionalism and transformative behaviors.
The findings on professional teaching identity coincide with research on efficacy
which finds that "teachers with a higher sense of efficacy exhibit greater enthusiasm for
teaching, have greater commitment to teaching, and are more likely to stay in teaching"
(cf. Tschannen-Moran et. al., 2001). Beijaard et. al. (2000) studied the effect of teachers'
subject matter, pedagogical, and didactical expertise on their perceptions of professional
identity, and found that most teachers saw themselves as a combination of the above.
This study, coincidentally, found that teachers denoted themselves as efficacious in
curriculum (subject matter); student engagement, management, and relationships
(pedagogical); and in instruction (didactical).
The information presented above is dissimilar to some current research on
alternatively certified teachers' sense of efficacy. Despite the fact that Darling-
Hammond‟s (2001) research finds alternatively certified teachers to have more difficulty
in the classroom in the areas of classroom management, curriculum development, student
motivation, and teaching strategies, the teachers‟ efficacy scores in this study had
64
significant increases in all areas of the TSES (curriculum, engagement, and management)
between pre and post administrations. The growth in each area was notable and the
teachers' post-administration scores ranged from .05 to .967 above the reliabilities from
Tschannen-Moran's original study (2001).
Beyond professional teaching identity, this study strengthens the idea that action
research can be used as a method to increase teacher professionalism and encourage
transformative thinking. Ponte, Beijaard, and Wubbels (2004) support the idea of using
action research as a means to make teacher work more professional. Their works asserts
that action research is a cyclical process that allows teachers to be responsible for their
own actions, apply professional knowledge, and develop deeper understandings based on
their results and experiences within each study. The qualitative data reported earlier
highlighted the idea that the teachers experienced personal growth from their
participation in action-research based learning communities.
While most new teacher induction programs ask teachers to reflect on teaching,
they may not ask them to analyze practice to the extent that action research requires. The
mentor teachers in this study asserted that the T3IP model was a more advanced step than
would naturally occur in a traditional teacher induction program. Both the mentor
teachers and participants agreed that the focus on action research in communities of
practices was a valuable experience that promoted critical reflection and analysis of daily
practice, aligning with research from Carr and Kemmis (1986). The group, colleagues
who shared commonly believed concepts and directions over a sympathetic time period
in pursuit of a common goal, worked as an active CoP (Wenger, 1998b).
Discussion on Professional Teaching Identity
While these participants displayed confidence from the beginning of the program,
their elevated levels of efficacy were also potentially hazardous, as the possible fall might
65
have unhinged them more than most. The majority of the teachers in this study were
strong students who never struggled in school. They were successful in their first careers
and then entered teaching. They were not used to failing, and they were not used to
students who found school to be difficult. As students themselves, they were in honors
classes, studied to learn, and completed homework because their teachers told them it
was due the next day. One even admitted to engaging in conversations with researchers
as a child. They were not prepared for the realities of title one schools, middle schools, or
high schools, in general. Some admitted to looking more to the impact of students‟
deficiencies on student outcomes than their own teacher qualities when they started
teaching. The T3IP model may have provided teachers with tools to overcome these
disparities in upbringing, allowing the teachers to engage with the students at their
schools in a more positive manner.
Part of the identity shift that occurred in the teachers regarding teacher
professionalism came when they realized that they still had something to learn. They
reported that while they came in feeling they were prepared with preconceived ideas
about teaching and learning, they ended the program knowing they could learn from their
students and that the act of teaching is complex. Action research allowed them to grapple
with data and approach teaching from a research-based perspective, pushing hypotheses
and emotions aside. The results, quantitative and qualitative, told the teachers a story and
offered them a glimpse into students‟ actions and attitudes. They saw results and knew
their actions directly affected those results, either positively or negatively. Over half of
the teachers stated they had come to the realization that their students could teach them
more than they would probably ever return. During her speech on research night, one
teacher reported, “I‟ve learned that I absolutely need to stay in a professional learning
66
community with people that I love and respect and … learn from my students because
also they have so much more to teach me than I will ever have to teach them.”
The data also revealed that the teachers possessed a clear definition of self, a
defining feature in professional teaching identity. Although these alternatively certified
teachers had not yet completed three years of teaching, and had entered the field with no
educational teaching background, they clearly identified themselves as leaders,
professionals, and innovators within the field. One of the teachers summed up the
sentiments representative of the group in the following quote:
I think with our group of nine, just the day we stepped on campus we raised the
bar and it ruffled a lot of feathers. Then with our group we're not the type to just
sit and be stagnant so we're all going to be looking for more new things so we are
all going to be constantly raising the bar.
The construct of teacher agency was another notable area in the findings.
Embedded within this concept is participation in professional development and reflection.
The T3IP focused on teachers participating in action research, which is a reflective
endeavor by definition. The data revealed clear connections between the teachers‟
participation in action research and the reflective conversations that occurred during the
LSC meetings. Not only were the teachers reflecting on their research projects, but also in
the areas of instruction, curriculum, students‟ attitudes, school systems, and assessment.
The construct of relationship between person and context includes teachers who
are dedicated to collaborating for the greater good in educational reform (Mitchell, 1997),
and is at the core of the T3IP. The model was created, in part, to bring teachers together
to work collaboratively for educational reform inside and outside of their own
classrooms. The data revealed the majority of the participants viewed themselves as
reformers and felt they were involved in educational reform. It may be difficult to
67
decipher if the teachers‟ participation in education reform was caused by the T3IP or if
their actions simply occurred within the same time frame as the treatment. There were a
few indicators in the research, however, that clearly identified the affect of the program
on the teachers‟ dedication to collaborate as a result of participation in the T3IP. For
example, one teacher stated that his community of peers gave him an extra push to raise
the bar for himself and to be more innovative. Another referred to how each of the past
three cycles of action research had influenced her practice and how she wanted to share
her knowledge with colleagues. A third teacher, when talking about current reforms,
based her new actions on results from past studies. If the teachers‟ propensity toward
reformative actions were not solely the cause of their participation in the T3IP, it is
possible to believe they were at least influenced by the continuous participation in a
learning community that expected results while providing support.
Discussion on Transformative Behaviors
Critical reflection is a sign of discriminatory action and transformative behaviors.
The data showed that the teachers questioned the why and how of education as a result of
participating in this model. Having already participated in two action research cycles, the
teachers were already accustomed to questioning their practice. The addition of district
mentor teachers in the content area elevated the discussions and took the context from the
classroom to departments, school, and district realms.
Conversations surrounding meaning perspectives, however, were less prevalent,
perhaps due to the nature of the construct. While meaning perspectives guide one‟s
thoughts and actions (Mezirow, 1991), the teachers did not typically narrate the meaning
perspectives behind their choices, yet focused instead on the reason for change and their
immediate course of action. For example, one teacher explained that she would use her
research to better understand her students‟ need for engagement in order to make a
68
connection with students that would help them to retain new learning. She did not,
however, tell if this research topic was built on prior experiences from her life; she
merely explained the current circumstance.
One might argue that transformative learning occurs when one experiences a
perspective transformation. The data was clear in revealing multiple incidents of
perspective transformations. As a direct result of participating in action research, the
participants experienced shifts in their perceptions of the teaching profession. They were
surprised to learn about the research -base behind the education profession. The process
of engaging in action research projects, collaborating with peers, and dialoging with
content experts allowed the teachers to experience the act of researching their own
practice. As a result, they were no longer intimidated by educational research; instead
they were inspired by the challenge. In fact, a few of the teachers posited that the
challenge of action research kept them engaged. One teacher advised that she may have
become bored with the profession was it not for her involvement in the T3IP.
The teachers consistently showed signs of confidence in conducting research,
supporting Shockley, Bond, and Rollins‟ (2008) assertion that teachers who participate in
action research are transformed in their roles as educators; finding self-confidence as
researchers, along with empowerment, and a sense of purpose. Brianna stated that by the
end of the program she did not know anything other than action research, giving credence
to the level of focus action research had taken in the teachers‟ practice. The T3IP model
allowed the mentor teachers to facilitate conversations about change and to challenge the
teachers‟ preconceptions in education. Action research moved the teachers from solely
reflecting on action to reflection for action as the teachers‟ conversations centered on
upcoming tweaks to their projects, and projections of students‟ successes or failures.
69
Implications
The nation is in crisis and is calling for educational reform. To meet these
demands, the schools are charged with focusing on core content areas; however, it is
often difficult to find highly qualified applicants in these areas. When schools are unable
to fill positions with traditionally certified teachers, they turn to alternative certification
programs. As the need to recruit accomplished individuals to the field remains, school
districts will benefit from better understanding the types of teachers they are hiring, and
learning how to best value and prepare them for success in the classroom. The findings
from this study also reveal suggestions for replication including the role of the induction
coordinator, purposefully selected mentor teachers, and a focus on action research.
Furthermore, the study carries possibilities for professional development beyond
alternatively certified teachers.
Working with alternatively certified teachers. An implication from this study
is that alternatively certified teachers need to be valued. The participants in this study
were accustomed to leadership positions and were highly regarded in their previous
professions. They had successful careers and chose teaching. When they entered the
profession, their drive followed. The T3IP allowed the teachers the opportunity to feel
valued within their learning communities. They were able to share research findings with
colleagues in lieu of attending traditional new teacher meetings that typically focus on
lesson planning and classroom management. The teachers in this study still learned how
to plan and manage their classes through university coursework and in situ learning, but
they were also given a tool to problem-solve gaps in student knowledge and to challenge
assumptions they might have made about teaching and learning. The T3IP allowed the
teachers to act as independent thinkers and reflectors, characteristics that may not have
been nurtured or encouraged in a traditional, lock-step teacher induction program.
70
When asked why they chose to participate in the T3IP over the traditional teacher
induction program, the teachers stated they felt they were capable of achieving and
producing more than the traditional program had to offer and they desired the challenge
and the opportunity for meaningful growth. An alternative teacher induction program for
alternatively certified teachers creates opportunities to challenge some of the best and
brightest while validating their knowledge and abilities.
Suggestions for replication. Three key elements discovered for success in the
T3IP were the role of the induction coordinator, purposefully selected mentor teachers,
and a focus on action research through communities of practice.
The role of the induction coordinator. The data clearly presented the importance
of the induction coordinator's role in this model. In the initial stages of the model, the
coordinator was in charge of logistical tasks such as organizing meetings dates, choosing
participants, and creating required tasks. Throughout the semester, however, the
coordinator took on the role of mentor, cheerleader, and authority figure. Outside of the
LSC meetings, the coordinator communicated with mentor teachers and the participants
through face to face meetings, emails, and by phone. Many of the teachers requested help
from the coordinator in narrowing down topics, finding literature, and deciding methods.
The coordinator attended most LSC meetings, allowing for smooth transitions between
informal and formal communications with all participants. The role of the induction
coordinator is labor intensive. Future programs would need to carefully select an
induction coordinator with the ability to establish relationships, guide research,
coordinate learning opportunities, and promote the model.
Purposefully-selected mentor teachers. Additionally, the participants reported
they valued the following attributes in their mentor teachers: content expertise, ability to
ask critical questions, and experience in the field. It is important to note that the mentor
71
teachers were not randomly assigned to this project. The induction
coordinator/researcher-practitioner considered the teachers' needs, personalities, and
abilities before determining the best mentor teachers. The study required that the mentor
teachers had content expertise coupled with the ability to facilitate meaningful
discussions; they also needed to be confident enough to push these strong-willed teachers
in their practice. The mentor teacher position in the T3IP was critical for the model‟s
success. In order for the induction coordinator to take a backseat and allow the LSCs to
form relationships and trust, the mentor teachers must be strong enough to negotiate
content, research, and conversations surrounding professionalism. The math and language
arts LSC groups had the richest conversations surrounding content. In both cases, the
teachers taught similar grade levels and the mentor teachers had experience with those
curriculums. Future programs should consider both the content and context when
choosing membership for groups.
A focus on action-research through communities of practice. One of the most
influential aspects of the T3IP is its focus on action research. Because the alternatively
certified teachers in this study were efficacious and intelligent, it was important to create
a model that allowed them to discover themselves as teaching professionals. Action
research allows teachers to look at gaps in instruction and to problem solve; this action is
appropriate for teachers who need the challenge or who respond better to self-directed
learning opportunities. The participation in action research through a CoP framework
provides an environment for sharing and critical reflection while elevating the sense of
urgency with the addition of subject matter, pedagogical, and didactical experts.
A model for differentiated teacher induction. While the context of this study
served a specific population, this study could serve as a model for a differentiated teacher
induction program. The format of the T3IP served its audience of alternatively certified
72
teacher due to the stature of the participant. Future studies might consider other types of
teachers who enter the field and might also benefit from such a program. New teachers
who enter with sound pedagogical practices and have benefited from intensive clinical
experiences in their preparation program may be ready for an outcome-based teacher
induction model such as the T3IP. This study might also carry implications for nationally
known alternative certification programs. Selective findings from this study could also be
shared with school districts and suggested as a possible model for teacher induction.
A model for professional development. While the universities are working to
better prepare students to become teachers, school districts have a responsibility to take
the next steps in teacher development. With a focus on problem-solving and reform
efforts, the T3IP can serve as a model for advanced teacher induction programs as well as
a structure for professional development of in-service teachers. Many schools use
professional learning communities as a form of professional development. The T3IP
model embraces learning communities, but adds a structure of leaders and scholars.
Additionally, the expectation of sharing results at the end of the model can be used to
create leaders and promote successes.
Conclusion
In an article regarding education and teachers‟ colleges, university Dean Koerner
(as cited in Reese, 2010) states, "The deprofessionalization of teachers has happened over
years ... Teaching should become a career of choice for smart people who want to have
an impact on the world.” The T3IP is dedicated to celebrating intelligent, accomplished
individuals who have chosen teaching as a second career. The model values alternatively
certified teachers and provides an outcome expectancy framework. While the induction
program supports the new teachers, it also sets expectations and requires the teachers to
produce results beginning in their first year of teaching. The process of engaging in
73
action research studies with carefully selected mentor teachers in a collaborative
environment creates an environment that fosters critical reflection and allows for teachers
to be more open-minded, discriminatory, and emotionally able to change. The T3IP gives
teachers space, direction, and motivation to do something they may have done eventually
on their own or through professional development; the difference lies in the fact that the
T3IP encourages new teachers to engage in levels of professional development consistent
with or beyond that of career teachers. The model recognizes the fact that even new
teachers in the field affect 150 students or more a year, regardless of the intensity of their
professional development or teacher induction program.
An induction model focused on cycles of action research can cause the kinds of
changes educators are being asked to produce. First, the practice of classroom-based
action research creates a culture of change at the individual level. Second, action research
conducted with a community of practice framework creates communities of educators
focused on change who possess the possibility of impacting systems through patterns and
behaviors that support change. In times of high stakes and accountability for teachers, the
T3IP puts new teachers in the race, and possibly, even a little ahead of the game.
Sometimes change is systemic; sometimes change comes one action research project at a
time.
74
REFERENCES
Adelman, N.E. (1991). Preservice training and continuing professional development of
teachers. Washington, DC: Policy Study Assoicates.
Allen, S. (2007). Joining school communities of practice: Career changer teacher identity transitions. (Doctoral dissertation).Retrieved from ProQuest®. (UMI No.
9315947).
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1974). Theory in Practice. Jossey-Bass.
Ariizumi, Y. (2005). Five empowering principles of action research that lead to Successful personal and professional development. Lanham, MD: University
Press of America.
Atay, D. (2007). Teacher researcher for professional development. ELT Journal 62(2), 139-147. doi: 10.1093/elt/cc1053
Bandura, Albert (1993). Perceived Self-Efficacy in Cognitive Development and
Functioning. Educational Psychologist. 28 (2), 117-148.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. NY: W.H. Freeman and
Company
Basch, Charles E. (1987). Focus Group Interview: An Underutilized Research Technique for Improving Theory and Practice in Health Education. Health Education
Behavior, 14, 411.
Retrieved from http://heb.sagepub.com.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/cgi/reprint/14/4/411
Beijaard, D., Verloop, N., & Vermunt, J. D. (2000). Teachers‟ perceptions of professional identity: An exploratory study from a personal knowledge
perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 749–764.
Beijaard, D., Meijer, P.C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers‟
professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education 20 (2), 107-128.
doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2003.07.001
Berman, P., McLaughlin, M., Bass, G., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1977). Federal
programs supporting educational change: Vol. 7. Factors effecting implementation and continuation. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
BHEF 2006 Issue Brief. (2006). The American competitiveness initiative: addressing the stem.
Retrieved from
http://www.bhef.com/publications/documents/brief3_s06.pdf
Bowen, G.A. (2009). Supporting a grounded theory with an audit trail: an illustration. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 12(4), 305-316.
doi: 10.1080/13645570802156196
75
Britzman, D. (1991). Practice makes practice: A critical study of learning to teach.
Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Brooke, G.E. (1994). My personal journey toward professionalism. Young Children, 49
(6), 69-71.
Brown, K.M. (2004). Leadership for social justice and equity: Weaving a transformative
framework and pedagogy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40 (1), 77-108.
Bullough, R. V. (1997). Practicing theory and theorizing practice. In J. Loughran, & T.
Russell (Eds.), Purpose, passion and pedagogy in teacher education (pp. 13–31).
London: Falmer Press.
Carlgren, I. (1996). Professionalism and teachers as designers. In M. Kompf, W. R. Bond, D. Dworet, & R. T. Boak (Eds.), Changing research and practice:
Teachers‟ professionalism, identities and knowledge (pp. 20–32). London,
Washington, DC: The Falmer Press.
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge, and action
research. London, UK: Falmer Press.
Clark, C.M. & Olson, K. (2009). A signature pedagogy in doctoral education: the leader
scholar community. Educational Researcher, 38 (3), 216-221.
Cohen-Vogel, L, & Smith, T.M. (2007). Qualifications and assignments of alternatively
certified teachers: Testing core assumptions. American Educational Research
Journal, 44 (3), 732-753.
Coldron, J., & Smith, R. (1999). Active location in teachers‟ construction of their
professional identities. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31 (6), 711–726.
Conway, P. (2001). Anticipatory reflection while learning to teach: From a temporally
truncated to a temporally distributed model of reflection in teacher education.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 89–106.
Corbin, J.M., & Strauss, A.L. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and
procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications, Inc.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coeffficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.
Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
Darling-Hammond, L.(1990). Teaching and knowledge: Policy issues posed by alternate
certification for teachers. Peabody Journal of Education, 67 (3), 123-154.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2001). Defining 'highly qualified teachers': What does 'scientifically-based research' actually tell us? Educational Researcher, 31 (9),
13-25.
76
Darling-Hammond, L., Chung, R., & Frelow, F. (October 2002). Variation in teacher
preparation: How well do different pathways prepare teachers to teach?. Journal of Teacher Education, 53, 280-303. Retrieved from
http://jte.sagepub.com.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/cgi/reprint/53/4/286
Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Keeping good teachers: Why it matters, what leaders can do. Educational Leadership, 60 (8), 6–13.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Boston, MA: D.C. Heath.
Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. Wittrock
(Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. (pp. 119-162). London, UK: Collier Macmillan Publishers.
Feiman-Nemser, S., Carver, S., Carver C., & Yusko, B. (1999). A conceptual review of
literature on new teacher induction. National Partnership for Excellence and Accountability in Teaching, Washington, DC. Office of Educational Research
And Improvement. Washington, DC.
Feistritzer, C.E. (2009). The impact of alternative routes to teaching: How teacher
preparation has changed, and why it may need to change more. Education Week,
29 (12), 2632.
Fenstermacher, G.D. (1990). The place of alternative certification in the education of
teachers. Peabody Journal of Education, 67 (3), 155-185.
Foulger, T. S. (2009). External conversations: An unexpected discovery about
the critical friend in action research inquiries. Action Research Online First,2 (8),
1-18. doi: 10.1177/1476750309351354
Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. London,
UK: Falmer.
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational Research: An Introduction
(7th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Gauthier, D.P. (1963). Practical reasoning. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Gay, L.R., Mills, G.E., & Airasian, P. (2009). Educational research: Competencies for
analysis and applications. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Gibbs, C.J. (1997, June). Teacher thinking, teaching thinking, and self-efficacy. Paper
presented at the Seventh International Conference on Thinking, Singapore.
Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for
qualitative research. New York, NY: Aldine De Gruyter.
Goodland, J. (1990). Teachers of the nation's schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
77
Goodnough, K. (2008).Moving Science of the "Back Burner": Meaning Making Within an Action Research Community of Practice. Journal of Science Teacher
Education., 19 (1), 15-39.
Goos, M. E., & Bennison, A. (2008). Developing a communal identity as beginning
teachers of mathematics: Emergence of an online community of practice. Journal
of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(1), 41-60.
Greene, J., Caracelli, V, & Graham, F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for
mixed-methods evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11 (3), 255-274.
Guskey, T.R. (1984). The influence of change in instructional effectiveness upon the affective characteristics of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 21,
245-259.
Hampden-Thompson, G., Herring, W.L., & Kienzi, G. (2008). Attrition of Public School Mathematics and Science Teachers. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2008077
Harris, S., Lowery-Moore, H., & Farrow, V. (2008). Extending transfer of learning
theory to transformative learning theory: A model for promoting teacher leadership. Theory into Practice, 47, 318-326.
James, W. (1983). Talks to teachers on psychology and to students on some of life’s
ideals (F. Bowers, Ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original work published in 1899).
Killion, J.P., & Todnem, G.R. (1991). A process for personal theory building.
Educational Leadership, 48 (6), 14-16.
Kreber, C., & Cranton, P. (2000). Exploring the scholarship of teaching. The Journal of
Higher Education, 71 (4), 476-495.
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Lewin, K. (1944). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2 (4),
34-46.
Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago Press.Chicago Press.
78
Malow-Iroff, M. S., O'Connor, E. A., & Bisland, B. M. (2004). Pupil control and teacher
efficacy in a group of alternative certification teachers in New York City. Roundtable discussion presented at the meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, San Diego, CA.
McDonald, F. (1980). The problems of beginning teachers: A crisis in training (Vol. 1).
Study of induction programs for beginning teachers. Princeton, NJ: Educational
Testing Service.
Mezirow, J. (1990). Fostering critical reflection in adulthood: A guide to transformative
and emancipator learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J. (2003). Transformative learning as discourse. Journal of Transformative
Education, 1 (1), 58-63.
Mitchell, A. (1997). Teacher identity: A key to increased collaboration. Action in
Teacher Education, 19 (3), 1–14.
Moin, L. J., Dorfield, J. K., & Schunn, C. D. (2005). Where can we find future K-12 science and math teachers? A search by academic year, discipline, and academic
performance level. Science Education, 89 (6), 980-1006.
Moore, M., & Hofman, J. E. (1988). Professional identity in institutions of higher
learning in Israel. Higher Education, 17 (1), 69–79.
Murphy, J. (2001). Re-culturating the profession of educational leadership: New blueprints. Paper commissioned for the first meeting of the National Commission
for the Advancement of Educational Leadership Preparation, Racine, WI.
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (2010). The five core propositions.
Retrieved from http://www.nbpts.org/the_standards/the_five_core_propositio
National Science Board (2006). Science and Engineering Indicators 2006. Two volumes.
Arlington, VA:National Science Foundation (volume 1, NSB 06-01; volume 2, NSB 06-01A).
Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Oja, S.N., Diller, A., Corcoran, E., & Andrew, M.D. (1992). Communities of inquiry,
communities of support: The five year teacher education program at the
University of New Hampshire. In L. Valli (Ed.), Reflective teacher education: cases and critiques (pp. 3-22). London, UK: The Falmer Press.
Paechter, C., & Head, J. (1996). Gender, identity, status and the body: Life in a marginal subject. Gender and Education, 8 (1), 21–29.
79
Pajares, F. (1966). Self-Efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational
Research, 66 (4), 543-578. doi:10.3102/00346543066004543
Planty, M., Hussar, W., Snyder, T., Provasnik, S., Kena, G., Dinkes, R., KewalRamani,
A., & Kemp, J. (2008). The condition of education 2008 (NCES 2008-031).
National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC.
Ponte, P., Ax, J., Beijaard, D., & Wubbels, T. (2004). Teachers' development of professional knowledge through action research and the facilitation of this by
teacher educations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 571-588.
Reynolds, C. (1996). Cultural scripts for teachers: Identities and their relation to
workplace landscapes. In M. Kompf, W. R. Bond, D. Dworet, & R. T. Boak
(Eds.), Changing research and practice: Teachers’ professionalism, identities
and knowledge (pp. 69–77). London, UK: The Falmer Press.
Richert, A.E. (1992). The content of student teachers' reflections with different structures
for facilitating the reflective process. In R. Russell & H. Munby (Eds.), Teachers and teaching: From classroom to reflection (pp. 171-193). London, UK: Falmer.
Reese, M. (2010, November 18). ASU adopts Teach for America‟s training, recruiting ideas. East Valley Tribune. Retrieved from
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/arizona/article_30977b88-f35a-11df-bbd2-
001cc4c03286.html
Sanders, W.L., Sanders, W.L., & Rivers, J.C. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of
teachers on future student academic achievement. Research Progress Report.
Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center.
Schön, D. A. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. Oxford,
UK: Jossey-Bass.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How practitioners think in action. New
York, NY: Basic Books.
Scriven, M.S. (1983). Evaluation methodologies.. In G.F. Madaus, M.S. Scriven., & D.L.
Stufflebeam (Eds.), Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation (pp. 229-260). Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff.
Shockley, K.G., Bond, H. & Rollins, J. (2008). Singing in my own voice. Journal of
Transformative Education, 6 (3), 182-200. doi: 10.1177/1541344608324017
Smith, M. L. & Glass, G. V. (1987). Experimental studies in M. L. Smith and G. V Glass
(Eds.), Research and Evaluation in Education and the Social Sciences, (pp. 124-157), Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Stringer, E. (1999). Action research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
80
Stringer, E. (2004). Action Research in Education. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.
Stringer, E. (2007).Action Research. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
Stringer, E.T., Christensen, L.M., & Baldwin, S.C. (2010). Integrating teaching, learning, and action research: Enhancing instruction in the K-12 classroom.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Suzuki, L.A., Ahluwalia, M.K., & Mattis, J.S. (2007). The pond you fish in determines
the fish you catch: Exploring strategies for qualitative data collection. The
Counseling Psychologist, 35 (2), 295-327. doi: 10.1177/0011000006290983
Taylor, E.W. (1998). The theory and practice of transformative learning: A critical
review. ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education.
Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.
Tekkaya, C., Cakiroglu, J. & Ozkan, O. (2004). Turkish preservice science
teachers‟ understanding of science, self efficacy beliefs and attitudes toward science teaches. Journal of Education for Teaching: International Research and
Pedagogy, 30 (1), 57-66.
Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W.K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its
meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68 ( 2), 202-248.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct, Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805.
U.S. Department of Education. (2010, March 29). U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan’s statement on race to the top phase 1 winners.
Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/news/speeches/2010/03/03292010.html
Vygotsky, L. (1991). The genesis of higher mental functions. In P. Light, S. Sheldon, &
M. Woodhead (Eds.), Learning to think (pp. 34–63). London: Routledge.
Watt, M.L. & Watt, D.L. (1999). Doing research, taking action, and changing practice. In
M. Solomon (Ed.) The diagnostic teacher: Constructing new approaches to
professional development (pp. 48-77). London, UK: Teachers College Columbia University.
Wenger, E. (1998a). Communities of practice: Learning as a social system. Systems
Thinker, 9 (5).
Wenger, E. (1998b). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning and identity.
Cambridge,UK: Cambridge University Press.
81
APPENDIX A
YEAR 1: T3IP TIMELINE
82
Event Meeting/Location Time
Frame
Content
Inservice for all Alternatively
Certified District
Teachers
Fall 2008/District Office 2 Days Community Building; Classroom Environment; Classroom Management; Procedures; Planning
for the 1st Day of School; Effective Elements of
Instruction
Classroom Visits August 2008 1 Hour The coordinator visits the teachers in their
rooms to provide support and feedback.
District New
Teacher Meeting
September 2008 3 Hours Whole Group (All District Alternatively
Certified Teachers): Community Building;
Classroom Management
T3IP Members- Bridging Theory with Practice-
Classroom Management and Classroom Environment; Piaget, Vgotskey, and Skinner;
Classroom Relationship Goal Setting
Email Reminder September 2008 Email Email reminder to reflect on classroom
relationship goal
Classroom
Visits/Co-
Teaching
Sept. 2008 – Oct. 2008; School Sites 1 Hour The coordinator visits the teachers in their
rooms to provide support and feedback. The
coordinator plans and co-teaches lessons with
select teachers.
T3IP Meeting 1 October 2008 3 Hours CoP Framework; Share Classroom Relationship
Goals; Motivation Webquests; Motivation Goal
Setting
Email Reminder September 2008 Email Email reminder to reflect on motivation goal
Teacher
Observation
Oct. 2008 -Nov. 2008 All Day Teachers are released by content area to observe
teachers in the field. After a half day of
observations, the teachers meet in the afternoon
to discuss. The teachers are asked to reflect on
what they learned as well as how they felt
validated in their practice.
T3IP Meeting 2 December 2008 3 hours Share Motivation Goals and Learnings;
Elements of Effective Teaching- Exploring
Relationships between Standards-Based
Curriculum, Lesson Design, Instructional
Strategies; Analysis of Current Lessons
T3IP Meeting 3 January 2009 3 Hours Communities of Practice Revisited; What is
Innovation? Exploring Action Research, AR;
Post Research Questions on Group Wiki
Classroom Visits January 2009; School Sites 1 Hour The coordinator visits the teachers in their
rooms to provide support and feedback.
T3IP Meeting 4 February 2009 3 Hours Stories from the Field; Pieces of AR;
Collaborative Time- Exploring Innovations;
Update AR Wiki
83
T3IP Meeting 5 March 2009 3 Hours AR Collaboration and Sharing; Data
Collection/Data Analysis; Update Action
Research Wiki
Classroom Visits March 2009; School Sites 1 Hour The coordinator visits the teachers in their rooms to provide support and feedback on
classroom instruction and action research.
T3IP Meeting 6 April 2009 2 Hours Presentation of AR Findings
Research Day May 2009 2 Hours Share AR Findings with Elementary Student
Teachers
End of Year
Celebration
May 2009 2 Hours Celebration of the Year
Questionnaire May 2009 On-Line
Disseminate Efficacy, Reflection and AR Questionnaire
Resources August-May Email Email differentiated resources to teachers as
needed. Examples include ideas for Sponge
activities; lesson plan templates; lesson plan
ideas in the content areas; technology ideas; etc.
84
APPENDIX B
YEAR 2: T3IP TIMELINE
85
Event Meeting/Location Time
Frame
Content
T3IP Inservice August
2009/Class Site
1Day Reflection on Year 1 and Growth; Creating an
Atmosphere of Respect and Rapport;
Questioning Strategies; Creation of Group
Ning; Semester Overview
Classroom Visits August 2009;
School Sites
1 Hour The coordinator visits the teachers in their
rooms to provide support and feedback.
Video August 2009 1 Hour Teachers video tape a lesson and analyze for
questioning strategies (aligned with University
Coursework). Post reflections to group NING.
Video September 2009 1 Hour Teachers video tape a lesson and analyze for
classroom environment (aligned with
University Coursework). Post reflections to
group NING.
Classroom
Visits/Co-Teaching
Sept. 2008 – Oct.
2008; School Sites
1 Hour The coordinator visits the teachers in their
rooms to provide support and feedback. The coordinator plans and co-teaches lessons with
select teachers.
T3IP Meeting 1 October 2009 2
Hours
Debrief on semester; Discuss University
Action Research Projects; Pair teachers with
district content specialists to provide feedback
on University research plans and to discuss
content-based effective strategies
T3IP Meeting 2 December 2009 2
Hours
End of Semester Celebration; Sharing of
Action Research Plans
Classroom Visits January 2009;
School Sites
1 Hour The coordinator visits the teachers in their
rooms to provide support and feedback.
Teacher
Observation
Oct. 2009 –Jan.
2010
All
Day
Teachers are released by content area to
observe teachers in the field. After a half day
of observations, the teachers meet in the
afternoon to discuss. The teachers are asked to
reflect on what they learned as well as how
they felt validated in their practice.
Classroom Visits Feb. 2010- Mar.
2010; School Sites
1 Hour The coordinator visits the teachers in their
rooms to provide support and feedback.
T3IP Meeting 3 March 2010 3
Hours
Reflect on Classroom Observations; Share
how practice has changed as a result of
observing others; Share progress on action
research; Overview of Research Day;
Teachers will be presented with Year 3 of
T3IP and given a choice to continue or enter
the traditional new teacher induction.
86
Classroom Visits April 2010-May
2010; School Sites
1 Hour The coordinator visits the teachers in their
rooms to provide support and feedback on
classroom instruction and action research.
Research Day May 2010 2 Hours
Share Action Research Findings with Elementary Student Teachers, principals,
inservice teachers, university professors and
district administrators
End of Year
Celebration
May 2010 2
Hours
Celebration of the Year
Questionnaire May 2009 On-
Line
Disseminate Identity, Efficacy, Reflection and
Action Research Questionnaire
Resources August-May Email Email differentiated resources to teachers as needed. Examples include ideas for Sponge
activities; lesson plan templates; lesson plan
ideas in the content areas; technology ideas;
etc.
87
APPENDIX C
T3IP ROLES AND TASKS
88
__________________________________________________________________________ Coordinator
Roles: *Learner
*Role Model
*Mentor
*Guide
*Coordinator
Tasks: *Create timeline for LSC meetings.
*Work collaboratively with mentor teachers, alternatively certified teachers,
school principals, and district officials. *Provide feedback to teachers on their action research projects.
*Provide feedback and direction to mentor teachers on their LSC meetings.
*Plan and deliver initial group meeting.
*Observe LSC meetings and meet with mentor teachers between meetings.
*Coordinate final sharing of research projects.
*Promote Opportunities for Teacher Leadership
Leader Scholar Community Mentor
Roles: *Learner
*Role Model
*Mentor *Guide
*Facilitator of Learning
Tasks: *Work collaboratively with alternatively certified teachers and induction
coordinator.
*Provide feedback to teachers on their action research projects.
*Participate in all group meetings.
*Promote Opportunities for Teacher Leadership.
*Establish safe environment for critical dialogue about practice.
*Encourage critical reflection on action research as it applies to the teaching
profession.
*Encourage teachers to reflect on their professional identities as they move through the varied stages of action research.
*Attend and promote final sharing of research projects.
Alternatively Certified Teacher
Roles: *Learner
*Role Model
*Teacher Researcher
Tasks: * Create, implement and discuss action research projects.
*Participate in all group meetings.
*Critically examine teaching practice. *Critically examine action research projects as they apply to the teaching
profession.
*Critically examine their professional identities as they move through the varied
stages of action research.
*Critically examine belief systems.
*Attend and promote final sharing of research projects.
_______________________________________________________________________________
89
APPENDIX D
YEAR 3: T3IP TIMELINE
90
Intervention Date Content Data Collection
Recruit LSC
Mentors
Spring
2010
Choose 2 LSC mentors for each
content area
Mentor Meeting Spring
2010
Meet with LSC mentors to
overview intervention
Observations
3rd Year
Induction
Orientation
August
2010
Program Overview/Exploring
Innovation
Mentor Teacher Pre Focus
Group
LSC Meeting #1 August
2010
Identify Innovation/Craft
Research Questions/Post to Wiki
& Respond to Reflection
Question
Observations/Artifacts
LSC Meeting #2 Sept.
2010
Discuss Research on
Innovation/Create Innovation/
Post to Wiki & Respond to
Reflection Question
Observations/Artifacts
LSC Meeting #3 Sept.
2010
Discuss Research on
Innovation/Create Timeline for
Innovation/Choose Methods/
Post to Wiki & Respond to
Reflection Question
Observations/Artifacts
LSC Meeting #4 Oct.
2010
Finalize Timeline and Methods/
Post to Wiki & Respond to
Reflection Question
Observations/Artifacts
Action Research Oct. -
Nov.
2010
Teacher Implement Innovations
Artifacts
LSC Meeting #5 Nov.
2010
Discuss Results and Implications/
Post to Wiki & Respond to
Reflection Question
Observations/Artifacts/Efficacy
Scale/Questionnaire
Whole Group
Meeting
Dec.
2010
Discuss Results and
Learning/Prepare for Research
Day
Observations/Artifacts/Teacher
Interviews
Research Day Dec.
2010
Teachers share research results
with district administrators,
principals, teachers and master‟s
students
Mentor Post Focus Group
91
APPENDIX E
PARTICIPANTS' RESEARCH PROJECT TITLES
92
Participant Content Research Projects
Mallory L.A. The PDSA Cycle: Impacts on Student Achievement and
Feelings of Self-Efficacy
Courtney L.A. Using Mnemonics to Improve Vocabulary Usage
Summer L.A. Motivation and Engagement
Madison Math Attitude=Success
Chris Math Prescription for Math Success
Brianna Math Writing in the Math 8 Classroom: Focus on Fractions
Julie Science Deliberate Development of the Right Side of the Brain
Trent Science Building Relationships with At-Risk Students
Karen Science Effect of Mastery Learning and School Wide Support on
Student Motivation, Perceived Abilities and Achievement
93
APPENDIX F
TEACHER RECRUITMENT LETTER
TSEUNIS TRANSFORMATIVE TEACHER INDUCTION PLAN
94
Date: March 31, 2010 Dear ______________________:
I am a graduate student under the direction of Professor Puckett in the College of Teacher
Education and Leadership at Arizona State University. I am conducting a research study to determine the effect of a Communities of Practice model of teacher induction on
alternatively certified teachers.
I am inviting your participation, which will involve monthly on-line meetings, face to
face meetings, participation in classroom action research projects via a collaborative
social network, and participation in questionnaires and interviews. The study will take approximately five months. You have the right not to answer any question, and to stop
participation at any time.
Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose not to participate or to withdraw from the study at any time, there will be no penalty, and you will have the
option of joining the traditional new teacher induction program offered through the
district. Data collected throughout this project will be used to determine the effectiveness of using a Communities of Practice model as a form of teacher induction for alternatively
certified teachers. There are no foreseeable risks or discomforts to your participation.
Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose not to participate or to
withdraw from the study at any time, there will be no penalty; it will not affect your
status as a teacher in the Deer Valley Unified school district or any current or future
evaluations. No real names will be used in the study. All participants will be given a pseudonym by which they will be identified. Results from this study will only be used in
reports, presentations or publications but your name will not be used. Results will only be
shared in the aggregate form.
I would like to videotape the meetings and interviews for purposes of record keeping.
You will not be recorded, unless you give permission. If you give permission to be taped,
you have the right to ask for the recording to be stopped. The video will be secured on a home computer and the footage will be kept for 2 years. After this time, the tape and
footage will be destroyed.
If you have any questions concerning the research study, please contact the research team
at: Dr. Kathleen Puckett, 602-543-6300 or Paula Tseunis, 480-861-7299. If you have any
questions about your rights as a subject/participant in this research, or if you feel you have been placed at risk, you can contact the Chair of the Human Subjects Institutional
Review Board, through the ASU Office of Research Integrity and Assurance, at (480)
965-6788.
By signing below you are agreeing to participate to in the study.
___________________________ _________________________
Signature Date By signing below, you are agreeing to be taped.
___________________________ _________________________
Signature Date
95
APPENDIX G
MENTOR TEACHER RECRUITMENT LETTER
TSEUNIS TRANSFORMATIVE TEACHER INDUCTION PLAN
96
Date: April 2010
Dear ______________________:
I am a graduate student under the direction of Professor Puckett in the College of Teacher
Education and Leadership at Arizona State University. I am conducting a research study
to determine the effect of a Communities of Practice model of teacher induction on alternatively certified teachers.
I am inviting your participation, which will involve monthly on-line meetings, face to face meetings, facilitation of classroom action research projects via a collaborative social
network, and participation in two focus groups. The study will take approximately five
months. You have the right not to answer any question, and to stop participation at any time.
Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose not to participate or to
withdraw from the study at any time, there will be no penalty. Data collected throughout this project will be used to determine the effectiveness of using a Communities of
Practice model as a form of teacher induction for alternatively certified teachers. There
are no foreseeable risks or discomforts to your participation.
Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose not to participate or to
withdraw from the study at any time, there will be no penalty; it will not affect your status as a teacher in the Deer Valley Unified school district or any current or future
evaluations. No real names will be used in the study. All participants will be given a
pseudonym by which they will be identified. Results from this study will only be used in
reports, presentations or publications but your name will not be used. Results will only be shared in the aggregate form.
I would like to videotape the meetings and interviews for purposes of record keeping. You will not be recorded, unless you give permission. If you give permission to be taped,
you have the right to ask for the recording to be stopped. The video will be secured on a
home computer and the footage will be kept for 2 years. After this time, the tape and
footage will be destroyed.
If you have any questions concerning the research study, please contact the research team
at: Dr. Kathleen Puckett, 602-543-6300 or Paula Tseunis, 480-861-7299. If you have any questions about your rights as a subject/participant in this research, or if you feel you
have been placed at risk, you can contact the Chair of the Human Subjects Institutional
Review Board, through the ASU Office of Research Integrity and Assurance, at (480) 965-6788.
By signing below you are agreeing to participate to in the study.
___________________________ _________________________ Signature Date
By signing below, you are agreeing to be taped.
___________________________ _________________________
Signature Date
97
APPENDIX H
TEACHER SENSE OF EFFICACY SCALE
98
Teacher Beliefs This questionnaire is designed to help us gain a better understanding of
the kinds of things that create challenges for teachers. Your answers are confidential. Directions: Please indicate your opinion about each of the questions below by marking
any one of the nine responses in the columns on the right side, ranging from (1) “None at
all” to (9) “A Great Deal” as each represents a degree on the continuum.
Please respond to each of the questions by considering the combination of your
current ability, resources, and opportunity to do each of the following in your
present position.
None at all
Very Little
Some Degree
Quite A Bit
A Great Deal
1. How much can you do to control disruptive behavior in the classroom? 2. How much can you do to motivate students who show low interest in school work?
3. How much can you do to calm a student who is disruptive or noisy?
4. How much can you do to help your students value learning? 5. To what extent can you craft good questions for your students?
6. How much can you do to get children to follow classroom rules?
7. How much can you do to get students to believe they can do well in school work? 8. How well can you establish a classroom management system with each group of
students?
9. To what extent can you use a variety of assessment strategies?
10. To what extent can you provide an alternative explanation or example when students are confused?
11. How much can you assist families in helping their children do well in school?
12. How well can you implement alternative teaching strategies in your classroom?
99
APPENDIX I
TSES (2001) CRONBACH'S ALPHA RELIABILITY RESULTS
100
Alpha (Pre) Alpha (Post)
Efficacy in Engagement .303 .707
Efficacy in Instruction .857 .735
Efficacy in Management .907 .878
101
APPENDIX J
T3IP QUESTIONNAIRE
(3PAGES)
102
SA= Strongly Agree; A= Agree; SWA= Somewhat Agree; D=Disagree; SD=
Strongly Disagree
Reflection (R)
SA A SWA D SD
1. I think systematically about my practice and learn from experience.
2. I have developed a way to listen to students in order to
reflect on teaching and improve instruction.
3. I have developed a way to listen to colleagues and administrators in order to reflect on teaching and improve
instruction.
4. I have developed a way to reflect on my instruction in order improve instruction.
5. As a result of reading educational materials, I question
my practice.
6. As a result of reading educational materials, I create and
am willing to try new things in my classroom.
7. I critically examine my practice on a regular basis to
deepen my knowledge.
8. I critically examine my practice on a regular basis to
expand my repertoire of skills.
9. I critically examine my practice on a regular basis to incorporate new findings into my practice.
10. I frequently make changes during a lesson based on „in
the moment‟ reflection.
11. Future lessons are frequently informed by the outcome
of past lessons.
Professional Teaching Identity
SA A SWA D SD
(C)1: On-going process 12. I love teaching.
13. I see myself in the education field 10 years from now.
14. I view teaching as a valuable profession. 15. My colleagues view teaching as a valuable profession.
16. If I were not already a teacher, I would make the
decision to enter teaching today.
17. I believe I can and do make an impact on teaching as a profession.
SA A SWA D SD
(C)2: Relationship between person and context
18. I defend my teaching methods to other teachers. 19. I share stories of my teaching experiences with other
teachers.
20. My colleagues take my opinions about teaching
seriously when I express them.
21. I believe I can and do make an impact on the
community in which I teach.
22. It is important for me to make an impact on the
103
community in which I teach.
23. It is important for me to make a positive difference in the lives of other teachers at my school.
24. It is important for me to make a positive difference in
the lives of other teachers outside of my school, but within
the district.
25. It is important for me to make a positive difference in
the lives of other teachers outside of my district.
SA A SWA D SD
(C)3: Role of sub-identities 26. I believe I can and do make an impact on the lives of
my students.
27. I believe I can and do make an impact on the lives of my colleagues
28. I am an expert teacher in my content area.
29. I am an expert teacher with the students I encounter in
my school.
30. My personal beliefs align with what is viewed as
important in the profession of teaching.
31. My personal beliefs align with curriculum changes at my school or district.
32. My personal beliefs align with instructional changes at
my school or district.
33. My personal beliefs align with structural changes in education at my school or district.
SA A SWA D SD
(C)4: Teacher Agency
34. My classroom practices are based on what I know about my content area.
35. My classroom practices are based on what I know about
my students.
36. My classroom practices are based on what I know about
good teaching.
37. It is important for me to continually learn and grow in
instruction.
38. It is important for me to continually learn and grow in
my content area.
39. It is important for me to continually learn about how students learn.
Open-Ended Questions:
40. How would you define your role in education?
41. Do you view yourself as an educational reformer? If yes, in what way? If no, why
not?
42. Do you believe that your perception of the teaching profession has shifted over the past 3 years as a result of participating in this teacher induction program?
104
Critical Reflection
SA A SWA D SD
43. Through my participation in this LSC I have reflected
critically about my own preconceived notions of education.
44. My LSC mentors encourage group members to reach
mutual understandings about discussions in the group.
45. Participation in this LSC has challenged
presuppositions I may have from my background as a student.
46. Participation in this LSC has helped me consider „what”
I teach.
47. Participation in this LSC has helped me consider „how‟
I teach.
48. Participation in this LSC has helped me consider „why‟
I teach the way I do.
49. Participation in this LSC has helped me consider the
consequences of my teaching.
Open-Ended Questions:
50. How did the process of participating in action research affect your classroom
practice? 51. Did the process of action research make you more reflective about your daily
instructional practice? Why or why not?
52. Do you consider yourself a leader on your campus or in the district? Please explain. 53. Student Achievement: If you have access to student achievement data, how would
you describe your results in comparison to like peers?
Demographics
54. What is your gender? O Male O Female
55. What is your racial identity? O African American O White, Non-Hispanic O Other 56. What subject matter do you teach? O Math O Science O O Language Arts
57. What grade level do you teach? O Elementary O Middle O High
58. What is the context of your school? O Urban O Suburban O Rural 59. What is the approximate proportion of students who receive free and reduced lunches
at your school? O 0-25% O 25-50% O 50-75% O 75-100%
60. What is your name?
105
APPENDIX K
PILOT RELIABILITY: T3IP QUESTIONNAIRE
106
Construct Cronbach’s Alpha Possible
Cronbach’s Alpha
if One Item
Deleted
Text Of Possible
Deleted Question
Overall .899 .909 I frequently make
changes during a
lesson based on „in the moment‟
reflection.
Action Research .864 .907 Analyzing data from
my action research
gave me a new prospective about
students‟ abilities.
Identity:
Relationship
between person
and context
.875 .905 My colleagues take
my opinions seriously when I
express them.
Reflection .784 .859 I frequently make changes during a
lesson based on „in
the moment
reflection‟
Identity: Role of
Sub-Identities
.679 .772 I am an expert in
my content area.
Identity: Teacher
Agency
.530 .828 My classroom practices are based
on what I know
about my content area.
Identity : 0n-
Going Process
.544 .796 My colleagues view
teaching as a
valuable profession
107
APPENDIX L
MENTOR FOCUS GROUP: MODERATORS GUIDE
PRE INTERVENTION (2 PAGES)
108
Sections Script
Distribute materials Name card, demographic form, consent form, and worksheet.
Moderator
introduction, thank
you and purpose
(1 minute)
Hello. My name is Paula. I‟d like to start off by thanking each
of you for taking time to come today and for agreeing to work
with our group of alternatively certified teachers. This meeting will take approximately one hour.
The reason we‟re here today is to get your opinions and
attitudes teacher induction for alternatively certified math and science teachers.
I‟m going to lead our discussion today. I am not here to convince you of anything or try to sway your opinion. My job
is just to ask you questions and then encourage and moderate
our discussion.
I will be videotaping our conversation solely for the purpose
of accurately transcribing our conversation. I will also provide
you with a script of our conversation to allow you to check for accuracy.
Group Norms
(2 minutes)
To allow our conversation to flow more freely, I‟d like to go
over some group norms.
1. Please talk one at a time and avoid side conversations.
2. Everyone doesn‟t have to answer every single question, but I‟d like to hear from each of you today
as the discussion progresses.
3. This will be an open discussion É feel free to comment on each other‟s remarks.
4. There are no Òwrong answers,Ó just different opinions. Say what is true for you, even if you‟re the
only one who feels that way. Don‟t let the group sway
you. But if you do change your mind, just let me
know.
5. Please know that all responses will be kept
confidential and will not be used in an evaluative
manner.
6. If you need a break at any time, please let me know.
Introduction of
participants
(10 minutes)
Before we start talking about your thoughts on teacher induction for math and science teachers, I‟d like to have a
moment to introduce each other and to gather some basic
demographic information. Please tell me:
Your name
How long you have been in the field of education
The leadership roles you have held
109
Your current professional role in the field of
education
General questions
(25 minutes)
A. Think back to your first years of learning how to become a
math or science teacher. In what ways do you feel your belief
systems about teaching and learning were initially molded? Please discuss.
B. How would you describe the teaching profession and how do you view your role within the profession?
C. Now that you‟ve arrived at your current status in the teaching profession and are well respected by your peers,
what are some of the steps that you belief guided your current
level of level of success?
D. What are your initial thoughts about using action research
in a mentoring model as a form of new teacher induction for
math and science teachers?
Specific questions
(15 minutes)
A. What is your experience with classroom research? In
which areas might you need some assistance?
Closing question
(10 minutes)
What are the three most important things that teacher
induction programs should focus on with alternatively certified math and science teachers to create habits of mind
where critical analysis is a daily practice?
Closing
(2 minutes)
Thanks for coming today and talking about the transformative teacher induction program. Your comments have given me a
varied perspective into this program. I thank you for your
time.
110
APPENDIX M
MENTOR FOCUS GROUP: MODERATOR GUIDE
POST INTERVENTION
(2 PAGES)
111
Section Script
Moderator
introduction, thank
you and purpose
(1 minute)
Hello. I‟d like to start off by thanking each of you for taking
time to come today and for working with our teachers this semester. This meeting will take approximately one hour.
The reason we‟re here today is to get your opinions and attitudes about the T3IP and the LSC groups you have worked
with this year.
I‟m going to lead our discussion today. I am not here to convince you of anything or try to sway your opinion. My job
is just to ask you questions and then encourage and moderate
our discussion.
I will be videotaping our conversation solely for the purpose
of accurately transcribing our conversation. I will also provide you with a script of our conversation to allow you to check for
accuracy.
Group Norms
(2 minutes)
To allow our conversation to flow more freely, I‟d like to go over some group norms.
1. Please talk one at a time and avoid side conversations. 2. Everyone doesn‟t have to answer every single
question, but I‟d like to hear from each of you today as
the discussion progresses.
3. This will be an open discussion É feel free to comment on each other‟s remarks.
4. There are no wrong answers, just different opinions.
Say what is true for you, even if you‟re the only one who feels that way. Don‟t let the group sway you. But if you
do change your mind, just let me know.
5. Please know that all responses will be kept confidential and will not be used in an evaluative manner.
6. If you need a break at any time, please let me know.
Introduction of
participants
(10 minutes)
Before we start talking about your thoughts on teacher induction for math and science teachers, I‟d like to gather
some basic information
Your name
The names of the teachers in your LSC Groups
A summary of the teachers' research projects
General questions
(25 minutes)
A. Remember that this is the third year of the alternatively
certified teachers‟ careers and that they are still establishing
their belief systems. In what ways you belief the teachers‟ belief systems about teaching and learning were influenced by
this induction model?
112
B. Now that you‟ve mentored a group of teachers through
action research projects, what are your thoughts about using action research in a mentoring model as a form of new teacher
induction for math and science teachers?
Specific questions
(15 minutes)
How did your working with alternatively certified teachers in the LSC model affect your own practice?
Closing question
(10 minutes)
What do you believe are the three most important things that
teacher induction programs should focus on with alternatively certified math and science teachers to create habits of mind
where critical analysis is a daily practice?
Closing
(2 minutes)
Thanks for coming today and talking about the transformative
teacher induction program. Your comments have given me a
varied perspective into this program. I thank you for your
time.
113
APPENDIX N
SEMI-STRUCTURED TEACHER INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
114
The purpose of this interview is to gain a better understanding of your journey to and
within the profession over the past 2 ½ years. You have transformed from a newly hired teacher with content expertise and limited teaching knowledge to a provisionally certified
secondary teacher. I would like to spend some time reflecting on this time period, to help
me better understand the university and district support through your eyes. With you
permission I will record the interview in order to make a transcription for analysis. I will provide you with a copy of the transcription so you can check it for accuracy
Research
Question
Intro/Context Interview Questions
RQ1
The first section of this
interview is intended to give me some information about
your stages of professional
teaching identity development over the past 2 ½ years.
Why did you choose to participate in
the T3IP over the traditional teacher
induction program?
Do you remember what you thought
about the teaching profession or your
beliefs about teaching before year one of this program? Please describe.
How would you describe the teaching
profession now and how do you view
your role within the profession? Have you changed any assumptions or
beliefs as a result of participating in
this induction program?
RQ2 The second section of this
interview is focused on your
participation in AR within your
LSC group and the effects on your practice.
Please describe your experience in
your LSC group this semester.
Do you feel you are more or less open
to trying new ideas in your classroom
as a result of conducting your own action research?
Follow Up/Big Picture:
1. Please describe the ways in which your participation in the T3IP has influenced
your practice
2. What aspects of the Teacher Induction Program were helpful in your development as a teacher? What are some areas for improvement?
3. Is there any information you would like to add that you see as relevant to our
conversation?
Thank you for your time and devotion over the past 3 years.
115
APPENDIX O
DATA SOURCES COMPHREHENSIVE CHART
116
Sources Words/Items Analyzed
Pre-Focus Mentor Group 5,132 words
Researcher Journal 12,303 words
Emails 8,696 words
Fall 2010 Initial Post to Wiki Discussion 700 words Meeting 1 Discussion Board 373 words
Meeting 2 Discussion Board 537 words
Meeting 4 Discussion Board 178 words
Julie/Trent Notes October 20, 2010 50 words Language Arts meeting 1 (Notes) 3,956 words
Language Arts meeting 3 (Video) 3,916 words
Math meeting 4 (Video) 10,498 words Science Meeting 1 (Video) 4,537 words
Science meeting 3 (Notes) 683 words
Science Meeting 4 (Video & Notes) 7,275 words Mentor Teacher Reports on Teachers 669 words
Wiki- Individual Teacher Pages for Action Research
Projects
16,758 words
Research Night Teacher Speeches 2,002 words Post-Interview (Science) 3,808 words
Post-Interview (Math) 3,400 words
Post-Interview (Language Arts) 1,703 words
Post mentor teacher focus groups 1,652 words
TSES (2001) 12 Likert Questions T3IP Questionnaire 41 Likert Questions
7 Open-Ended Questions (2,372
words) 7 Demographic Questions
117
APPENDIX P
IRB APPROVAL LETTER
118
119
APPENDIX Q
TSES APPROVAL LETTER
120
121
122
123
This document was generated using the Graduate College Format Advising tool. Please
turn a copy of this page in when you submit your document to Graduate College format
advising. You may discard this page once you have printed your final document. DO NOT TURN THIS PAGE IN WITH YOUR FINAL DOCUMENT!
123
123