Texas Tech University, Sharron S. Hubbard, December 2015

Best Practices for Texas Rural School Leaders to Enable

First-Year Alternative Certification Program Teachers to

Build Self-Efficacy and Find Success in Their New Careers

by

Sharron Sullivan Hubbard, B.S., M.A.T.

A Dissertation in

Educational Leadership

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty

of Texas Tech University in

Partial Fulfillment of

the Requirements for

the Degree of

DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

Approved

Dr. Fernando Valle, Committee Chair

Dr. Joe Claudet, Committee Member

Dr. Fred Hartmeister, Committee Member

Mark Sheridan

Dean of the Graduate School

December, 2015

Texas Tech University, Sharron S. Hubbard, December 2015

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

After a wonderful career working in two Texas school systems serving 30 years

as a teacher, librarian, supervisor, principal, and director, I am now retired and have

found the time to complete my doctorate in educational leadership that I began years ago.

While serving 23 years as an English teacher, I was blessed to have the opportunity to

supervise over 20 student teachers. My time spent helping integrate them into the

educational profession was one of the highlights of my career. Some of those student

teachers are now serving as teachers, principals, and even superintendents in districts

across the state.

Upon retirement, I had the opportunity to continue working in education with

Education Service Center (ESC) XV and its alternative certification program (ACP)

serving as an intern and clinical supervisor for over thirty student teachers and first-year

teachers in fourteen different rural school districts. I thank Larry Taylor and all the

assistance he rendered while working with ESC XV. When Texas Education Service

Centers could no longer employ contract workers, I worked for WebCentric and Texas

Teachers, two other Texas-certified alternative certification programs, as a coach for

first-year teachers. It has been a wonderful opportunity to continue to share my

classroom experience and expertise with educators new to the profession. I have a

passion for seeing them succeed as I believe education is one of the most rewarding

careers any professional can choose.

I want to thank my dissertation committee, Chair Dr. Fernando Valle, and

committee members Dr. Joe Claudet and Dr. Fred Hartmeister for their support and

encouragement. I also want to extend my appreciation to my dissertation coach, Dr.


iii

Marcelo Schmidt, and to Lesley Shelton, both from Texas Tech University’s Doctoral

Support Center, for their assistance in the final stages of this dissertation process.

Without my committee’s patience and guidance and their allowing me to re-enter the

program to complete a life-long dream of becoming Dr. Sharron Hubbard, I would not

attain this goal. I appreciate their guidance.

Finally, I want to acknowledge the sacrifice of my husband, Charles Bruce

Hubbard, who though retired had to learn a new career, that of being house-husband. He

learned to mop floors and plan and cook the meals, enabling me to focus on my

educational pursuits. I appreciate his patiently being there beside me, solving my

technology issues when I frantically faced a computer issue I couldn’t resolve and

encouraging me to take the time I needed to complete this pursuit. I love him for being

there supporting me throughout these past two years.


iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................... ii

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................ vii

LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................... viii

I. THE RESEARCH TOPIC AND DETAIL .............................................................. 1

Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1

Background of the Researcher .................................................................................. 8

Background of the Problem ...................................................................................... 8

Statement of the Problem ........................................................................................ 17

Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................... 23

Research Questions ................................................................................................. 23

Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................... 24

Overview of Methodology ...................................................................................... 27

Implications ............................................................................................................. 30

Identification of the Variables ................................................................................. 31

Definition of Terms ................................................................................................. 31

Summary ................................................................................................................. 35

II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ..................................................................... 36

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 36

Organization of the Literature Review .................................................................... 37

Historical Perspective.............................................................................................. 38

Research Approach ................................................................................................. 42

Instructional Leadership .......................................................................................... 44

Rural School Characteristics and Teacher Shortages .............................................. 48

Alternative Certification Programs ......................................................................... 52

Self-Efficacy and Its Impact on Student and Teacher Success ............................... 56

Teacher Induction—Best Practices to Support Success.......................................... 59

Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 64

III. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................... 65

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 65

Research Design ...................................................................................................... 65


v

Instruments for Data Collection .............................................................................. 68

Description of Participants ...................................................................................... 74

Timeline and Process .............................................................................................. 75

Methods for Data Analysis ..................................................................................... 78

IV. FINDINGS............................................................................................................. 82

Overview ................................................................................................................. 82

Description of Participants ...................................................................................... 83

Procedures ............................................................................................................... 85

Results ..................................................................................................................... 86

Question One: What various practices are the leaders in REAP schools in

Texas using to support the induction of first-year ACP teachers? ..................... 86

Question Two: Do the numbers and types of support mechanisms offered

contribute to the self-efficacy of ACP teachers across rural Texas’ schools? . 106

Question Three: Do the level of self-efficacy and the numbers and types of

support mechanisms offered contribute to the successful induction of these

first-year ACP teachers as identified by the renewal of their teaching

contracts or their principals’ recommendation for certification? ..................... 112

Teachers’ Ideal New-Teacher Induction Process .................................................. 116

Principals’ Ideal New-Teacher Induction Process ................................................ 120

Summary of Research Findings ............................................................................ 122

Question One: What various practices are the leaders in REAP schools in

Texas using to support the induction of first-year ACP teachers? ................... 122

Question Two: Do the numbers and types of support mechanisms offered

contribute to the self-efficacy of ACP teachers across rural Texas’ schools? . 123

Question Three: Do the level of self-efficacy and the number and types of

support mechanisms offered contribute to the successful induction of these

first-year ACP teachers as identified by the renewal of their teaching

contracts or their principals’ recommendation for certification? ..................... 123

V. IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS ......................................................... 125

Introduction ........................................................................................................... 125

Results ................................................................................................................... 128

Influence of Social Media in Education ................................................................ 131

Limitations of the Study ........................................................................................ 133

Implications for Future Research .......................................................................... 136


vi

Implications for Practice and Recommendations .................................................. 137

Summary ............................................................................................................... 139

REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 142

APPENDICES ........................................................................................................... 163

Appendix A: Superintendent Contact Letter ......................................................... 163

Appendix B: Principal Contact Letter ................................................................... 165

Appendix C: Participant Contact Letter ................................................................ 166

Appendix D: Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (short form) .............................. 168

Appendix E: Demographics and School Supports Questionnaire......................... 169

Appendix F: Permission to Use Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES) ........ 172

Appendix G: Principal Interview Protocol ............................................................ 173

Appendix H: ACP Teacher Interview Protocol .................................................... 174

Appendix I: Comparison and Contrast of Rural and Urban Districts ................... 175


vii

ABSTRACT

First-year teachers trained through alternative certification programs often find

themselves teaching in smaller, rural school districts (Ballou & Podgursky, 1995; Monk,

2007). Since 2007, Texas has seen a steady increase in the numbers of first-year teachers

who are being trained through alternative certification programs rather than the

traditional colleges of education (Certified, Employed Teachers by Preparation Route,

2010–2014, Texas Education Agency, 2015). By 2011–2012, 63.6% of all first-year

teachers hired in Texas public schools were trained in alternative programs (Employment

of Certified Teachers 2010–2014, Texas Education Agency, 2015). Effective

instructional leaders will assume the responsibility for successfully inducting these new

educators so that they can grow and develop in their new careers (Spillane, Halverson, &

Diamond, 2004; Institute of Educational Leadership, 2000; Fullan, 2002). Providing a

support system to build the teachers’ level of self-efficacy is one way to accomplish this

goal.

This parallel mixed-methods study identified effective induction supports that are

available to help school leaders assist first-year ACP teachers teaching in rural school

districts across Texas and determined if there are relationships among variables including

the teachers’ perceptions of self-efficacy and these supports impacting teachers’

successfully completing their certifications. The resultant inventory of best practices

used across the state to provide support for these rural school first-year ACP teachers will

be a useful tool for school leaders, as well as for first-year teachers and alternative

certification program directors and coaches.


viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Certified, Employed Teachers by Preparation Route, 2007–2014 ................ 13

Table 2: Summary of Data Sources and Analysis ....................................................... 81

Table 3: Induction Supports Identified in Order of Frequency in 73 Rural Districts .. 86

Table 4: Reliability and Validity Participants’ TSES Short Form Results ................ 107

Table 5: Self-Efficacy and Induction Supports (Types and Numbers) ...................... 108

Table 6: Impact of Self-Efficacy on Successful Certification ................................... 112

Table 7: Analysis of Variance: Induction Supports and Standard Certification ........ 114

Table 8: Numbers and Types of Supports’ Impact on Successful Certification ........ 115

Table 9: Information Gathered from 25 Interviews with Principals and Teachers.... 175


1

CHAPTER I

THE RESEARCH TOPIC AND DETAIL

“The beginning is the most important part of the work.” Plato

Introduction

Albert Einstein said, “All that is valuable in human society depends upon the

opportunity for development accorded the individual.” Beginning teachers are

transforming from students themselves into teachers and need affirmation and support to

complete the process. This study is focused on beginning teachers who come into the

rural classrooms of Texas who have been trained via alternative certification programs.

The purpose of this study is to identify effective induction supports that are available to

help school leaders assist first-year alternative certification program teachers teaching in

rural school districts across Texas and to determine if there are relationships among

variables including perceptions of self-efficacy and these supports impacting teachers’

successfully completing their certifications.

Alternative certification is defined by the U. S. Department of Education as

“teacher preparation programs that enroll non-certified individuals with at least a

bachelor’s degree, offering shortcuts, special assistance, or unique curricula leading to

eligibility for a standard teaching credential” (cited by Guyton, Fox, & Sisk, 1991, p. 1).

The American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education defines alternative

certification as “any significant departure from the traditional undergraduate route

through teacher education programs in colleges and universities” (cited by Smith,

Nystrand, Ruch, Gideonse, & Carlson, 1985, p. 24). And in the Texas Administrative

Code, Title 19, Part 7, Chapter 229, Rule 229.2, alternative certification is defined as “an

approved educator preparation program, delivered by entities described in 228.20(a) of


2

this title…, specifically designed as an alternative to a traditional undergraduate

certification program, for individuals already holding at least a bachelor’s degree.” The

modern concept of alternative education was first introduced in the U. S. Department of

Education Sourcebook, America 2000: An Education Strategy (May 1991):

Congress will be asked to make grants available to states and districts to develop

alternative certification systems for teachers and principals. New college

graduates and others seeking a career change into teaching or school leadership

are often frustrated by certification requirements unrelated to subject area

knowledge or leadership ability. This initiative will help states and districts to

develop means by which individuals with an interest in teaching and school

leadership can overcome these barriers (p. 26).

Due to a variety of reasons, some rising from the implementation of federal

legislation, No Child Left Behind (NCLB), others resulting from Texas’s state

accountability and changing demographics including an increase in the numbers of

retiring teachers as well as an influx of people moving into Texas, a shortage of qualified

teachers has developed over the past three decades. Research documents the shortages of

highly qualified teachers especially in specific subject areas (Abell, et al., 2008;

Podursky, 2006; Darling-Hammond, et. al., 1999). Robert Duron with the Texas

Association of School Boards was quoted in an article by Matthew Waller, Austin Bureau

chief, published in the San Angelo Standard-Times on August 2, 2015 (p. 1B), saying

that Texas schools will have to hire an increasing number of teachers due to class sizes he

describes as “bursting at the seams.” He also stated, “We are seeing many more people

leave the profession every year than those who replace them” (Waller, 2015). These


3

reasons indicate there is a shortage of highly qualified teachers available to fill the

classrooms of Texas.

At the same time, data collected by the U. S. Department of Education’s National

Center for Education Statistics show a decrease in the number of Bachelor of Science

degrees conferred in the field of education from 176,307 in 1971 to 104,647 in 2013

(NCES, 2014). This has led to an increase in the number of ACP-trained teachers being

hired to teach in Texas’s rural districts, also known as REAP schools by the Rural

Education Assistance Program authorized under the No Child Left Behind Act 20

U.S.C.§§6201-6202 (2015). In an issue brief from the Texas Legislative Budget Board

staff produced in February 2013, the staff declared the following as key facts:

Texas has three basic routes for obtaining teacher certification: alternative,

post-baccalaureate, and university-based programs.

The alternative route for educator preparation has produced the largest

number of teachers since the school year 2004–2005. In the school year

2010–2011, approximately 48 percent of initial, standard teaching

certificates were earned through alternative programs.

University-based preparation programs experienced a 7 percent decrease

in the number of certified teachers produced from school years 2006–07 to

2010–11. (Texas Legislative Budget Board, 2013)

Therefore, rural school leaders have an important role to play in the successful induction

of these new alternatively trained educators into the profession.


4

This parallel mixed-methods research provides a timely study to assist rural

school leaders as they seek the means to assist their first-year ACP teachers to become

effective educators and complete their certifications. The opportunities for instructional

support differ in rural school districts when contrasted with urban districts that have

larger staffs and closer proximity to the resources offered by universities and region

service centers. In working with first-year ACP teachers and their instructional leaders

over the past ten years as a supervisor/coach for three different alternative certification

programs, the researcher has observed that school leaders in rural districts often struggle

to identify a variety of helpful resources available to assist these new teachers.

This study focused on the identification of effective induction supports to assist

Texas rural school leaders as they work with first-year ACP teachers. The participants in

the study included ten rural school principals and 77 first-year ACP teachers employed

for the 2014–2015 school year by Texas school districts categorized as Rural Education

Achievement Program or REAP districts, those with an average daily attendance (ADA)

of fewer than 600 students in grades K–12 or located within a county having a population

density of fewer than 10 people per square mile as defined in the federal Rural Education

Achievement Program 20 U.S.C.§§6201-6202 (2015). Fifteen of the teacher participants

who volunteered to be considered for an interview were randomly selected for telephone

interviews with the researcher to discuss their perceptions of self-efficacy, their first-year

teaching in a rural district in Texas, and their feelings about the different types of

induction supports they experienced. The ten volunteer rural school principals employing

first-year ACP teachers were interviewed for their perspectives on the self-efficacy of

first-year teachers and the induction processes used in their districts. The results of this


5

research can provide a resource to help these school leaders identify different types of

support available to help these teachers succeed in their quest for standard certification.

These ACP teachers must be successful in their first year of teaching, meaning they are

recommended for certification by their principals, to complete their certification process

and obtain their Standard Texas Educator’s Certificate.

In the 2013–2014 school year, 27.5% of all public school teachers employed in

Texas’s schools trained for their certification using an alternative certification program,

7.8% trained in a university post-baccalaureate program similar to an ACP, and 59%

trained through the traditional university schools of education that included a student

teaching component. The balance, 5.5%, were certified from out of state or via the

Jamison Bill, which is similar to post-baccalaureate but is no longer available (TEA,

Certified, employed Teachers by Preparation Route 2010–2014, 2015). Considering just

the first-year teachers employed in Texas’ schools during the 2013–2014 school year,

data show that 42.5% had trained for their certifications using alternative certification

programs, 4.3% using a university post-baccalaureate training, and 43.2% trained in the

traditional schools of education. The balance, almost 10%, were from out of state (Texas

Education Agency, Employment of Certified Teachers 2010–2014, 2015). Results of

data analysis show that the percentage of ACP-trained teachers in Texas schools has

increased each year from 2007 through 2014, while the percentage of undergraduate

university-trained teachers has decreased each year from 2007–2012 when data show

there to be a slight .1% increase in 2012–2013, followed by a .2% decrease in 2013–2014

(TEA, Certified, Employed Teachers by Preparation Route, 2009–2013, 2014). The State

Board of Educator Certification, September 1, 2015, reports that from September 1,


6

2014—August 31, 2015, Texas issued initial educator certificates to first-year teachers as

follows:

ACP trained teachers—11,552 or 54.4%

University traditional trained teachers—8,533 or 40.2%

Post-baccalaureate trained teachers—1,146 or 5.4%

The trend of an increasing number of ACP-trained teachers continues.

Another factor impacting the need for ACP-trained teachers in rural districts is the

annual attrition rate. Research conducted by the Southern Regional Education Board

(Bolich, 2001) found that after five years, more than 30% of novice teachers had left

education. Data collected by the Texas Education Agency show that a larger percentage

of beginning teachers leave from the smaller school districts, those with Average Daily

Attendance (ADA) of under 500, rather than from the larger school districts. In 2012–

2013, the attrition rate for beginning teachers was 43.3% in districts under 500 ADA and

39.9% for districts under 1000 ADA. For all teachers, the attrition rate for districts less

than 500 ADA was 24.4% and for districts less than 1000 ADA, 22.0% (TEA, One-Year

Attrition by District Size 2010–2013, 2014).

The leaving can be for a variety of reasons such as lack of contract renewal or

moving to another school district for many reasons including salary increases, proximity

of another district to bigger cities or to be closer to families or a more desirous teaching

assignment, spouse’s job change, starting a family, or other circumstances. In addition,

results of data collection indicate that the 2012–2013 retention rate for first-year ACP

teachers was 87.44% and for first-year university post-baccalaureate teachers the


7

retention rate was 92.3%; whereas the retention rate for first-year university

undergraduate-trained teachers was 94.7% (TEA, Teacher Retention 2009–2013, 2014).

Due to an increase in the number of ACP teachers hired to teach in rural Texas schools

and due to the increased attrition among first-year teachers in these smaller districts, there

is a need to identify successful practices which can be implemented by the leaders of

these rural schools with their unique characteristics to address the challenges facing first-

year rural ACP teachers. This mixed-methods research was framed using theories of self-

efficacy, educational leadership, and teacher induction.

The researcher found anecdotal evidence of the need for this type of research in

Rocksprings Independent School District (ISD), a Texas rural school district of 254

ADA. Sandra Van Winkle, a second-year K–12 principal at Rocksprings ISD, is one of

these school leaders who is asking for this type of information. Rocksprings ISD, located

within Education Service Center XV’s region, 130 miles from San Angelo and 150 miles

from San Antonio, is far distant from the available services provided at ESC XV or at

universities in San Angelo or San Antonio. For the 2013–2014 school year, Ms. Van

Winkle hired six new teachers—five of whom were first-year ACP teachers. She

struggled to identify available supports to assist these novice teachers in their new

positions. According to Ms. Van Winkle,

I have a challenge to find the means of helping these new teachers, especially the

ones who didn’t complete the university education courses, to be successful. In a

district as small as Rocksprings ISD, matching novice teachers with mentors in

their same teaching assignment is usually impossible. What are some effective

interventions I can offer them to ensure they complete their certification process


8

and are as effective in the classroom as possible? (Conversation between

researcher and Ms. Van Winkle, March 30, 2014).

Ms. Van Winkle is one of the school leaders who could benefit from this study.

Background of the Researcher

The researcher retired after 30 years in public education, ten in Three Rivers ISD,

a REAP district in South Texas, followed by 20 years in San Angelo ISD, an urban

district. During my career, I served as a secondary English teacher, a librarian, a

principal, a supervisor, and a director, and as a supervisor teacher for more than 20

student teachers, most of whom are still in working in public education serving as

teachers, principals, and superintendents. After retiring in 2003, I went to work as a

contract employee of ESC XV where I served as a supervisor of ACP interns (teacher of

record) and clinical teachers (similar to student-teaching under the auspices of a certified

teacher) seeking to obtain their standard teaching certificate. Most of the ACP teachers I

supervised were working in rural school districts within Region 15. I have also worked

as a supervisor/coach for two other ACP’s, Web-Centric and Texas Teachers. It is from

these experiences with student teachers in my own classroom and working as a

supervisor/coach for three ACP programs and recognizing the unique needs of the rural

districts in which I worked that the idea of this study evolved.

Background of the Problem

The proliferation of alternative routes to teacher certification has impacted teacher

training and has spawned controversy and debate. However, alternative certification

routes to certification have also generated positive effects on the field of education

including becoming another route for universities to use in the preparation of teachers.


9

NCEI (2005) described the alternative certification program route to teacher preparation

as “one of the few truly market-driven phenomena in American education” (p. 3). Today

there is a changing market for teaching with a significant increase in the numbers of non-

traditional candidates wanting to become teachers. The search for how to facilitate the

preparation of these people for careers in education has led to the rapid growth of ACP

programs across the nation. Today teacher demand is usually geographic and subject-

matter specific with a growing need in inner-city schools and outlying rural areas

especially in the subjects of math, science, and special education usually at the secondary

level (NCEI, 2005). The Educational Commission of the States in 2005 identified that

29% of ACP candidates were teaching math; 24%, science; and 11%, special education,

three of the high-needs teaching areas identified by NCEI, to help address the subject-

specific needs of schools across America (p. 2).

Commonly cited reasons for the teacher shortage in the United States include a

growing population with increasing numbers of public school children, legislation

decreasing class size limits, the requirement to have “highly qualified” teachers in all

classrooms from NCLB legislation, low teacher pay, and an aging workforce. The

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) estimates student enrollment in the

United States will increase from 49 million to 52 million between the years 2010 and

2019 (NCES, 2010). Also, due to an increase in immigration, many of these students will

be non-English speaking students requiring the need for more bilingual and ESL teachers.

School improvement research shows one means of improving school

effectiveness is to reduce class size. In Texas this was mandated in 1984 legislation

when elementary grades K–4 were required to have no more than 22 students to one


10

teacher (Texas Education Code 25.112), and other grades and subjects were to have a

sufficient number of certified teachers to maintain a ratio of not less than one teacher for

each 20 students in average daily attendance (Texas Education Code 25.111). The

mandated decrease in class sizes required some school districts to employ more teachers

to cover the increased number of sections created with the decrease in mandated class

sizes. In 1985, the University of Texas’ Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs

wrote in Policy Research Project Report 70 that the legislation caused an average

increase of 3.3% in the number of additional teachers needed within the state (p. 16).

One reason identified is that many of the nation’s teachers are “baby boomers”

reaching the age of retirement (Ingersoll, 2001; Weiss, 1999). Also, Ingersoll & Smith

(2003) found that within seven years of entering the profession, almost fifty percent of

teachers leave the profession. Another study conducted by the Texas Center for

Educational Research (2000, p. 16) found that the attrition rate for new teachers in Texas

is 19% after their first year and 43% after their third year, and the financial impact to the

state ranges from a low estimate of $480 million to $1.59 billion. A study by the Texas

Teaching Commission in 2012 entitled Educate Texas included among the factors related

to teacher retention the “acceptance of multiple career moves among members of

Generation Y and the lack of competitive salary options for teaching” (p. 18, 2012).

Also exacerbating the teacher shortages is No Child Left Behind (NCLB), a

presidential initiative that became law in 2001, mandating that each classroom has a

“highly qualified” teacher. By definition that meant districts had to hire many new

teachers who were fully certified in the areas in which they were to teach rather than

issuing emergency permits to teachers to fill the classrooms. Still another factor is the


11

explosive increase in the use of technology in education since 2000–2001 exacerbating

the shortage of technology applications teachers (U.S. Dept. of Education Office of

Postsecondary Education, 2014). Globalization has led to the increased demand for

foreign language classes to be added to school curriculums. Also, the national focus on

STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) curricula due to the drop in

American students’ test scores when juxtaposed with test scores of students in other

countries has increased the demand for teachers in these four areas. According to the

data from the U.S. Dept. of Education Office of Postsecondary Education (2014), Texas

is currently facing teacher shortages in the following areas: bilingual/ESL, technology

applications, foreign languages, mathematics, science, and special education.

To meet the demands of the schools to fill their classrooms with “highly

qualified” teachers, universities, as well as alternative certification programs, have

worked to recruit and train educators. Alternative education programs allow prospective

teachers to enter the classroom more quickly than the traditional teacher training models

used in many university education departments. One of the benefits of candidates using

alternative routes to certification is that this method of training oftentimes attracts more

mature, well-educated individuals with a strong desire to become teachers who are

provided enhanced supervision during their initial year of teaching and often beyond as

they develop into proficient subject-area educators, according to a study by Adelman,

Michie, and Bogart (1986).

New Jersey is the first known state to enact legislation to create this type of

alternative pathway to teacher certification. This legislation enacted in 1984 has served to

create an alternative certification process to avoid the state’s having to issue emergency


12

certificates that brought non-traditional candidates into the state’s classrooms with little

preparation. New Jersey recruits liberal arts graduates to train in school-based programs

while working alongside mentor teachers. By 2005, twenty-five percent of New Jersey

teachers were being certified through alternative certification programs (NCEI, 2005).

In 1985, the state of Texas allowed Houston Independent School District (ISD) to

implement the first ACP in Texas to meet a critical teacher shortage for Houston schools.

By the 2011 – 2012 school year, Texas had 161 different accredited ACP providers

which fall into one of six program types: private companies, universities, community

colleges, school districts, education service centers, or counties (State Board of Educator

Certification [SBEC], 2013).

In 2012–2013, the public school districts across the state of Texas employed

317,680 public school teachers; of those, 85,213 or 26.8% were ACP-certified teachers

(TEA, Certified, Employed Teachers by Preparation Route, 2009–2013, 2014). ACP has

made a large impact on Texas schools over the past few years, especially in the inner-city

and outlying rural schools. According to the Texas Education Agency (Employment of

Certified Teachers 2009–2013, 2014), Texas schools hired 14,209 first-year teachers for

the 2012–2013 school year. Of that number, 5,845 or 41% of those were initially

certified through alternative certification programs; whereas 7,181 or 50.5% were trained

in traditional university programs. The remaining 8.5% were trained in post-

baccalaureate university programs or moved into the state with out-of-state certifications.

The percentage of ACP-trained teachers increased each of the years from 2007–2013,

while the percentage of university education-trained teachers decreased each of those


13

years until 2012–2013 when the percentage of university-trained teachers increased by

.1% (TEA, Certified, Employed Teachers by Preparation Route 2009–2013, 2014).

Table 1: Certified, Employed Teachers by Preparation Route, 2007–2014

Year

Total

Alt. Cert. Prog. Univ. Post-Bac. Univ. Undergrad.

Number % Number % Number %

2013–2014

320,354 88,147 27.5 24,786 7.8 189,824 59.3

2012–2013

317,661 85,214 26.8 24,899 7.8 188,921 59.5

2011–2012

317,860 84,048 26.4 24,907 7.8 188,687 59.4

2010–2011

322,192 79,958 24.8 25,331 7.9 194,969 60.5

2009–2010

317,561 72,968 23.0 25,118 7.9 196,547 61.9

2008–2009

308,886 64,574 20.9 24,691 8.0 195,394 63.3

2007–2008

301,824 56,149 18.6 24,143 8.0 196,046 65.0

Note: Totals do not include Out of State, Jamison Bill, or Certified by Examination.

Source: SBEC online data, TEA PEIMS data constructed by Michael C. Ramsay, PhD., TEA

Research Specialist, May 2015

Results show a steady increase in percentages for ACP certified, employed teachers

growing from 18.6% to 27.5% during the seven-year period, a growth of 8.9%.

Conversely, the percentages for University undergraduate certified, employed teachers

decreased from 65% to 59.3% over the same period. The percentage of University post-

baccalaureate certified, employed teachers remained fairly steady from 8.0 to 7.8% over

the seven years.

Since the inception of ACP, the requirements for professional educator

certification have varied greatly. In Texas in 2009, with the passage of Senate Bill 174,


14

the Texas Education Code (TEC) Sections 21.041 and 21.045 were amended and

Sections 21.0451 and 21.0452 were added to create an Accountability System for

Educator Preparation Programs. The State Board of Educator Certification (SBEC)

adopted the Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 229 to improve the quality of

alternative certification programs by developing a list of standard requirements for each

of the current 161 accredited alternative certification programs in the state to meet in

order to maintain their annual accreditation status. Senate Bill 174, which was fully

implemented by July 31, 2013, created the following four measures to ensure the quality

of all teacher preparation programs:

To retain program accreditation, 80 percent of each program’s teacher

candidates must pass the certification exams.

Texas principals are to complete annual surveys regarding the

effectiveness of each new teacher by program; the data are posted on the

Consumer Information website to assist both prospective teacher

candidates selecting an educator preparation program and administrators

making hiring decisions.

A State Longitudinal Data System (SLDS) using value-added measures to

assess a new teacher’s impact on student achievement is developed; “the

metric will include measures of growth in student performance,

observations of teachers, principal appraisals, and school-wide growth in

student performance” (Texas Teaching Commission, 2012). The student

achievement data are linked to the teacher as well as to the teacher

educator preparation program.


15

Educator preparation programs are to collect observation data from field

supervisors including the duration, frequency, and quality of field

supervisions. The statisticians enter the data into the Accountability

System for Educator Preparation (ASEP), and the percentage of

compliance is to be reported to the State Board of Educator Certification

(Texas Education Agency, 2010).

In 2011, Educate Texas, a public–private initiative of the Communities

Foundation of Texas, was created with the goal “to advance new information, strategies,

and ideas on how the Lone Star State can better align various state policies and local

programs with the comprehensive goal of better training, supporting, evaluating, and

compensating” the teachers of Texas (Texas Teaching Commission, p. 4, 2012). The

Texas Teaching Commission was launched with the specific charge to “take a holistic

look at the teaching continuum in Texas and recommend strategies for improvement” (p.

4). The Commission met monthly throughout 2012 to develop its report,

“Recommendations for the Next Generation of Teaching Policy in Texas.” It recognized

that the most important school-based factor impacting student success was an effective

teacher. As a result, the Commission’s recommendations are “anchored in high-quality

standards for teaching practice.” (p. 7). The commission studied teacher induction and

indicated the need to strengthen the process.

The State Board of Educator Certification created a list of the basic requirements

for alternative certification teacher candidates. The first requirement is for the candidate

to have a bachelor’s degree with a minimum cumulative GPA of a 2.5 and a minimum of

24 college hours (12 must be at the junior or senior level) in the specified subject area(s)


16

of certification. Then the candidate must pass a state background check and complete an

educator-preparation program. The required components of the ACP training include

modules in pedagogy, classroom management, lesson planning, child development,

multi-cultural training, and subject-specific teaching methods, as well as opportunities for

a specified number of hours of classroom observation. The next requirement is for the

candidate to pass the TExES test in the area(s) of certification and obtain a probationary

teacher certificate.

After that, the candidate, referred to as an intern, obtains either a full-time

teaching position or elects to complete a clinical program that is rather like a supervised

12-week student teaching experience. As the teacher of record, the intern is granted all

the rights and responsibilities of a full-time teacher including having to obtain passing

teacher evaluations from the campus administrator. During the intern or clinical

experience, the candidate trains for and is granted permission by the ACP program to

take the Pedagogy and Professional Responsibilities (PPR) test. Once the instructional

year or the clinical teaching experience is completed successfully, including obtaining

passing scores on the required certification tests, the candidate is recommended for his or

her standard teaching certificate.

The candidates are assigned both a program supervisor as well as an on-campus

mentor to help guide and direct them during the initial year in the classroom. Completing

the required training using an alternative certification route can take as short as three

months up to three years’ time depending upon the candidate’s dedication to completing

the training modules and the observation requirements. Finally, the candidate must be

recommended for certification at the end of the year by the campus administrator and the


17

ACP supervisor. Once all these steps have been completed successfully, the candidate

can then apply to the State Board of Educator Certification (SBEC) for his or her

standard teaching certificate.

Statement of the Problem

First-year ACP teachers working in the more isolated rural districts across Texas

sometimes struggle during their first year and could, therefore, benefit from a variety of

induction supports to enable them to succeed in completing their first year successfully so

they are recommended for standard certification. It is in the best interests of the schools,

as well as the students, for school leaders to help these new teachers be successful in their

first year of teaching that leads to their contracts’ being renewed and likely retention.

Since researchers have documented a correlation between teachers’ perceived level of

self-efficacy and their ability to succeed in the classroom (Ghaith & Shaaban, 1999; Hoy,

2000), effective school leaders will target teacher self-efficacy to affect the success of the

first-year teachers. The costs associated with teacher attrition make it in all the

stakeholders’ interest to identify a wide range of effective induction supports to help

these novice educators raise their self-efficacy and be successful in order to continue in

their teaching positions. Though difficult to determine the exact financial cost of teacher

turnover in Texas, a study prepared for the Texas State Board for Educator Certification

by the Texas Center for Educational Research in 2000 estimated a conservative cost of

teacher turnover to be $329 million each year while other estimations ranged upward to

$2.1 billion per year (Texas Center for Educational Research, 2000, p. 16).

According to Roth and Swail (2000), “The single most important thing a school

can provide to ensure the success of students is a skilled and knowledgeable teacher.


18

Good teachers—those who know what to teach and how to teach it—produce successful

students” (p. 19). Helping a rural school instructional leader find a means of assisting a

new ACP teacher find success in his or her initial year of teaching was the main purpose

of this research. The researcher surveyed first-year ACP teachers working in rural Texas

school districts and interviewed ten randomly selected principals and fifteen first-year

ACP teachers to identify those induction practices that have helped novice teachers to be

successful in their first year of teaching.

Teachers’ self-efficacy, their “confidence in their ability to promote students’

learning,” is an important component of their effectiveness (Hoy, 2000, p. 2). Ross

(1994) found “efficacy is one of the few individual teacher characteristics that reliably

predicts teacher practice and student outcomes” (p. 3). According to Henson (2001), the

simple idea that a teacher’s belief in his or her ability to positively impact student

learning is critical to their success as an educator. Teachers’ professional development

should be designed to help them improve students’ outcomes so the teachers “reap the

efficacy pay-off that would result” (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001, p. 783).

Researchers have correlated the level of self-efficacy of teachers with their degree of

commitment to their job and their level of job satisfaction (DiPaola & Hoy, 2005).

So the question becomes, “How do school leaders help teachers develop a strong

self-efficacy?” Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001, p. 803) stated, “the potency of efficacy

beliefs to impact teacher motivation and persistence over the course of a career could also

well lead to a rethinking of the induction-year experiences of novice teachers, allowing

for greater protection and support.” Hoy (2000) suggests “some of the most powerful

influences on the development of teacher efficacy are mastery experiences during…the


19

induction year” (p. 2) which affirms the importance of school leaders’ providing for

“mastery experiences” during the first year of teaching.

The role of the principal as a campus leader is changing. A task force convened

by the Institute of Educational Leadership (IEL) in 2000, agreed that the role of the

campus principal as a middle-level manager responsible for the daily operation of the

campus has changed to that of an instructional leader charged with raising student

performance. The more mundane management tasks previously assigned to the campus

principal are to be delegated to others in order for the campus principal to concentrate on

instructional leadership that “focuses on strengthening teaching and learning, professional

development, data-driven decision-making and accountability” (Institute for Educational

Leadership, 2000, p. 4). The IEL task force referred to this transition as “reinventing the

principalship” (IEL, 2000, p. 1). The IEL report cites the Educational Research Service’s

conclusion, “Researchers, policy makers, and educational practitioners agree: good

school principals are the keystone of good schools. Without the principal’s leadership,

efforts to raise student achievement cannot succeed” (IEL, 2000, p. 6). The task force

concluded its report with the suggestion that

school systems should recognize that one person cannot provide effective

leadership for student learning while tending to the thousand tasks traditionally

heaped on principals. Instead, school systems must recognize the need to provide

principals with the resources and flexibility to delegate specific responsibilities,

distribute leadership, or head up school leadership teams as needed (IEL, p. 13).

School leadership is a skill that grows with experience. Many rural schools hire

inexperienced principals who gain experience in the smaller districts before applying for


20

administrative positions in larger districts requiring more experience and offering greater

compensation. In a literature review for the National Governors’ Association (NGA),

Mazzeo (2003) points to a shortage of talented school administrators, especially for rural

and inner-city school districts, since these districts often pay lower salaries; therefore,

these districts are more likely to hire lesser-experienced principals. These novice

principals are forced to focus on the daily operations of the school as they generally are

the sole administrator on the campus which necessitates their serving in many different

capacities including dealing with discipline, attendance, budget, school climate,

evaluation, curriculum and instruction, building and maintenance, accountability,

planning, staffing, as well as parental and community relations. Research has also shown

that small-school leaders tend to have a more direct and significant impact on student

learning than their large-school counterparts (Waters, et al., 2004; Leithwood et al.,

2004). The focus in educational research today is on the principal as a “leader for

learning” (IEL, 2001). According to the IEL report, “Schools of the twenty-first century

will require a new kind of principal, one whose main responsibility will be defined in

terms of instructional leadership which focuses on strengthening teaching and learning”

(p. 3).

From this researcher’s personal experience serving as a campus principal for four

years, any assistance these novice principals can get to help them carry out any of their

numerous roles would be appreciated. Having a ready tool to reference when called upon

to assist with supporting beginning teachers would be beneficial. To address the issue of

supporting beginning first-year ACP teachers, the researcher collected an inventory of

strategies and best practices available to rural school districts in Texas.


21

The induction process for new teachers is critically important to their success as

they begin their new careers in education. Knowing that nearly half of all new teachers

leave the profession within the first five years of their teaching careers, according to the

Texas Teaching Commission’s report Educate Texas (2012) and Ingersol & Smith

(2003), it is apparent that the working conditions for and the support of these new

educators must be carefully considered to help ensure their retention in the field of

teaching. According to the National Commission on Teacher and America’s Future

(NCTAF, 2003), teacher retention is considered to be one of the Achilles’ heels of the

teaching profession and is largely responsible for the teacher shortages.

In high-quality induction programs, state policy creates a supportive context and

establishes a strong expectation that comprehensive support will be provided to

every beginning teacher. Research suggests that comprehensive, multi-year

induction programs reduce the rate of new-teacher attrition, accelerate the

professional growth of new teachers, provide a positive return on investment, and

improve student learning (Goldrick, Osta, Barlin, & Burn, 2012, p. iii).

Induction usually means the assignment of a mentor to the novice teacher.

However, effective induction programs encompass more than that. They include giving

support, guidance, and orientation for beginning teachers during the transition into their

first teaching jobs and include a variety of activities (Ingersoll & Smith, 2004, p. 28).

Ingersoll and Smith caution that induction programs do not just offer a new teacher some

additional training; rather they are like “a bridge from student of teaching to teacher of

students” (p. 29). For years once a teacher was hired, he or she was given the keys; a

textbook, grade book and lesson plan book; then shown to the classroom. That is how the


22

researcher was “inducted” in 1972. It was rather a “sink or swim” experience. That

phenomenon has been linked to the increasing rates of attrition of educators in the early

years of their careers which have then been linked to the teacher shortages, leading to the

perennial problem referred to as the “revolving door” in education (Ingersoll & Smith,

2003, p. 29). That revolving door needs to be closed. This research intended to identify

some alternative supports available for school leaders in Texas’s rural districts to help the

first-year teachers to be successful in completing their certification process.

In order to improve the induction process for new teachers and ensure their

effectiveness in the classroom, Texas has addressed these issues with the development of

the Beginning Teacher Induction and Mentoring System (BTIMS) program to increase

teacher retention, as well as the Texas Beginning Educators Support System (TxBESS).

Also, the Tarleton State University with funding and support from the Texas Education

Agency has created an online program Performance-Based Academic Coaching Team

(PACT) as a novice teacher support system. These are a few of the different supports

available for new teachers.

A host of different types of supports can be made available to beginning ACP

teachers that can make an impact in their being successful in their newfound careers.

This is especially critical in the rural school settings which tend to be more isolated from

university support and Regional Service Center accessibility, as well as often lacking

available same subject-area, same grade-level quality mentors due to the smaller size of

the faculty. A new physics teacher or a foreign language teacher employed by a rural

school district may feel isolated due to the lack of proximity of an experienced physics or


23

foreign language teacher, the closest, no doubt, to be found in a different school district,

one possibly far away.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to identify effective induction supports that are

available to help school leaders assist first-year alternative certification program teachers

teaching in rural school districts across Texas and to determine if there are relationships

among variables including perceptions of self-efficacy and these supports impacting

teachers’ successfully completing their standard certification. Offering support for these

new teachers is in the best interests of these novice educators who have spent time and

money on the certification process, the students who will benefit from the new teachers’

increased effectiveness and their enhanced experience level over time, the faculty who

have a stake in the success of fellow teachers especially in the context of a school’s

collective efficacy, the administrators who make the hiring decisions and invest time and

money in the process, and the rural community which is impacted by the successful

integration of new faculty into the community. With so much at stake for so many

stakeholders, the successful transformation of a novice teacher into an experienced

teacher is worth the effort and expense needed to create a successful induction program.

It is believed that school leaders’ offering a variety of effective supports for these first-

year ACP teachers will enhance the educators’ level of self-efficacy and thereby increase

their ability to be successful in obtaining full standard certification.

Research Questions

The intent of this research is to provide an inventory of effective induction

practices, also referred to as supports, used by the rural school leaders across Texas


24

which are identified as impacting the success of first-year ACP teachers in obtaining their

official certifications. To help with the determination of the “success” of the first-year

ACP teachers, a survey of their self-efficacy, which research has identified as having a

high correlation to the teacher’s level of success, was administered. Also, the researcher

administered a questionnaire to gather demographic information and to collect a list of

various types of supports offered to the beginning ACP teachers participating in the

study. The research was expected to answer the following questions:

1. What various practices are the leaders in REAP schools in Texas using to

support the induction of first-year ACP teachers?

2. Do the numbers and types of support mechanisms offered contribute to the

self-efficacy of ACP teachers across rural Texas’ schools?

3. Do the level of self-efficacy and the number and types of support

mechanisms offered contribute to the successful induction of these first-

year ACP teachers as identified by the renewal of their teaching contracts

or their principals’ recommendation for certification?

Theoretical Framework

The concept of instructional leadership provided the basic framework for this

research study. One of the primary roles of instructional leaders is to focus on the

improvement of instruction as a means of improving outcomes for students. Studies

conducted by Fullan (2005), Marzano, Waters, & McNulty (2005), and Leithwood,

Louis, Anderson & Wahlstrom (2004) have found significant correlations between

instructional leadership and student performance. Case study research by Togneri and

Anderson (2003) indicates that school leaders engender student success by creating


25

conditions that support teachers. They found effective school leaders created approaches

to improving instruction that included articulating the curriculum, providing for

instructional supports, adopting new approaches for staff development, and implementing

and supporting new instructional strategies (Togneri and Anderson, p. 4). Effective

school leaders also provided support and resources including release time and financial

support for teachers to attend professional development to benefit the students by

growing the teachers’ expertise. They found the resources to provide teachers with the

manipulatives and other instructional aids teachers find useful in working with students.

The transformation of school leaders from “campus managers” into instructional

leaders has been a focus of 21st-century educational leadership training. The Institute for

Educational Leadership (IEL), focusing on issues related to instructional leadership,

determined “the top priority of principalship must be leadership for learning” including

improving teacher quality (IEL, 2001, p. 1).

The theory of self-efficacy provided another framework for this research study.

The theoretical foundation for self-efficacy is founded in Bandura’s (1997) social

cognitive theory that has become possibly the most influential theory of learning and

development. Rather than relying on direct reinforcement as an explanation for learning,

Bandura added the social element saying people can learn by watching others. His social

cognitive theory has three core concepts: people can learn through observation; internal

mental states including intrinsic reinforcement are an important part of the learning

process; and just because someone has learned something does not mean their behavior

will change (Bandura, 1997). Central to Bandura’s social cognitive theory is self-

efficacy. Bandura defined self-efficacy as “beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and


26

execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments” (1977, p. 3).

Bandura’s theory posits our beliefs in our abilities that affect our behavior, motivation,

and our successes or failures. Bandura (1993) and Pajares (1996) linked self-efficacy to

academic performance and student learning. Bandura observed that people make an

effort according to their expectation of the consequences of their action rather than the

actual result of their actions. Therefore, it follows that one’s self-efficacy influences the

choices, effort, and persistence one makes (Pajares, 1996). Self-efficacy theory has

become a common theme in the arena of motivation because of its predictive power and

application for most behavioral tasks (Graham & Weiner, 1996).

Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy, and Hoy (1998, p. 206) define teacher efficacy

as a teacher’s “judgment of his or her capabilities to bring about desired outcomes of

student engagement and learning, even among those students who may be difficult or

unmotivated.” Their research has found consistent relationships between characteristics

of teachers and learning behaviors of students. Hoy (2000) asserted that a teacher’s self-

efficacy is an important component of their effectiveness. Ross (1994) determined

“efficacy is one of the few individual teacher characteristics that reliably predicts teacher

practice and student outcomes” (p. 3). In her dissertation on teacher efficacy research,

Robin Henson (2001) focused on the concept of self-efficacy as it related to educational

improvement and called it teacher self-efficacy. She asserted the simple idea that

teachers’ beliefs in their ability to positively impact student learning is critical to their

success as educators. So the question becomes, “How do school leaders help teachers

develop a strong sense of self-efficacy?”


27

Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001, p. 803) stated “the potency of efficacy beliefs

to impact teacher motivation and persistence over the course of a career could also well

lead to a rethinking of the induction-year experiences of novice teachers, allowing for

greater protection and support.” Hoy (2000, p. 2) suggests “some of the most powerful

influences on the development of teacher efficacy are mastery experiences during…the

induction year.” These statements support the importance of school leaders’ providing

for mastery experiences during the first year of teaching. The research correlated the

level of self-efficacy of teachers with their degree of commitment to their job and their

level of job satisfaction (DiPaola & Hoy, 2005). School leaders’ offering a variety of

effective supports for these first-year ACP teachers are expected to enhance the

educators’ level of self-efficacy and thereby increase their ability to be successful in

obtaining full certification.

Overview of Methodology

This parallel mixed-methods study made use of the following research

instruments:

Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale—Short Form (TSES) developed by

Megan Tschannen-Moran and Anita Woolfolk Hoy,

A Demographics and School Supports questionnaire that was personally

developed by the researcher to obtain demographic information and the

identification of teacher induction strategies experienced by the teachers

within the rural schools surveyed, and


28

Telephone interviews with ten principals and 15 teachers randomly

selected from those volunteering to discuss teacher induction methods

used within their respective districts.

The researcher began by submitting a Personal Information Request (PIR) to the

Texas Education Agency in October, 2014, seeking the identity of the first-year ACP

teachers teaching in Texas’s REAP districts for the 2014–2015 school year. Once the

correct list was finally received in March 2015, the researcher began identifying the

names and email addresses of the 177 superintendents heading the REAP districts that

employed the first-year ACP teachers by using TEA’s AskTED.com website. Then each

one of the superintendents was emailed a personal letter introducing the researcher,

briefly explaining the research, identifying the first-year teacher(s) to be surveyed, and

requesting his or her permission for the researcher to contact said teacher(s) by school

email address (See Appendix A). The superintendents were emailed April 9–10, 2015.

When the number of superintendent responses did not equal the desired number, the

researcher sent out a second personal email April 22–24, 2015, to the remaining

superintendents reminding them of the study and requesting their permission to email the

teachers. Two weeks later, the researcher began calling the 71 superintendents who had

not responded to the two previous email requests. The researcher spoke with most of the

71 remaining superintendents, and once the study was explained, the majority granted

permission for the survey invitation to be emailed to their first-year ACP teachers. In the

end, 127 of the 177 superintendents (71.75%) granted permission for their cumulative

214 first-year ACP teachers to be invited to participate in the research.


29

Once the researcher received permission to send an email containing a link to the

Qualtrics survey to the teachers, the next step the researcher took was to email the

principals of those teachers informing them of the study and asking if they would

volunteer to be called for a telephone interview regarding induction supports in their

districts (See Appendix B). On May 24, 2015, the researcher randomly drew ten of the

names from the 28 volunteering principals who agreed to be interviewed. Each was

emailed to arrange for a date and time for the phone interview. Those interviews were

conducted from May 27–June 13, 2015.

After contacting the superintendents and principals, beginning May 6, 2015, the

researcher then sent emails to the 214 first-year ACP teachers who were allowed to be

invited to participate in the research (See Appendix C). The email invitation to

participate in the survey/questionnaire introduced the researcher, briefly explained the

value of the research, and then invited the teachers to click on the link provided if they

were willing to complete the survey/questionnaire. Seventy-seven of the 214 (36%)

possible participants voluntarily completed the research instrument. Also, the teachers

were invited to return email the researcher if they were willing to be selected randomly to

participate in a telephone interview regarding induction supports in their district. Forty-

two teachers agreed to participate in interviews; fifteen were chosen randomly in a

drawing the researcher made on May 24, 2015, and the interviews were conducted from

May 27–June 13, 2015.

Using Qualtrics survey software, the researcher compiled data from the two

instruments, the Teacher Self-Efficacy Survey (short form) (See Appendix D) and the

original Demographics and School Supports questionnaire (See Appendix E).


30

Descriptive statistics were generated from the results of the researcher-developed

questionnaire regarding the different types of induction supports experienced by the

participants in the research study. Also, the interview responses from fifteen teachers and

ten principals were added to the quantitative results to explain further and confirm the

findings from the survey/questionnaire data. From data collected from the questionnaire

as well as from the principal and teacher interviews, the researcher was able to create an

inventory of all identified support. Regression analysis allowed the researcher to

determine if the number and types of induction supports could be correlated to the level

of self-efficacy of the ACP teachers. Finally, logistic regression was utilized to examine

the predictability of variables—self-efficacy and the number of induction supports—upon

the level of a teacher’s self-efficacy and the likelihood of a new teacher’s success in

obtaining standard certification.

Implications

The results of this research study could have implications for different audiences.

The results could provide valuable information to school leaders, ACP teachers and their

colleagues, as well as alternative certification program directors and supervisors. School

leaders can have a heightened awareness of the components of alternative certification

programs and the unique characteristics of rural schools that can either negatively impact

or enhance new teachers’ effectiveness. These rural school leaders can have an easily

accessible tool to use to find an inventory of best practices that have been used in Texas’

rural schools to assist these first-year ACP teachers. Also, faculty can realize what role

they can play in assisting first-year ACP teachers to succeed in their classrooms. Finally,

the actual design, components, and policies of the various alternative certification


31

programs can be impacted as the program directors and supervisors are made aware of

identifiable supports that are available within the rural school settings or those which are

missing from those settings. Then needed adjustments can be made to the ACP programs

for the improvement of student achievement and the success of the ACP first-year

teachers in obtaining their standard certification.

Identification of the Variables

This researcher identified the various induction supports made available to assist

first-year ACP teachers to assist them to find success in obtaining their standard

certification, and the researcher analyzed the relationships among rural school

characteristics with the beginning ACP teachers’ level of self-efficacy and their

successful completion of their standard teacher certifications. The independent variables

were the rural Texas schools’ characteristics and the components of induction programs

that are made available to the novice ACP teachers. The dependent variables are the

first-year ACP teachers’ perception of self-efficacy and their success in the classroom

allowing them to obtain their standard certification.

Definition of Terms

Alternative teacher certification refers to a means of licensing a teacher other than the

traditional, campus-based education program that results in one’s earning a

license to teach (Feistritzer, C. E., 2005).

Alternative certification program (ACP) is “an approved educator preparation program…

specifically designed as an alternative to a traditional undergraduate certification

program, for individuals already holding at least a bachelor’s degree” (TAC

229.2)


32

First-year ACP teacher is an educator who has at least a bachelor’s degree and has

completed an alternative certification program training in the areas of curriculum,

lesson planning, working with disabled and multi-cultural students, analyzing

data, assessment, classroom management, as well as subject area content and

teaching strategies. This probationary-certified educator is contracted as the

teacher of record for his or her first year in a school district. Upon the passing of

required state testing and the successful completion of the first year as a teacher of

record working with a mentor and a program supervisor, the candidate can apply

for a standard teaching certificate.

Distributed leadership is a view of leadership that is “shared by multiple individuals at

different levels of the organization” (Riordan, 2003)

E-Mentoring or electronic mentoring is “a relationship between a more experienced

individual {mentor} and a less skilled or experienced individual {mentee}, using

computer-mediated communication (CMC) to develop and improve the mentee’s

skills, confidence, and cultural understanding” (Jaffe et al., 2006, p. 90).

Highly-qualified teacher (HQT) is a teacher who has a bachelor’s degree and standard

state certification or licensure, and who can prove he or she knows each subject

taught (U. S. Department of Education, 2004).

Induction is the period after pre-service education extending into the first years in the

classroom that encompasses a variety of activities (Ingersoll & Kralik, 2004;

Billingsley et al., 2009)


33

Instructional leadership “focuses on strengthening teaching and learning, professional

development, data-driven decision making, and accountability” (Institute for

Educational Leadership, 2000, p. 4)

Mentoring is a process of guiding, teaching, influencing, and supporting a beginning

teacher. A mentor teacher leads and guides as well as advises a novice teacher

building a relationship of mutual trust and shared beliefs (Feiman-Nemser &

Parker, 1990).

NCLB refers to the federal legislation entitled No Child Left Behind which “allows school

districts to hire teachers who have not obtained full state certification for Title I

schools if the teacher is enrolled in an acceptable alternate route to certification”

(SBEC, 2015).

Post-baccalaureate programs are “teaching training programs offered by colleges and

universities for individuals who already hold a baccalaureate degree” (SBEC,

2015).

Probationary certification is granted by the Texas Education Agency once an ACP intern

has passed a background check, paid the certification fee, secured a teaching

position, and has been recommended for probationary certification by an ACP

program. The certificate is valid for one calendar year allowing the intern time to

complete the standard certification and ACP program requirements.

Professional development includes activities to improve and increase teachers’

knowledge of the subjects they teach, evidence-based teaching strategies, skills to

enhance students’ academic achievement, and classroom management skills.


34

Rural school is a school located within a district having fewer than 600 students in grades

K – 12 or within a county having a population density of fewer than ten people

per square mile. In this study, rural schools will also be called REAP schools for

the Rural Education Achievement Program designation assigned in NCLB, Title

VI, Part B.

School leaders include central office and campus administrators, department chairs and

team leaders, counselors, diagnosticians, and even experienced teachers.

Self-efficacy is the quality of being successful in producing an intended result; for

teachers, it is the extent to which the teacher believes he or she affects student

performance. (Reeves, 2011, p. 36).

Standard certification will be issued to an ACP intern once all program training,

internship, examinations, and other program requirements are completed and the

Texas Education Agency receives a recommendation for certification from the

intern’s principal and program supervisor. According to TEA (Becoming a

Certified Educator, 2015), an intern may not teach more than three years in Texas

public schools on temporary credentials prior to receiving an initial standard

certificate.

State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) refers to the series of state-

mandated, standardized tests administered to Texas students in specified English

(including reading in grades 3--8 and writing in grades 4 and 7), science, math,

and social studies classes at specified grade levels.

Teacher supports encompass a variety of resources and strategies made available to new

teachers that enable them to improve their craft.


35

Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) are the Texas standards for what students

should know and be able to do in most of the subject areas and all the grade

levels.

TxBESS, the Texas Beginning Educator Support System, is a statewide program targeted

at retaining Texas’ beginning teachers by providing them with instructional and

mentor support during their first years of teaching (Dana Center, 2002)

University-based programs are “teacher training offered by colleges and universities as

part of an undergraduate degree program” (SBEC, 2015).

Summary

Alternative certification programs have become an effective means of addressing

the teacher shortage. However, ACP first-year teachers have a need for a wide range of

supports to help them through the critical first year of their educational careers. Previous

research has documented a strong correlation between teachers’ perceptions of their self-

efficacy and their effectiveness in the classroom. Effective induction programs,

especially in outlying rural districts with limited resources where many of the ACP

teachers are hired, are sparse or sometimes non-existent. Without appropriate

interventions and supports, many of these first-year teachers will leave the profession.

Teacher attrition has a negative impact on student achievement, as well as a negative

economic impact on the school district, community, and the state. It is important that a

variety of induction activities and resources be made known to rural school leaders so

they can make them available to novice teachers.


36

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

This parallel mixed-methods study identified effective induction supports that are

available to help school leaders assist first-year ACP teachers teaching in rural school

districts across Texas and determined whether or not there are relationships among

variables including the teachers’ perceptions of self-efficacy and these supports

impacting teachers’ successfully completing their certifications. The resultant inventory

of best practices used across the state to provide support for these rural-school, first-year

ACP teachers can be a useful tool for school leaders, as well as for alternative

certification program directors and supervisors, in helping their first-year ACP teachers to

complete their standard certifications.

Teacher induction methods that support beginning teachers have been shown to

improve teacher quality and increase retention. Both of these results correlate positively

with student success (Guarino, Santibanez, & Daley, 2006; Ingersoll & Smith, 2004;

Strong, 2005). Retention has been correlated with teachers’ perception of their working

conditions especially their feelings about “administrative support, resources, and teacher

voice and influence over policy in their schools” (National Commission on Teaching and

America’s Future [NCTAF], 2002, p. 11). Writing for NCTAF, Fulton, Yoon, and Lee

(2005) state their belief that the kind of learning community in which a new teacher

works may be the most influential factor in their professional development, overriding

the influence of traditional versus alternative training. The reason teachers with higher

levels of self-efficacy tend to be more effective in the classroom is due to their


37

willingness to experiment, use innovations, allow student autonomy, persist even in the

face of failure, work one-on-one with struggling students, and design lessons that help

students develop their self-confidence in their academic skills (Silverman & Davis,

2012). The combination of the enhanced self-efficacy of teachers and school leaders’

knowledge of a variety of best practices to assist first-year ACP teachers find success in

their chosen field will likely produce positive results for students, the ultimate goal of

education. This research is intended to assist school leaders in reaching this goal.

The literature base for this study was procured through electronic searches of the

internet, including Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) database, as well as

JSTOR, Questia, Academia, the Texas Tech University Library, and various internet

search engines. Key terms searched included the following: instructional leadership,

alternative certification, rural schools, teacher shortage, self-efficacy, teacher self-

efficacy, teacher effectiveness, mentoring, and teacher induction.

Organization of the Literature Review

The literature review is organized into two introductory sections--historical

perspective and research approach--followed by five sections summarizing the literature

related to each of the components of the study--instructional leadership, rural school

characteristics and teacher shortages, alternative certification programs, self-efficacy and

the impact of teacher self-efficacy on teaching and learning, and the identification of best

practices that support the success of first-year ACP teachers, also known as teacher

induction. The research into these five areas is combined to determine if correlations

exist among the variables of instructional leadership, rural Texas schools, alternative

certification teachers, the self-efficacy of the first-year ACP teachers hired to teach in


38

those schools, and the supports that the rural schools can offer to engender the success of

these novice teachers.

Historical Perspective

References to the licensure of teachers go back to the days of the ancient Romans

(Angus & Mirel, 2001). In America, the history of education began with a church-based

approach and transitioned into tuition-based private schooling. Then in the middle of the

1800’s, there was a move to establish free “common” schools. That began the debate

surrounding teacher certification. In the early nineteenth century, the basic requirements

to enter the teaching profession were moral character and general knowledge base. The

first subject-area test requirement were introduced in Pennsylvania in 1834 (Ravitch,

2002). After that, teachers’ colleges, often called “normal schools,” began to be created,

especially for urban school districts. The rural school districts relied instead upon their

own “teacher institutes” to prepare educators for the classroom. Teacher certification in

the nineteenth century was sporadic and varied (Ravitch, 2002; Angus & Mirel, 2001).

The history of education in America shows two types of schools: rural and urban.

The rural schools included thousands of small, often one-teacher schools controlled by

parents; whereas the urban schools included larger, multi-graded campuses controlled by

elected school boards. Other differences in the two types of schools developed from

calendar considerations, funding issues, and the training and availability of teachers.

Parents in rural schools focused on finding teachers of “good moral character” whom

they could afford to pay to provide a basic education for their children (Angus & Mirel,

p. 13). In the urban districts, the focus was more toward training and licensing

professional educators. “By the late nineteenth century, a movement to centralize state


39

authority over the certification of teachers was well underway” (Angus & Mirel, p. 13).

Since then, there has been an on-going struggle between those desiring to raise standards

for teacher certification by focusing on pedagogy and those desiring a focus on more

subject-specific knowledge due to increasingly rigorous subject-area mastery

expectations (Ravitch, 2002).

In the twentieth century, schools of education began to proliferate in colleges and

universities as experts worked to develop an education profession with its own

preparation programs and technical language (Ravitch, 2002). Educational professionals

believed in a formal training program for teachers. However, in the rural areas, the local

school boards focused on the belief that “good teachers were born rather than made” and,

therefore, there was not a need for “formal pedagogical training” (Angus & Mirel, p. 6).

Until a major shortage of teachers arose with the advent of World War II, the professional

schools of education were winning the debate and “formal, university-based education

requirements for teachers” became the norm (Angus & Mirel, p. 7).

According to Dr. Angus (2001), the four main questions surrounding the

expectations for training teachers are as follows:

Who should control teacher certification?

Should teacher certification be based upon certification test scores or

completion of an “approved” training program?

What should be included in the “approved” training program?

How “detailed and specific” should the certification requirements be?


40

These questions remain hotly debated today especially in the face of teacher shortages

facing inner-city and rural school districts. Dr. Angus ended his history of teacher

certification with these words:

For the twenty-first century, it would seem incumbent on supporters of these old

and familiar positions to seek new, imaginative ways to define the problem of

preparing teachers for our schools and to create innovative programs for

supplying teachers who can ensure high quality education for all American

children (p. 45).

Alternative models of certifying teachers have been available since the beginning

of teacher education. In the late nineteenth century, local school districts were given the

power to certify teachers. Today’s alternative certification programs “represent a return

to that paradigm and further proof that there is in fact ‘nothing new under the sun.’”

(Roth & Swail, 2000, p. 2). The state of New Jersey in 1984 responded to a dire need for

certified teachers with the development of a new type of alternative certification process;

Houston ISD followed suit in 1985 developing an alternative certification program to

address that district’s critical teacher shortage (Feistritzer, 2005).

Today, all fifty states and the District of Columbia have implemented alternative

certification programs (U.S. Dept. of Education, 2014) to staff their schools with “highly

qualified” teachers as required by NCLB. Even colleges of education are designing their

own forms of alternative certification processes to provide a pathway for non-education

majors and post-baccalaureate students to become certified to teach without having to

enroll in the basic education curriculum of the colleges and universities (Tozer,

O’Connell, & Burstein, 2006).


41

Today’s alternative certification programs were created to address the growing

teacher shortage especially in the hard-to-serve locations including the isolated rural

schools and in the high-needs certification areas including special education, bilingual

education and English as a second language (ESL), math, science, and technology

applications in both rural and urban districts. Traditional routes to teacher certification

have been unable to keep up with the growing demand for fully certified teachers, those

labeled “highly qualified” by federal legislation, especially in the teaching areas of math,

science, technology, special education, and bilingual and English as a second language

(NCEI, 2005).

Alternative certification routes have impacted the teaching profession in many

ways including attracting more minorities, men, life-experienced, mature individuals into

the classrooms across America. A 2005 study by the Education Commission of the

States identified that in Texas 9% of all teachers were minorities while 41% of ACP

candidates were minorities. The study also found that in the Troops to Teachers’ ACP,

90% of the candidates were male compared to 26% male teachers nationwide, and 30%

were minorities compared to 10% nationwide (p. 2). According to data collected by the

NCEI in 2005, ACP teachers had the following characteristics:

70% were older than 30 years of age;

38% were males;

30% were minorities;

Almost 50% were employed in another field prior to entering the ACP;

and


42

Nearly 50% responded they would not have become teachers if not for the

ACP route to certification.

ACP programs often target military veterans, mid-career changers, educational

paraprofessionals, and recent university graduates who decide after graduation they

would like to become teachers, in ACP programs such as Troops to Teachers, Transition

to Teaching, and Teach for America (Roach & Cohen, 2002).

Research Approach

Research is defined by Vogt (1999) as the “systematic investigation of a subject,

aimed at uncovering new information (discovering data) and/or interpreting relations

among the subject’s parts (theorizing)” (p. 246). Orcher (2005) defines research as the

“process of systematically collecting and interpreting information” (p. 3). Orcher

continues by defining empirical research as “making systematic observations to collect

new information” (p. 3) which is the data used by a researcher for analysis and

interpretation. A researcher’s approach will be either experimental in which the research

explores a cause/effect relationship or nonexperimental in which the researcher identifies

causal sequences, compares groups, collects survey information, examines relationships,

analyzes documents, or evaluates programs (Ocher, 2005). Gay and Airasian (1996)

identify “the fundamental purpose of educational research is to increase our

understanding of educational processes, practices, and issues” (p. 8).

The method of one’s research will fall into one of two categories: quantitative or

qualitative. Gay and Airasian (1996) explain the difference. Quantitative research is

more impersonal and revolves around “the collection and analysis of numerical data


43

usually obtained from questionnaires, tests, checklists, and other formal…instruments”

including computer data which are then statistically analyzed” (p. 8). Quantitative

researchers use a large sample to represent a larger population. Quantitative data are

more objective, and the quantitative researcher is more an observer rather than a

participant. However, Gay and Airasian (1996) describe qualitative research as having

more personal involvement by the researcher and involving the “collection and analysis

of non-numerical data such as observations, interviews, and other more discursive

sources of information” (p. 9). These forms of data are then “analyzed interpretively by

organizing the data into categories, identifying patterns, and producing a descriptive

narrative synthesis” rather than using statistical procedures (p. 9). Qualitative research is

more focused on process rather than outcomes; it allows more flexibility for the

researcher. It will usually include a smaller number of participants due to the limitations

of the methods of information gathering.

Scholars agree that the research questions are the guiding principle of the study;

however, to go beyond raw data to answer the questions, researchers can combine

approaches, quantitative and qualitative, to enhance the research by corroborating,

elaborating upon, and expanding the results of the survey and questionnaire responses

through the use of mixed methods. The strengths and weaknesses inherent in each

approach, quantitative and qualitative, are offset when the two are used in combination

(Creswell & Clark, 2011). A mixed-methods design allows for a synergistic approach to

the research, whereby the researcher studies the subject using two or more approaches.

The interaction of these approaches used in combination is greater than the results of each

approach done singularly. Using both approaches simultaneously enhances the


44

credibility of the quantitative responses allowing the researcher to validate the

quantitative results with the qualitative responses. A definition of mixed-methods

research developed by Johnson, Onwuegbuzie, and Turner (2007) is as follows:

Mixed-methods research is the type of research in which a researcher combines

elements of qualitative and quantitative research approaches for the broad

purposes of breadth and depth of understanding and collaboration. (p. 123)

Mixed-methods research has become accepted in the realm of social sciences research,

especially since the turn of the century. According to Johnson, Onwuegbuzie, and Turner

(2007), the use of a mixed-methods approach affords the researcher the opportunity to

a) validate and explicate findings from another approach to produce more

comprehensive, internally consistent, and valid findings;

b) provide more elaborated understanding and greater confidence in

conclusions;

c) handle threats to validity and gain a fuller and deeper understanding; and

d) provide richer/more meaningful/more useful answers to research

questions. (p. 122)

Instructional Leadership

Educational literature has not definitively defined the term instructional

leadership. Some researchers define it as encompassing all actions taken by a principal

to foster student achievement (Debevoise, 1984); another has determined the term

describes a school administrator who focuses on the process of instruction and directs its

process (Acheson and Smith, 1986). Other researchers, including Bolman and Deal


45

(1991), Cheng (1994), and Sergiovanni (1984), identify instructional leaders as ones who

encourage professional development and improvement of instruction.

Numerous research studies have documented that principals are a powerful

influence on student learning. Tucker and Coddings (2002) believed in the powerful

impact of principals on student achievement enough to help create the National Institute

for School Leadership (NISL) to train principals to be effective instructional leaders who

can affect student learning in order to improve instruction. Fullan (1993, 2003, 2005)

repeatedly documented the positive impact school principals have upon student

achievement and teacher effectiveness. Fullan (2009) declared the “essence of the power

of the principal” is “second only to the teacher in his or her impact on the student” (para.

8). No Child Left Behind legislation indicates that the responsibility for improving

student academic achievement rests with the principals as well as with the teachers

(Gentilucci and Muto, 2007). Spillane, Haverson, and Diamond (2001) identify the

functions of educational leadership as encompassing “constructing and selling an

instructional vision; building norms or trust, collaboration, and academic press;

supporting teacher development; and monitoring instruction and innovation” (p. 24).

Fullan (2002) concluded that the central role of a school leader must be to lead

teachers to teach in a manner that increases student learning. This role is more critical

than the role of campus manager, one who works with budgets, facilities, safety issues,

resources and supplies, parents and community, discipline, and attendance. These tasks

are a part of the role of an educational leader; however, the chief role of the campus

principal is to be an instructional leader, one who leads instruction in order to grow

teachers into highly effective educators. Fullan wrote that effective school leaders will


46

work to improve the conditions in which teachers work, so they are “conducive to

continual development” (2002, p. 20). He believed in the importance of “cultures of

learning” which references schools that “seek and develop teachers’ knowledge and skills

required to create new learning experiences for students” (Fullan, Cuttress, & Kilcher,

2005, p. 55). Newman, King, and Youngs (2000) agreed “school capacity is the crucial

variable affecting the instructional quality and corresponding student achievement. And

at the heart of school capacity are principals focused on the development of teachers’

knowledge and skills…” (p. 16). Leithwood, Louis, Anderson, and Wahlstrom (2004, p.

9) identified one of the three most significant tasks of an instructional leaders as

“developing people” by “offering intellectual stimulation, providing individualized

support, and providing appropriate models of best practice and beliefs.”

These beliefs were used by Branch, Hanushek, and Rivkin (2013) to create a

value-added model to determine principal effectiveness in Texas by determining the

school leaders’ contributions to increases in student achievement. They determined that

the “primary channel through which principals can be expected to improve the quality of

education is by raising the quality of teachers, either by improving the instruction

provided by existing teachers or through teacher transitions that improve the caliber of

the school’s workforce” (p. 4).

Instructional leaders focus on the improvement of instruction as a means of

improving outcomes for students. The transformation of school leaders from “campus

managers” into instructional leaders has been a focus of 21st-century educational

leadership training. The Institute for Educational Leadership (IEL), focusing on issues

related to instructional leadership, convened a task force on principalship in 2000. The


47

task force determined “the top priority of principalship must be leadership for learning”

which includes improving teacher quality (IEL, 2001, p. 1). Fullan (2002) found that to

ensure deeper learning “requires mobilizing the energy and capacities of teachers. In

turn, to mobilize teachers, we must improve teachers’ working conditions and morale.

Thus, we need leaders who can create a fundamental transformation in the learning

cultures of schools and the teaching profession itself” (p. 17). Marzano, Waters, and

McNulty (2005) called on principals to take on the responsibility of being “hands on”

regarding their involvement, knowledge of, and monitoring of curriculum, instruction,

and assessment allowing them to develop teachers’ effectiveness.

The principal is considered by many to be the head of the school; however,

distributed leadership touts the importance of sharing the leadership role across the

campus. An effective leader using distributed leadership will work to develop leadership

capacity throughout the campus’s stakeholders—teachers, counselors, diagnosticians,

assistant principals, teachers, and even parents. When the leadership expertise of the

different stakeholders on the campus is expanded and developed, then instructional

improvement becomes more pervasive according to the research of Supovitz and

Poglinco (2001). Research by Spillane and Diamond (2007) identified leadership as

being an influence relationship—“the ability to influence the practices of others in ways

that bring about a major change in form, nature, and function of some phenomenon” (p.

1). Viewed through this lens, campus leadership is an interaction of a variety of campus

leaders working together to influence instruction. This 21st century approach to

leadership will certainly benefit from this research as the school leaders will have access


48

to an inventory of best practices available to implement to assist the first-year ACP

teachers.

Research by Elliott, Isaacs, and Chugani (2010) identified the following effective

strategies to help principals develop and retain their novice teachers:

a) Support and supervise them regularly to build their confidence;

b) Provide individualized attention to the teachers, modeling

individualization;

c) Monitor self-efficacy and staff development needs of the teachers;

d) Have “quick strategies” ready to address immediate concerns;

e) Match teachers and mentors according to teachers’ needs;

f) Observe for targeted skills and provide quick feedback;

g) Create a campus mentoring program, or join with another school to do so;

h) Incentivize staff to assist in development of new teachers; and

i) Study the best induction practices of other campuses and districts

Rural School Characteristics and Teacher Shortages

This study focused on rural schools which are identified in the Rural Education

Achievement Program as REAP schools according to Title VI, Part B, Section 6211, of

the Elementary and Secondary Education Act as amended in the No Child Left Behind

Act known as NCLB (TEA, 2001). These schools are located in districts having fewer

than 600 students in average daily attendance (ADA) or counties having a population

density of fewer than ten persons per square mile. The purpose of Rural Education

Achievement Program is to address the unique needs of rural districts that often lack the


49

personnel and resources to address local academic needs effectively (TEA, 2001). The

funding made available to REAP schools helps with teacher recruitment, professional

development, technology, parent involvement programs, and drug intervention programs.

According to TEA (2001), there are 1032 Texas public school districts; 438 of those

independent or consolidated school districts are identified as REAP districts.

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES, 2014) data show that 34% of

the public school districts in America are located in rural areas (para. 1). The U. S.

Census Bureau as well as the U. S. Department of Education define rural as “outside

urbanized areas in open country or in communities with less than 2,500 inhabitants or

where the population density is less than 10 inhabitants per square mile” (U.S. Census

Bureau, 2010). NCLB further refines the definition to be schools having fewer than 600

ADA or in counties having a population density of fewer than ten persons per square

mile. In the report published in 1997 by the U. S. Department of Education,

“Characteristics of Small and Rural School Districts” (1997), the cut-off for a “small

district” is “one having fewer students in membership than the sum of (a) 25 students per

grade in the elementary grades it offers (usually K–8) and (b) 100 students per grade in

the secondary grades it offers (usually 9 – 12).” This definition would allow “a threshold

of 625 in total enrollment or about 50 students per grade” (p. 4).

In the report, “Why Rural Matters 2007: The Realities of Rural Education

Growth,” Johnson and Strange (2009) documented an increase in the scale and the scope

of rural education in America. Between the 1999–2000 school year and the 2008–2009

school year, the enrollment in rural school districts increased by 22%, while the

enrollment of non-rural districts increased by 1.7%. Texas ranks number one in the


50

growth in rural school enrollment. The state’s rates of ESL and migrant students, as well

as the percentage of students in poverty, rank among the highest in the nation (p. 83).

A comprehensive Schools and Staffing Survey of 80,300 teachers and

administrators completed by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U. S.

Department of Education, 1992, was used by Ballou and Podgursky to compare the

advantages and disadvantages of urban and rural school districts (Ballou & Podgursky,

1995). The small rural school districts make up 28% of American school districts and

average 250 students per district (p. 11). Many operate a single school, K – 12, for the

district. Twenty percent of the rural school districts average fewer than one teacher per

grade, and eighty percent have fewer than 100 students per grade (p. 37). Though,

admittedly, rural educators usually have a lower pay scale than their urban counterparts,

Ballou and Podursky (1995) used the Schools and Staffing Survey information to

ascertain various advantages to teaching in these rural communities, including closer

personal relationships with students, lower pupil/teacher ratios, more attractive learning

environments, and more teacher autonomy and control. In addition, rural educators tend

to live in the communities in which they teach, educate their own children in the same

schools, and establish close links with the staff, administration, school boards, and the

community. These educators are perceived as more than “subject-matter specialists;”

they are people encountered within and without the walls of the school. The high quality

of social interactions between the educators and the community contributes to teacher

effectiveness (Ballou & Podursky, 1995, p. 14). Their research describes the ideal rural

teacher as one who can handle teaching multiple grades or subjects, sponsor

extracurricular activities, and adjust to the social, cultural, and professional isolation.


51

Educational researchers are coming to the conclusion that “bigger is not always

better” when it comes to schools. According to Chalker (1999), editor of a collection of

sixteen essays on rural education, many of the qualities inherent in small, rural schools

worthy of emulation in all schools include the smaller size, sense of community, service

education, multi-age groupings, cooperative learning, interdisciplinary projects,

community integration, and emphasis on school being a personal rather than an

impersonal organization (p. 44). In a research study by Howley (1996), the results

contributed to the evidence regarding school and district size and the impact on student

achievement. The data show that larger schools have a positive effect on achievement for

more affluent students, and smaller schools have a positive effect on the achievement of

impoverished students (p. 28). In a year-long qualitative study by Fry and Anderson

(2011), the researchers used interviews and observations with four beginning teachers in

rural schools. Three themes emerged from the study related to the new teachers’

backgrounds, personal outlook, and school contexts: evidence of the effectiveness of the

teachers, mentoring the new teachers, and adjustment to rural school and community.

The study pointed to the necessity of quality mentoring, the need for effective induction

practices, and the importance of helping teachers adjust to the culture of rural schools and

communities.

Many U. S. schools are facing critical shortages of well-qualified teachers due to

an increasing population of school-aged children and immigration into the country, to an

aging teacher population going into retirement, to mandated class-size reductions, to

increasing turnover as more and more teachers are choosing to leave education for a

variety of reasons, and course-specific reasons for needing more subject-specific teachers


52

(STEM emphasis requiring more math, science, and technology teachers,) as well as

increasing foreign language needs as our world becomes more globally interconnected

(Chaika, 2000, Donsky, 2001). In order to meet the requirement put into law that by the

end of the 2005–2006 school year, every classroom was mandated to have a “highly

qualified” teacher, the situation became desperate enough to cause policy makers to begin

to “think outside the box.” In the past, when the supply of certified teachers was

inadequate, states resorted to issuing emergency teaching certificates. However, under

federal law, that was no longer an option, leading to the increase in alternative

certification programs (ACP) to address the critical need of supplying “highly-qualified”

teachers for each and every classroom in the nation.

Ingersoll (2001) stressed the importance of retaining those teachers currently

employed rather than focusing solely on increasing the number of teachers. The highest

rate of turnover is generally within the first three years of a teacher’s career (Luekens,

Lyter, and Chandler, 2004). Research has found that many of these early-career teachers

identify the absence of effective induction or mentoring programs as a reason for their

leaving the profession thereby reinforcing the idea that induction supports and mentoring

programs are critical to the retention of these novice teachers (Elliott, et. al., 2010).

Alternative Certification Programs

Since the inception of ACPs in the mid-1980s, a variety of different states,

businesses, and schools have developed a variety of ACPs due in part to the NCLB

provisions which recognized the effectiveness of the programs and encouraged their

expansion. In addition, Title II of the 2001 Elementary and Secondary Education Act,

Preparing, Training, and Recruiting High Quality Teachers and Principals, supported


53

ACPs which offered professionals from different fields expedited training to obtain their

teacher certificates. In 2003, the U. S. Congress appropriated more than $41 million to

fund a program, Transition to Teaching, which sought qualified professionals from other

fields and provided them with an alternative pathway to teacher certification. Troops to

Teachers, another ACP program supported by the U. S. government, provides those in the

military with bachelor degrees an expedited route to teacher certification (Mikulecky,

Shkodriani, & Wilner, 2004).

Teacher shortages are increasingly problematic in low socioeconomic (usually

inner-city) and rural schools, especially in the areas of science and math. Rural schools

often resort to hiring ACP teachers though concerns have been raised about the

comparative quality of ACP teachers when compared with teachers from the traditional

certification route. To provide evidence as to the effectiveness of ACP teachers, the U. S.

Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences (IES) conducted two large

multi-state studies in 2012. One of the studies evaluated the effectiveness of ACP

elementary teachers from less selective ACP programs. The second study examined the

effectiveness of secondary math teachers certified through two highly selective ACP

programs, Teach for America and Teaching Fellows. The results showed that ACP

teachers can fill the teacher shortages in hard-to-staff (such as rural) schools without

negatively impacting student achievement. The data show that some of the ACP

secondary math teachers’ students even outperformed students of traditionally certified

math teachers. In addition, the two studies determined the difficulty of predicting a

teacher’s future effectiveness during the hiring process. Also, the teacher’s certification

route was not an indicator of the teacher’s effectiveness in the classroom which counters


54

Darling-Hammond’s contention that ACP teachers are less effective teachers (IES, 2013;

Darling-Hammond, 2000). Other studies have concluded that ACP and post-

baccalaureate trained teachers are an effective alternative to traditional teachers (Guyton,

Fox, & Sisk, 1991; Sindelar & Marks, 1993; Grable & Ogden, 1994; Davis, Impara,

Launey-Rodolf, & Dahlem, 2006; Sass, 2008).

The appeal of training for teachers through ACP is the time required and the cost

of the training. Typically prospective teachers can complete the education course

requirements more quickly through online ACP training which allows the candidate to

train at his or her pace than they can through the usual semester by semester route offered

through the traditional college and university schools of education. The time

requirements can vary from several months up to three years. The compressed

scheduling of the ACP training makes the training more accessible to those candidates

who are already employed elsewhere and want to train while still employed (Mikulecky,

Shkodriani, & Wilner, 2004). Then the second benefit is that the ACP candidates are

allowed to complete their training while employed as a teacher of record with the all the

rights and responsibilities of that position. Financially it benefits the candidates who can

continue to earn a salary while completing their training. The third benefit is the cost as

condensing the training time reduces the cost of the training. The ACP candidates who

have retained their non-teaching jobs and incomes while training expend less money to

pay the cost of the ACP program than those candidates who are enrolled in traditional

schools of education and spend the semesters required to complete the training as well as

the semester of required student teaching which is completed without compensation. In

addition, most districts will work with the ACP programs to prorate the cost of the


55

training over the ten months of the teacher’s first-year contract making the cost of the

ACP program more affordable to the interns. For ACP candidates having to support

themselves, as well as possibly a family, ACP offers a viable route for them. The

researcher has worked supervising and coaching ACP teachers for the past ten years, and

a number of them have stated that for these reasons they were able to get into the field of

education; the traditional route would not have been a possibility for them due mainly to

the financial considerations.

In September, 2015, Texas had 152 approved ACP programs registered in the

state according to the State Board for Educator Certification. During the 2014-2015

school year, initial educator certificates were issued for 11,552 first-year ACP teachers

being trained by 79 of those ACP programs (SBEC, 2015).

One other alternative is found in the post-baccalaureate programs offered by

colleges and universities across Texas. During the 2014-2015 school year, 60 Texas

colleges and universities trained 1,146 first-year teachers who were issued their initial

teaching certification (SBEC, 2015). These programs are similar to the other ACP

programs offered by school districts, private companies, and educational service centers.

The requirements vary from program to program. Some have all the training modules

online; others require face time in a classroom. The basic requirements of passing a

background check and having a bachelor’s degree from an accredited institution of higher

learning, a 2.5 or higher grade point average, and passing scores on the state content

test(s), are the same. In many of the post-baccalaureate programs, the participants are

also obtaining credit toward a master’s degree while they are completing their training

modules.


56

Self-Efficacy and Its Impact on Student and Teacher Success

In addition to the literature on instructional leadership, rural school characteristics

and teacher shortages, and alternative certification, another important concept related to

this research is the concept of self-efficacy which began in Albert Bandura‘s social

cognitive theory in 1977. Bandura pioneered research identifying self-efficacy as “the

extent to which individuals believe they can organize and execute actions necessary to

bring about a desired outcome” (Bandura, 1997, p. 3). Bandura’s research identified four

sources for increasing efficacy: social modeling, verbal persuasion, psychological

responses, and mastery experiences. Social modeling is witnessing others complete a task

thereby engendering the belief in one’s ability to do likewise. Verbal persuasion is being

encouraged that one has the skills and capabilities necessary to succeed. Psychological

responses refer to one’s stress level, emotional state, or mood that impacts feelings about

one’s abilities. Finally, mastery experiences, which Bandura identified as possibly the

most powerful source of efficacy, refers to one’s performing a task successfully thereby

strengthening one’s resolve to succeed again.

Later Ashton (1984) applied Bandura’s definition of self-efficacy to educators by

changing “a desired outcome” to “learning outcomes” (p. 142). Woolfolk Hoy and Hoy

(2009) expanded the definition to “a teacher’s belief that he or she can reach even

difficult students to help them learn; it appears to be one of the few personal

characteristics of teachers that is correlated with student achievement” (pp. 167–168).

Tschannen-Moran, Hoy, & Hoy (1998) related teachers’ self-efficacy to their behavior,

level of effort, enthusiasm, planning, resoluteness, creativeness, willingness to work with

more difficult students, and commitment to teaching. They found that teachers with


57

higher levels of self-efficacy had a heightened sense of confidence in their decision

making and in their ability to face challenges. Woolfolk Hoy (2000) identified the

impact of the first-year teachers’ having a high sense of self-efficacy as their feeling more

job satisfaction and having less stress (p. 6).

Dembo and Gibson (1985) found that teachers with the belief that they can

“facilitate student learning” can instill that belief in their students thereby raising the

students’ level of self-efficacy which positively impacts students’ learning. Elliott,

Isaacs, & Chugani (2010) supported the findings of Dembo and Gibson by correlating the

promotion of a first-year teacher’s self-efficacy with student success. Since research has

found that teachers can increase their self-efficacy through positive experiences and

learning opportunities and that the greatest impact upon the development of teachers is

early in their careers, it would be incumbent upon instructional leaders to provide these

opportunities through induction supports during the all-important first year of teaching

(Thompson, 2003; Hoy, 2000).

Many of the ACP-trained teachers have left other careers to train to become

teachers; they have the advantage of bringing with them their work-related experiences

and knowledge that help them face the challenges inherent in teaching (Robertson &

Singleton, 2010). These experiences factor into their level of self-efficacy and can,

therefore, have an impact on student learning. In a study by Ludlow (2010), the

researcher found that teachers’ self-efficacy levels were impacted by their professional

development experiences, their teacher preparation program training, district-sponsored

induction activities, and the assignment of a mentor. A study conducted by Hoy (2000)

correlated the teachers’ perception of effective induction supports with the increase in


58

their level of self-efficacy. Goddard, Hoy, and Hoy (2000, p. 503) concluded their

research with the statement, “It is not enough to hire and retain the brightest teachers—

they must also believe they can successfully meet the challenges of the task at hand.” In

rural districts, the person who handles helping these new teachers believe in themselves

and their ability to do the job they were hired to do is most often the campus principal.

Along with the principal, an assigned mentor, as well as an ACP supervisor or coach, are

instrumental in helping a novice teacher increase their level of self-efficacy.

In 2001, Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy created the Teachers’ Sense of

Efficacy Scale (See Appendix D) to quantify teachers’ beliefs in their impact on student

outcomes. Since that time there have been numerous empirical studies identifying

“teacher efficacy as a major predictor of teachers’ competence and commitment to

teaching—more powerful than self-concept, self-esteem, and perceived control”

(Silverman & Davis, 2012, p. 4). Four major studies of teacher efficacy agree that

teachers who report higher degrees of self-efficacy tend to find greater satisfaction with

their jobs, exhibit more effort and motivation, volunteer more on their campuses, and

show more resilience throughout their careers (Ross, 1998; Goddard et al, 2000;

Labonne, 2004; and Wheatley, 2005). According to Silverman and Davis (2012) these

teachers tend to be more effective due to their willingness to experiment, use innovations,

allow student autonomy, persist even in the face of failure, work one-on-one with

struggling students, and design lessons that help students develop their self-confidence in

their academic skills. Efficacious teachers, the ones willing to press students toward

more complex learning, challenging them to develop deeper understandings, are the

successful teachers.


59

Teacher Induction—Best Practices to Support Success

Once a highly-qualified teacher is hired to fill a classroom in a small rural school

district, the next concern is retention. To use resources wisely and increase the value of

the new teacher who increases in effectiveness with experience, it is important that the

school has a plan in place to retain that professional. This plan should include some

possible interventions, supports, strategies, and programs that can be used to meet the

needs of each teacher. From a year-long qualitative study by Fry and Anderson (2011),

three themes emerged: the necessity of quality mentoring, the need for effective induction

practices, and the importance of helping teachers adjust to the culture of rural schools and

communities. A number of supports are available for assisting new teachers in their

critical first year; however, rural schools are not always able to access some of these as

their unique characteristics due to size, staff limitations, and location which may prohibit

access to some of the options.

The first year of teaching has a major impact on the teachers’ development and

their decisions about continuing to teach (Ingersoll & Smith, 2004; McDonald, 1980;

Nemser, 1983). “Assisting beginning teachers in their development towards becoming

competent professionals is critically important” to all stakeholders (Reynolds, 1990, p.ii).

According to Darling-Hammond, “If there is anything that we could do and should do to

improve the quality of teaching and ensure the stability of the workforce, it is to provide

better, more substantive support for our new teachers” (Darling-Hammond, Berry,

Haselkorn, & Fideler, 1999, p. 185). As a way to reduce attrition, researchers have

documented mentoring and induction programs to be a highly effective strategy (Gersten,

Keating, Yavanoff, & Harniss, 2001; Smith & Ingersoll, 2004). Thompson (2003),


60

writing about the learning curve new teachers face within the first two years in the

classroom, reiterated the importance of the continuance of teachers’ training to help them

develop effective techniques and strategies. These researchers reinforce the need for this

study identifying effective induction supports available to the leaders in rural Texas

schools to use with their new teachers.

Three other studies regarding teacher induction reinforce the professional impact

of teacher induction. Howe (2006), who studied teacher induction programs in eight

countries, identified the key element in the success of the program as being the

“provision of time for reflection and opportunities for continued professional

development” (p. 132). Smith and Ingersoll (2004) found that some of the common

induction activities did not prove to have a statistically significant impact upon teacher

retention, but an increase in the number of induction activities or supports did correlate

with a decrease in attrition. Wechsler, Caspary, Humphrey, and Matsko (2010)

completed a four-year study of 39 different sites across the Chicago schools examining

the effects of new teacher induction. The researchers found that effective teacher

induction did impact new teachers’ self-efficacy and their professional growth. The most

impactful induction support identified in the study was the assignment of an individual

mentor. However, some of the important factors to consider regarding the assignment of

a mentor included the training of the mentor, mentor qualifications, the extent of

accountability to which the mentor was held, the proximity of the mentor to the new

teacher, the number of contact hours between the two, how well the two got along, and

the “level of professional community among all the teachers in a school” (Wechsler et al.,

2010, p. 41). The camaraderie that developed within that professional community


61

provided a forum for sharing ideas, voicing success stories, and sharing fears, all

indicators of support and relationships that encouraged professional growth in these new

teachers.

Due to researchers’ documenting that teacher induction methods do improve

teacher quality and increase retention (Guarino, Santibanez, & Daley, 2006; Strong,

2005), many states have mandated induction support for beginning teachers (Johnson,

Goldrick, & Lasagna, 2010). The Texas Beginning Educator Support System, known as

TxBESS, was created in 2002 as a result of the 2001 reauthorization of the Elementary

and Secondary Education Act which called for every state to place a highly qualified

teacher in every classroom by 2005. The state realized that the focus needed to be not

only on recruiting well-trained teachers, but also on retaining them (Dana Center, 2002).

Ingersoll (2001) wrote negatively of the “revolving door” of education referencing the

fact that 42 percent of teachers leave education for a variety of reasons besides

retirement. He saw a benefit in policymakers’ focusing attention on keeping teachers

working in Texas schools rather than focusing solely on recruiting new teachers.

Professional development is another often-used strategy to assist in the

development of effective teachers. According to Newmann, King, and Youngs (2000),

researchers agree that for staff development to improve teaching, it should focus on

“instruction and student outcomes in teachers’ specific schools; provide opportunities for

collegial inquiry, help, and feedback; and connect teachers to external expertise while

also respecting teachers’ discretion and creativity” (p. 1). Also, these staff development

opportunities to be most effective should be “sustained and continuous” (p. 1). Fullan

(2002) quoted Newmann, King, and Youngs when he declared, “At the heart of school


62

capacity are principals focused on the development of teachers’ knowledge and skills,

professional community program coherence, and technical resources” (p. 1). Fullan

describes effective school leaders as being those who create and share knowledge at the

same time they develop relationships within the professional learning community.

However, for teachers in rural districts, attending staff development sessions offered in

other towns or at education service centers can be challenging due to the distances

involved.

A 2015 study of three geographically diverse, large school districts and one

network of charter schools was conducted by The New Teacher Project (TNTP). The

results are documented in a report, The Mirage: Confronting the Hard Truth about Our

Quest for Teacher Development. The participants in the mixed-methods study included

10,507 teachers and 566 school leaders. The leading question related to the value of the

monetary investment made by districts in the development of teachers as it related to the

level of improvement in instruction from year to year. Several findings are important to

note. One is that most teachers show their greatest level of improvement over the first

five years of their careers (p. 14). The research was not able to identify a specific kind or

type of support that caused the greatest “meaningful improvement” (p. 18). However, the

study did determine that differentiation of professional development was important—

customizing the training to the needs of a specific educator as the teacher is expected to

do for each student. Another finding was the need for follow-through of the support to

sustain its effect (p. 26). The researchers recorded school administrator’s use of the

phrase “random act of school improvement” to describe his or her district’s professional

development plan (p. 28). Random acts will not sustain instruction improvement.


63

The TNTP study did find the greatest impact on educator improvement in districts

that offered a “more disciplined and coherent system for organizing themselves around

teacher development and a network-wide culture of high expectations and continuous

growth” (p. 30). The TNTP research indicated the value of the school leaders’

involvement in the development of teachers early in their careers “when the greatest

growth is most likely to occur” (p. 39).

Despite knowing the real value of quality mentoring, many rural districts do not

have the staff to allow ideal matching of mentors because often there is only one

secondary math teacher, one foreign language teacher, or one physics teacher. When that

occurs, a new teacher in need of a quality mentor from the same subject area cannot be

appropriately matched. One solution that has been made available due to the enhanced

use of technology is e-mentoring that allows for novice and expert educators to come

together in web-based professional learning communities. This form of mentoring

overcomes the limitations of face-to-face mentoring so is ideal for rural districts. Jaffe,

Moir, Swanson, & Wheeler (2006) suggest e-mentors might not be as helpful in

addressing issues related to building culture or the dynamics of staff interactions within

the school; however, an e-mentor is more likely to assist with curriculum and pedagogical

issues. Online mentoring can provide opportunities for networking within a group forum

drawing on the support and expertise of the virtual educational community (Gareis &

Nussbaum, Beach, 2007). Another advantage is that time and location are omitted from

the equation. No one has to leave the classroom or go to a meeting room; digital access

allows for easy use from home or school using computers, iPads, and cell phones. Skype

even allows for conducting online classroom observations long distance. PACT,


64

Performance-based Academic Coaching teams, developed by Tarleton State University,

supported by the Texas Education Agency, is one source for free e-mentoring.

Conclusion

After reviewing the literature related to instructional leadership, rural school

characteristics and teacher shortages, alternative certification, and self-efficacy and the

impact of teacher self-efficacy on teaching, the researcher identified the need for a study

which correlated these components. From the qualitative and quantitative responses, the

researcher developed an inventory of best practices that have been used in rural Texas

schools to achieve the goal of engendering the success of first-year ACP teachers hired to

teach on these campuses. The challenge can be summed up with the findings of Elliott,

Isaacs, and Chugani (2010) who identified a “need for individually targeted teacher

induction activities to ameliorate the early career teacher turnover and retention statistics”

(p.131). The creation of an inventory of best practices could prove useful to rural school

leaders and the ACP-trained first-year teachers with whom they work.


65

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

Introduction

This chapter describes the design of the study, the instruments employed for the

data collection, a detailed description of the research participants, and a timeline of the

process. The research approach used in the study was a parallel mixed-methods approach

employing both qualitative and quantitative methods. In order to obtain both qualitative

and quantitative data from the research participants, the researcher used a survey

developed by Tschannen-Moran and Hoy, the Teacher Self-Efficacy Survey, as well as a

researcher-developed Demographics and School Supports Questionnaire. Also, the

researcher randomly selected ten of the volunteering principals and fifteen of the

volunteering teachers with whom to conduct telephone interviews. The chapter also

covers the timeline and process of implementation of the study. Finally, the researcher

details the methodologies used to analyze the data.

Research Design

A researcher begins a study with a research design. This researcher’s original

plan was to do a quantitative study to determine the degree of correlation among the

research variables and to obtain a list of the induction supports identified in a survey

instrument. However, to ensure that enough data were available to answer the research

questions, the researcher concurred with the dissertation committee’s recommendation

that the research would be strengthened by the addition of a qualitative component.

Therefore, it was determined a parallel mixed-methods approach to the research to be the

most effective approach to ensure that the quantitative data gleaned from the survey and


66

questionnaire would be enhanced by the qualitative data from the interviews through

triangulation, elaboration, and expansion of data. The researcher was able to discuss with

the teachers and principals the reasons for some of the quantitative responses to the

survey and questionnaire making the responses more meaningful.

One of the reasons for adding the qualitative component to this study was so that

the researcher could be responsive to new insights that arose from the quantitative data.

Another reason is the researcher could use the additional qualitative data to confirm the

results of the quantitative date. Also, adding the qualitative component allowed the

researcher to get a better understanding of the topic than just the numerical data could

provide. The interviews with the respondents assisted the researcher in explaining the

circumstances leading to their survey responses. This elaboration added further insight

into the study. Each of the three research questions is answered by both quantitative and

qualitative data.

The interviews allowed the researcher to discuss with the teachers and principals

the reasons for some of the responses to the questionnaire making them more meaningful.

The research included responses obtained from twenty-five telephone interviews—15

with randomly selected volunteer first-year ACP teachers and 10 with randomly-selected

volunteer principals of these teachers—as well as from 77 first-year ACP teachers who

filled out the survey/questionnaire. However, all of the 77 responses were not complete,

so the total number of completed responses for the logistic regression analysis was 73.

This research can best be described as a parallel mixed-methods study that is also

descriptive and correlational. It is descriptive research that Gay and Airasian (1996)

describe as survey research using data collected to “answer questions, obtain information


67

regarding preferences, attitudes, practices, concerns, or interests of some group of

people” (p. 11). The methods used for data collection included surveys, questionnaires,

and interviews. Gall, Borg, and Gall (1996) state that descriptive research “involves

making careful descriptions of educational phenomena” (p. 374). Participants in this

study filled in a school supports questionnaire by checking off the supports they were

offered during their first year in the classroom and adding any others that were offered

not included in the list provided. Their identification of the supportive practices they

experienced was used by this researcher to compile an inventory of the various types of

support offered first-year ACP teachers in rural school districts across Texas.

Also, this study was correlational because it analyzed the degree of the

relationship, or the correlation, between variables to make predictions. Gall, Borg and

Gall (1996) asserted that “correlation coefficients are best used to measure the degree and

direction (i.e., positive or negative) of the relationship between two or more variables” (p.

414). The researcher used logistic regression methods to determine any relationships

between the dependent variables and the independent variables in order “to analyze how

these variables, either singly or in combination, affect the pattern of behavior” (p. 415).

The researcher explored the relationships among the independent variables, first-year

ACP-trained teachers teaching in rural Texas schools and the number and types of

induction supports which were made available to them during their first year teaching,

and the dependent variables, the first-year ACP teachers’ perceived levels of self-efficacy

and their success or failure to be recommended for their standard certification.


68

Instruments for Data Collection

The researcher employed the use of a survey, a questionnaire, and semi-structured

interview protocols, one for the teachers and another for the principals. First, the

researcher relied upon a survey developed by Tschannen-Moran and Hoy, the Teacher

Self-Efficacy Survey or TSES, also known as the Ohio State Teacher efficacy scale (See

Appendix D). The creators developed the survey in both a short form (12 items) and a

long form (24 items). For the purposes of the current research, the researcher selected the

12-item short form since the reliability factor was not significantly different and in

consideration of the participants’ time needed to complete the instruments.

The selected short form contained 12 items that can create difficulties for

teachers. Each of the impacts was followed by a Likert-formatted response as to the level

of perceived influence the teacher had over each impact. The responses ranged from 1

(nothing), to 3 (very little), to 5 (some influence), to 7 (quite a bit), to (9) (a great deal).

The TSES has been tested and is considered a reliable and valid instrument to measure

the perceived level of self-efficacy of a teacher in three major areas of instruction: student

engagement, instructional practices, and classroom management. In the short form, items

2, 4, 7, and 11 measure perceived level of self-efficacy involving student engagement.

Items 5, 9, 10, and 12 measure the perceived level of self-efficacy in instructional

strategies. The remaining items on the survey, 1, 3, 6, and 8, measure efficacy in

classroom management.

The TSES instrument developed in 2001 has been shown to have validity and

reliability in multiple research studies (Tschannen-Moran, M. and Woolfolk Hoy, 2001;

Heneman, H. et al., 2006; Fives & Buehl, 2010). In 2006, researchers from the


69

Wisconsin Center for Education Research, Heneman, Kimball, and Milanowski,

conducted a study with 1,075 teachers that confirmed the construct validity of the TSES

short form. The results of the study supported the “conception and measure of teacher

self-efficacy as operationalized with the TSES” (p. 3). The researchers affirmed that the

“psychometric properties of the TSES” held at all levels—elementary, middle, and high

school (p. 14). The results were similar to those reported by Tschannen-Moran and Hoy

when they tested the TSES. In 2010, another investigation into validating the use of the

TSES was conducted with 102 practicing teachers and 270 pre-service teachers by

college professors Fives and Buehl. The conclusion they reached concurred with the

findings of the creators of the TSES and Heneman, Kimball, and Milanowski with an

additional caveat—caution needed to be taken when using the instrument with preservice

teachers suggesting that using a one-factor instrument would be more appropriate than

using a three-factor instrument.

The results of a reliability test showed that the reliability factor for the 24-item

survey was 0.94 and for the 12-item survey, 0.90. The TSES surveys were also

correlated with other existing measures of teacher efficacy; the results showed positive

correlations with Rand and Gibson & Dembo instruments (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy,

2001). The results of this previous research provided the researcher with the assurance

that the TSES is a valid and reliable instrument appropriate for the current study. The

researcher obtained the creators’ written permission for the use of the TSES for this study

(See Appendix F).

In addition to the TSES, the researcher added an original demographics

questionnaire and a list of induction supports in order to collect demographic information


70

from each participant and administer a researcher-generated inventory of twenty-one

possible types of supports commonly used in teacher induction, as well as space for the

participants to add additional forms of support they were offered during the first year of

teaching (See Appendix E). The Demographics and School Supports questionnaire began

with 16 demographic questions regarding age; gender; type of degree; first career or not;

if not, previous career; grade level(s) and subject area(s); ACP program used; resident of

community prior to getting teaching position; and recommendation for standard

certification and contract renewal. Part II of the questionnaire regarded the school

supports offered the participants during their first year of teaching. Twenty-one types of

induction supports were listed asking for a Yes or No response. Four of the listed

supports asked for more specific information if, indeed, they were offered to the teacher.

Finally, the questionnaire had space for the participant to identify any other types of

induction support he or she may have had that were deemed beneficial.

The respondents were assured of anonymity so their responses could be as candid

as possible without concern that administrators or ACP program supervisors could have

access to their responses. Assuring them anonymity encouraged them to be completely

candid in their answers thereby enhancing the validity of the research. The assurance of

anonymity was included in the directions for the survey, “No information that could

identify you will be provided to anyone.” The responses were kept confidential and

viewed only by the researcher. Both the TSES short form and the original demographics

and induction supports questionnaire were uploaded into Qualtrics survey software. The

resulting link to the instruments was included in the Participant Contact Letter (See


71

Appendix C). It was estimated that participants needed no longer than 15 minutes to

complete both the TSES and the demographics/induction supports instruments.

The third method of obtaining data was the qualitative component of semi-

structured interviews with ten randomly-selected rural school principals employing first-

year ACP teachers for the 2014–2015 school year and fifteen randomly-selected first-

year ACP teachers employed in REAP districts for the same year. The researcher was

able to gather more insight into the teacher responses to the survey and questionnaire and

learned from the principal interviews how the principals viewed the induction process,

both as it was implemented in their current district and how they would change it if

empowered to do so.

Semi-structured interviews require the researcher to plan in advance a series of

questions to be covered in the interview, often referred to as the interview schedule or

protocol. This researcher developed the interview protocol based on the questions and

responses from the quantitative survey and questionnaire administered several weeks

prior to the interviews. The researcher conducted the interviews over the telephone

having made arrangements for a date, time, and telephone number to be called

beforehand. The reason for the telephone interview rather than a face-to-face interview

was the great distances across the state of Texas. Since the participants were educators

from across the state, those distances would have precluded the timely collection of the

qualitative data and would have been a costly endeavor. However, completing the

interviews over the telephone had its disadvantages as well. Facial expression and body

language are telling forms of communication that were not visible to the researcher.

Also, the lack of eye contact and personal interaction was detrimental to the interview


72

process. The interviews conducted from May 27–June 13, 2015, were audio recorded,

and the researcher took extensive notes during each of the interviews using prepared

interview protocol forms since no eye contact or physical interaction was required.

The semi-structured interview schedule for the principals included questions

about the number of first-year and ACP first-year teachers on the campus and in the

district. The principals were asked how they would rate the level of self-efficacy of the

first-year ACP teachers and how it changed during the year. They were asked to describe

their district’s and campus’s new teacher induction process and to identify the supports

they felt were particularly effective or not effective and identify why they held that belief.

Also, the question was asked about the principal’s opinion of the induction supports’

impacting the new teachers’ level of self-efficacy. They were then asked to identify any

other induction supports about which they knew that they would recommend to other

campus principals. The interview included a question on how they felt the induction

process used on their campus helped the campus and the staff overall. Finally, the

question was posed, “How would you like to change your campus’s induction procedures

in the future?” If time allowed and the conversation included mention of rural school

characteristics, the researcher asked the principal to identify any differences in rural and

non-rural districts as it related to new teacher induction. The interview ended with the

researcher thanking them for their time and wishing them well in their next school year.

The interview schedule for the fifteen teacher interviews was similar. It began

with the researcher asking them how many first-year teachers worked on their campus for

the 2014–2015 year, and how many were ACP-trained. They were asked to identify their

self-identified level of self-efficacy at the beginning of their first year in the classroom


73

and how they felt it changed during the year. They were asked to identify the reason(s)

for the change. Then the questions turned to the teacher induction process on their

campus. They were asked how they felt about the induction they received and to identify

which supports were particularly beneficial and why they helped. The participants also

were asked to identify which, if any, of the particular supports they believed helped build

their level of self-efficacy. They were asked if any of the induction supports were not

helpful and if so, which ones. The interview ended with the researcher asking them to

describe any changes they would make in the new teacher induction process if there were

no constraints. The interviewer thanked them for their time and wished them well in

furthering their careers. Three volunteered they were not returning though they had been

offered a contract but were choosing to do something else or to move elsewhere to teach.

The interviewer began by establishing a connection with the participant by

sharing a common experience as a former teacher and a former principal. The tone of the

interview was enthusiastic as the researcher is professionally engaged in the task of

assisting first-year ACP teachers be successful in obtaining their certifications. Once the

connection was made between the researcher and the interviewee, the researcher began

asking the pre-planned questions (See attached Principal Interview Protocol—Appendix

G—and Teacher Interview Protocol—Appendix H). From the responses received, the

researcher probed deeper with additional questions such as “Can you tell me more.” New

ideas that surfaced were explored further. Since the teachers were the recipients of the

induction supports, their opinions of the value or worth of the supports was valuable.

They were asked to identify the supports that they felt had the greatest impact on

improving their instructional abilities. Some of the respondents included their opinions


74

why some of the supports they were offered were not beneficial, feedback that also made

a valuable contribution to the study. Using a semi-structured interview approach rather

than an unstructured approach allowed the researcher to keep most of the interviews to

about a 15-minute interval of time by keeping the conversation on the topic.

Description of Participants

The sample included 77 first-year ACP teachers teaching in Texas REAP schools.

The sample was relatively homogeneous as they all shared the characteristics of being

first-year ACP teachers working in rural Texas schools. The only sub-groups were those

first-year ACP teachers deemed successful, meaning they received a recommendation for

standard certification and were offered a contract for the following year, or unsuccessful,

meaning they were not recommended for certification so were unable to complete the

certification process. In the case of a successful teacher’s contract not being renewed due

to financial or program considerations by the district and not due to the abilities or lack

thereof of the first-year teacher, then success was determined if the principal

recommended the teacher for standard certification.

The researcher desired to have a sample size of the study is 125 participants to

have an adequate sample size to run a regression analysis on the data to complete the

correlational study. The researcher learned from the Texas Education Agency that for the

2014–2015 school year, 5,325 first-year ACP teachers were employed by Texas’ schools,

but that included large and inner-city schools, as well as REAP districts. The researcher

submitted a Public Information Request to the Texas Education Agency (TEA) for the

names of all the first-year ACP teachers teaching in Texas’s REAP school districts during

the 2014–2015 school year. The researcher is required by IRB rules to obtain the


75

permission of the district superintendents prior to inviting the teachers’ participation in

the study. TEA identified 295 first-year ACP teachers working in Texas’s REAP districts

for 2014–2015. Of those 295 teachers, the researcher was granted permission by the

superintendents to invite 214 or 72.5% of them to participate in the study. Of the 214

invited to participate, 77 or 36% participated in the survey and questionnaire. However,

only 73 of the responses were complete enough to be included in the logistic regression.

Timeline and Process

On October 16, 2014, the researcher contacted TEA to obtain a list of the first-

year ACP teachers teaching in REAP districts across the state as well as their school

email addresses. The agency responded on December 3, 2014, asking for clarification

and verifying receipt of an estimated payment of $208.90. On January 29, 2015, TEA’s

PIR office emailed in response to a phone call from the researcher requesting an expected

date for the receipt of the information requested. The agency reported that it did not have

all the eligible participants’ school email addresses on file since approximately 65% of

the first-year ACP teachers chose to submit only their private email addresses. TEA

would not release private email addresses due to privacy restrictions. The list of first-

year ACP teachers would have to be “scrubbed” to delete all private email addresses.

The result would be a list of approximately 35% of the eligible participants, and the

process would be time-consuming and expensive. On February 23, 2015, the researcher

received a list of teachers and their districts, their telephone numbers, and their personal

mailing addresses, and only 24 of their school email addresses. However, the list was

incorrect. It contained the names of the ACP teachers who were actually in their second

year teaching in the classroom. TEA determined that the previous year was not their first


76

year to teach as they were working on a probationary certificate; rather TEA believed

2014–2015 to be their “first year.” Being a coach for two ACP providers, the researcher

knew that the list was incorrect as her current-year interns were not listed. Therefore, on

February 24, the researcher met with the TEA Open Records Coordinator and her

supervisor to determine what needed to be done to enable the researcher to obtain the

correct information. The researcher resubmitted the public information request on

February 24, 2015, asking only for the names and school districts employing each of the

probationary-certified ACP teachers working in Texas’s REAP districts for the 2014–

2015 school year. The correct list that was produced on March 16, 2015, contained the

names of 295 teachers employed in 177 REAP school districts for the 2014–2015 school

year. The list did not contain their email addresses, only names of school districts and

teachers’ names, telephone numbers, and mailing addresses.

During the time spent corresponding with TEA, the researcher was also busy

preparing for the dissertation proposal defense on January 27, 2015, and writing the

Institutional Review Board (IRB) proposal for permission to proceed with the research

which was submitted on February 12. The IRB granted permission to proceed with the

research on April 9, 2015.

The next step was for the researcher to use the TEA’s AskTed.com website to

identify the names of the districts’ superintendents and their email addresses. Each of the

177 superintendents was emailed a letter on April 9 or 10, 2015, explaining the study,

including the name(s) of the first-year ACP teachers employed in that district, and

requesting permission to allow the researcher to invite the first-year ACP teacher(s) to

participate in the study (See Appendix A). For the 141 superintendents who did not


77

respond to the first email, the researcher sent a second email between April 22 and April

24, 2015, asking for permission once again. Then from May 5 – 11, 2015, the researcher

called the 76 still non-responsive superintendents’ offices to speak directly to the

superintendents or the secretaries. After that final effort, the total number of districts that

allowed the study to be conducted totaled 127. The total number of first-year ACP

teachers employed in those 127 districts was 214.

The following step was to make contact with the campus principals of the first-

year ACP teachers employed in the 214 districts. Once a superintendent’s permission

was received allowing research in the district, the researcher then emailed the campus

principal explaining the study, seeking his or her support, and inviting his or her

voluntary participation in a randomly-selected telephone interview regarding the teacher

induction process used on the campus and in the district (See Appendix B). Twenty-eight

principals volunteered to participate; ten were randomly selected for telephone interviews

conducted from May 25–June 15, 2015, once the semester was over.

Beginning May 6, 2015, the 214 first-year ACP teachers were contacted via their

school email explaining the purpose of the research, the timelines and commitment

necessary to complete the survey and questionnaires, and requesting their voluntary

participation in this research study while assuring them of their anonymity (See Appendix

C). The teachers were given an informed consent when they clicked on the link included

in the emailed invitation to participate in the study. The link was prefaced with the

statement, “By clicking on the link below you are voluntarily agreeing to participate in

this study.” Also, the letter was followed by an information sheet supplying more details

about the research project. Then on May 13, a reminder email that included a thank you


78

to those who had completed the survey was sent out to all 214 teachers in order to obtain

a greater response rate as only 48 responses had been recorded by Qualtrics. Again, on

May 23, a third email was sent to all 214 teachers thanking those who had participated

and inviting those who had not yet responded to do so. After the three attempts to elicit

participation by the first-year ACP teachers, the researcher received a total of 77

responses; 73 were complete and usable for regression analysis. Since the desired sample

size of 125 was not reached, the researcher appreciated having the use of qualitative

responses gathered from interviews with ten principals and 15 teachers to supplement the

quantitative data collected from survey and questionnaire.

The interview dates and times were arranged for the ten randomly-selected

principals and fifteen randomly selected teachers by email after the May 24, 2015,

random drawings from the volunteers’ names. The researcher’s email to those selected

reminded the volunteers of their approval for an interview, thanked them for doing so,

and asked them for the desired phone number to be called as well as the preferred day

and time. Three of the interviews had to be re-scheduled when two of the principals were

not available due to scheduling conflicts and one of the teachers forgot and did not have

her telephone with her. Another email was sent requesting another day and time to be

scheduled. Those makeup interviews were conducted at the newly scheduled date and

time. The telephone interviews were conducted between May 28 and June 11, 2015.

Methods for Data Analysis

The researcher’s plan was to use the collected data to develop a list of induction

supports and to determine a level of correlation between the level of self-efficacy of the

first-year ACP teachers assigned to Texas rural schools and their successful completion


79

of their standard certification meaning their contracts were renewed or their principals

recommended them for their standard certification. In addition, the researcher’s plan was

to determine the level of correlation between the perceived level of self-efficacy and the

availability of appropriate supports provided to assist them during that initial year of

teaching. The research study was guided by the following research questions:

1) What various practices are the leaders in REAP schools in Texas using to


2) Do the numbers and types of support mechanisms offered contribute to the


3) Do the level of self-efficacy and the number and types of support

mechanisms offered contribute to the successful induction of these first-

year ACP teachers as identified by the renewal of their teaching contracts

or their principals’ recommendation for certification?

Question one was answered using descriptive statistics gathered from the

quantitative induction supports questionnaires and qualitatively from the twenty-five

principal and teacher interviews. The collected data were used to develop a summary of

the quantity and quality of support resources that first-year teachers and their principals

in rural Texas schools considered to be contributors to their success. For question two, a

univariate analysis of variance was utilized. Univariate analysis of variance is a type of

regression analysis. Regression analysis is more powerful than a simple correlation as it

allows the researcher to estimate the effect of an independent variable on the outcome

variable. In this case, the independent variable, the number and types of induction

supports, was examined for its effect on the outcome variable, self-efficacy. Finally, for


80

question three, a regression analysis was used to determine if self-efficacy and school

supports are predictors of the first-year ACP teachers’ successful completion of their

standard certification as indicated by their contracts’ being renewed or their principals’

making recommendations for standard certification. Given the bivariate nature of the

outcome variable, whether contracts are renewed or not renewed, the regression used was

a logistic/bivariate regression. Logistic regression, which is “useful for describing and

testing hypotheses about relationships between a categorical outcome variable and one or

more categorical or continuous predictor variables” (Peng, Lee, & Ingersoll, 2002, p. 4),

was intended to help the researcher to predict the effect of the independent variables’—

rural school characteristics and induction supports—on the dependent variables of self-

efficacy and successful completion of certification.

The values of the independent variables, rural school characteristics and effective

supports used in an induction process, were determined using interviews and a

researcher-generated questionnaire to gather demographic information and an inventory

of all identifiable types of support afforded these first-year teachers during their first year.

The values of the dependent variables, teacher self-efficacy and success (determined by

the first-year teacher’s obtaining standard certification), were determined by means of a

survey, the Teacher Self-Efficacy Survey (TSES) short form, and the responses to the

demographic and school supports questionnaire administered concurrently.

From this research study, school leaders and those educators working with ACP

programs can have an increased awareness of best practices that can be implemented in

rural Texas schools to assist first-year ACP teachers to be successful in completing their

induction year and obtaining their standard Texas certification. The information gathered


81

from the analysis of the survey and questionnaires was the basis of the Chapters 4—

Findings and Chapter 5—Implications and Conclusions.

Table 2: Summary of Data Sources and Analysis

Research Question Data Source Data Analysis

1. What various practices are the leaders in REAP schools in Texas using to support the induction of first-year ACP teachers?

First-year ACP Teacher Induction Supports Questionnaire Telephone Interview with ten principals and 15 teachers

Qualtrics: Descriptive statistics Qualitative analysis

1. Do the numbers and types of support mechanisms offered contribute to the self-efficacy of ACP teachers across rural Texas’ schools?

First-year ACP Teacher Induction Supports Questionnaire TSES Telephone Interviews

Qualtrics: Descriptive statistics Univariate analysis of variance Qualitative analysis

2. Do the level of self-efficacy and the number and types of support mechanisms offered contribute to the successful induction of these first-year ACP teachers as identified by the renewal of their teaching contracts or their principals’ recommendation for certification?

First-year ACP Teacher Induction Supports Questionnaire TSES Telephone interviews

Qualtrics: Descriptive statistics Regression analysis Qualitative analysis


82

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS

Overview

This chapter presents the results of the data collection and analysis for both the

quantitative and qualitative components of this study. Three questions guided the

research to identify effective induction supports available to assist first-year ACP

teachers working in Texas’s rural districts to enable them to succeed in obtaining their

standard teacher certificates. The questions were posed in order for the researcher to

identify the induction support practices being used in Texas’s rural districts to support

first-year ACP teachers, to determine if the number and types of these supports

contributed to the perceived level of self-efficacy of these teachers, and to ascertain

whether the level of self-efficacy and the number and types of induction supports

impacted the teachers’ successful completion of their certification process. The

instruments used to answer the three research questions included the TSES short form, a

survey to determine a teacher’s perceived level of self-efficacy completed by 77 first year

ACP teachers; a Demographics and School Supports questionnaire completed by 73 first-

year ACP teachers; as well as the qualitative interview responses from ten rural school

principals and fifteen first-year ACP teachers to telephone interview questions about their

districts’ new-teacher induction process.

To analyze the data to answer these three questions, the researcher used a parallel

mixed-methods approach. Scholars agree that the research questions are the guiding

principle of the study; however, to go beyond raw data to answer the questions,

researchers can combine approaches, quantitative and qualitative, to enhance the research


83

by corroborating, elaborating upon, and expanding the results of the survey and

questionnaire responses through the use of mixed methods (Creswell & Clark, 2011).

Description of Participants

The most recent data compiled by the State Board of Educator Certification

(SBEC, September 1, 2015) indicate that from September 1, 2014--August 31, 2015, a

total of 21,231 Initial Educator Certificates were issued by the State of Texas. Of those

first-year teacher certificates, 11,552 or 54.4% were issued to teachers trained by an

alternative certification program, 1,146 or 5.4% were trained through a post-

baccalaureate program, and 8,533 or 40.2% were trained by traditional universities’

Departments of Education (SBEC, 2015). However, Dr. Ramsay of the Texas Education

Agency, in response to PIR #24724 submitted by the researcher July 2, 2015, reported

that the number of first-year teachers (all routes) actually employed in Texas’ public

schools on the snapshot day October 31, 2014, was 12,728.

The TSES and the School Supports Questionnaire were distributed to all of the

214 first-year ACP-trained teachers employed in REAP districts across the state of Texas.

By the end of the survey period, 77 responses were received. However, of those 77 who

completed the TSES, only 73 completed the Demographics and School Supports

questionnaire. Also, the researcher invited all 214 teachers, as well as 143 principals, to

volunteer to participate in telephone interviews to be scheduled at a later date. Forty-two

teachers and 28 principals volunteered. From the volunteer pool, the researcher randomly

selected 15 teachers and ten principals to participate in the telephone interviews.

The demographics of the participants showed that 79% of the participants were

female; 21%, male. Forty percent of the teachers were ages 20 to 29; 36% were 30 to 39;


84

13% were 40 to 49; and 10% were 50 and older. Eighty-four percent had a bachelor’s

degree; 16% had a master’s degree; and no one had a doctor’s degree. Sixty-four percent

of them were coming into education from another career field; for 36%, this was their

first career field. The majority, 43%, were teaching in grades 9–12; 36% were in grades

6–8; 17% in grades 4–5; 14% in grades 1–3; and 5% were teaching in preK–K. For those

teaching in secondary schools, 23% were teaching in the fields of language

arts/English/reading; 21% in math; 33% in science; and 19% in social studies. Some

were teaching in more than one subject area. Thirteen percent were teaching self-

contained elementary. The rest were teaching in a variety of areas including physical

education, computer science/technology, agriculture, music and art, business and

accounting, and theater arts.

The teachers were seeking a wide range of certifications: 28%, elementary, 19%,

science; 15%, special or bilingual education; 14%, English/language arts/reading; 11%,

math; and 10%, social studies. The others were seeking technology/computer science,

agriculture, theater or music, or business education. Some were seeking more than one

certification. Twenty-four percent of the respondents were getting their ACP training

through Texas Teachers; another 24% through ITeach Texas. Twenty-one percent were

being trained through university-based ACP programs. Nineteen percent were being

trained through different Educational Service Centers. The other 12% were being trained

through other private companies including ACT Houston, Webcentric, A Career in

Teaching, and the Texas Institute for Teacher Education (Txite). Seventy-two percent of

these teachers moved to the rural community to begin their jobs; 28% were residents of

their current rural community before seeking certification. All fifteen indicated their


85

principals were recommending them for certification; however, 88% had their contracts

renewed even though 27% of those interviewed indicated they were obtaining jobs in

other districts, many closer to their hometowns.

Procedures

Both of the quantitative instruments, the TSES and the Demographics and

Induction Supports questionnaire, were uploaded into an electronic data collection

software to expedite the collection and analysis of the data. A link to the instruments was

provided in the Participant Contact email. The researcher was able to see on a daily basis

how many participants had taken or were in the process of completing the survey and

questionnaire. That information was the catalyst for the two reminder emails that were

sent to the teachers. Each time a reminder was sent, the number of participants showed

an increase.

Quantitative data were collected during a period from May 13 to May 30, 2015,

and once it was uploaded, the researcher was able to see the results immediately. The

researcher was able to use the survey software to perform analysis of the data organizing

it into a usable format. Once the quantitative data were collected, the researcher arranged

for the interviews to gather the qualitative data. Subsequently, a random sample of

interview participants was made on May 24, and the researcher sent out emails to those

selected to arrange for the date and time of the telephone interview, as well as to confirm

the telephone number to be called. The researcher completed the ten principal interviews

and the fifteen teacher interviews during a period from May 27 to June 13, 2015.


86

Results

The use of a parallel mixed-methods approach to the research gave the researcher

two sets of data to use to answer each of the three research questions.

Question One: What various practices are the leaders in REAP schools in Texas using to


This question was answered with data collected from the School Supports

questionnaire and 25 interviews of teachers and principals. The quantitative responses to

the questionnaire indicated that the most commonly offered induction support is in-

district professional development. The quantitative responses are summarized below in

Table 3.

Table 3: Induction Supports Identified in Order of Frequency in 73 Rural Districts

Rank Order Induction Support No.

Receiving

1. Professional Development 63

2. Informal help from campus leaders 61

3. Mentor assigned in proximity 60

4. Mentor assigned in same subject/grade level 38

5. Observation of new teacher by another 51

Online resources 51

6. ACP coach/supervisor 50

7. Observation by new teacher of another 49

8. Support from district-level administrators 48

9. Books and videos 46

In-district professional development 46

Out-of-district new-teacher training 46

10. Assigned mentor in same grade level or subject 38

11. Education Service Center consultant/specialist 37

12. Regular shared-planning session w/other teachers 35

13. Assistance from district consultant/specialist 32

14. Extra provision for prep time in schedule 27

15. Involvement on a district professional learning

team

25

16. Alterations to teaching schedule 23

17. Assigned teacher’s aide (part-time or full-time) 16

18. Electronic mentor (e-mentor) 14


87

The School Support questionnaire asked the respondents to provide specific

details when listing in-district professional development, out-of-district professional

development, online resources, books, videos, or any other recommended induction

support so that the specific support could be identified. Both the quantitative data

obtained from the 73 questionnaires and the qualitative data obtained from the 25

interviews regarding recommended induction supports being used in rural districts across

Texas are included in the following summary of the induction supports that the

participants in the study identified as having made a positive impact on the teachers in the

first-year of their careers.

Induction Supports Identified as Making a Difference

Staff development.

Building Background Knowledge Through Academic Vocabulary is

staff development offered by Education Service Centers to provide

effective instructional strategies for teaching vocabulary to increase

student achievement in the content areas.

CHAMPS training is a “research-based program on classroom

organization and management.” Participants learn “how to structure

classrooms to prompt responsible student behavior, directly teach and

encourage students to behave responsibly, and pre-plan responses to

student misbehavior” (ESC 20).

Depth of Knowledge (DoK) is training for teachers to enable them to

categorize tasks according to the complexity of thinking.


88

First-year or New Teacher Academies offered by some of the Education

Service Centers were impactful especially when they were on-going

during the year.

Fundamental 5 Embedded Staff Training is based on the book, The

Fundamental 5: The Formula for Quality Instruction by Cain and Laird.

The training modules provide teachers with practical skills to increase

instructional rigor and relevance to improve campus performance.

Marzano’s Building Academic Vocabulary workshop offered by many

of the Education Service Center provides instructional strategies for

teaching vocabulary across the curriculum. Vocabulary is an integral part

of learning to read and reading to learn.

Professional Learning Communities Workshop has been presented by

some of Education Service Centers, or it can be purchased as a bundle.

The PLC workshop leads campuses to increase the level of collaboration

among all stakeholders—administrators, teachers, parents, and support

staff—with the goal being to transform instructional practices and increase

student achievement.

STEM Project-based Learning training teaches educators how to

implement STEM strategies including critical thinking, communication,

and leadership into all the other disciplines.

WOW (Working on Work) is an induction support that was deemed

highly effective by one district. WOW was led by an Education Service

Center presenter who came to the campus several times a month


89

specifically to work with first-year teachers, but all teachers were invited

to participate. WOW offered different strategies that could be

incorporated into the classroom to enhance educator effectiveness.

Writing Across the Curriculum staff development offered through

Education Service Centers proved very effective in encouraging writing in

disciplines other than English Language Arts.

Online resources.

Abcya.com offers free educational computer games to families and

classrooms covering a wide range of subject and grades.

Brainpop.com is a free site offering movies, quizzes, activities, lesson

plans, and more for grades K–12 in arts and music, engineering and

technology, social studies, science, English, math, and health.

Commoncore.com provides teachers a free resource for math and ELA

curriculums including lesson plans and accompanying videos.

Discoveryeducation.com is an online site created by the Discovery

channel providing teacher, student, and parent resources including free

clip art, homework help, puzzle maker, and games, as well as free

curriculum ideas and activities broken down by K–5, 6–8, and 9–12, then

into the four core subjects.

DMAC-Solutions.net is a web-based application developed to assist

educators with their assessment and curriculum needs. Using the

application, educators can monitor student progress and achievement


90

allowing the teacher to have the data needed to plan appropriate

curriculum.

Ducksters.com provides free educational computer games in history,

biography, geography, science, math, and typing categorized by grade

level and subject area.

Econoclass.com is a free online resource for economics teachers offering

activities, games and simulations, case studies, debate topics, and brain

teasers.

Edhelpernet.com includes links to 200 of the most popular teacher

websites covering all subjects and grade levels. The sites are listed in

order of their popularity. The site gives easy access to educational

materials; lesson plans by grade level, subject, and topic; and, for ELA

teachers, hundreds of novel units.

Education.com provides free games, worksheets, activities, lesson plans,

and science fair ideas for teachers categorized by grade, subject, and type

of activity.

Educationworld.com is a free e-magazine for teachers and administrators

offering professional development, lesson plans, articles about the

profession, and other resources useful for teachers.

Eduphoria.net partners with Education Service Centers to provide local

assessments, student monitoring, curriculum management, lesson

planning, and other administrative tasks. The Eduphoria Suite is a

collection of seven applications (Aware, Appraise, Workshop, Formspace,


91

Facilities & Events, Helpdesk, and Forethought) that make managing both

the learning and services side of a district easier. When combined, the

applications can enhance each other, simplify management, and provide

in-depth data analyses.

Englishteacher.com provides English Language Arts teachers resources,

lesson plans, videos, e-texts, and technology to use in developing their

curriculum in many different areas including literature, drama, grammar,

journalism, poetry, reading/literacy, vocabulary, and writing.

Kahnacademy.org is a free resource offering practice exercises and

instructional videos in K-12 math, science, computer programming,

history, art history, economics, and more, allowing students to progress at

their own speed or to receive instruction in one specific objective they

have not yet mastered.

Kahoot.it is a game-based digital learning system that empowers

educators and captivates learners by allowing them to connect in real time

to create a social, fun, and game-based learning space.

Kids.nationalgeographic.com provides free games, videos, and fun facts

about animals and places.

Learning.com offers support to teachers seeking to integrate technology

into their curriculums. “The site provides digital literacy solutions for

grades K–12 making it easy for them to integrate digital literacy into their

daily curriculums,” even for teachers who are not themselves comfortable

with today’s technology.


92

Library of Congress has a free website, American Memory

(www.lcweb2.loc.gov), that allows teachers to browse through the

American collection for historical images, maps, sound recordings,

manuscripts, photos, movies, and more that are available for download to

use in the classroom.

Neuhausacademy.org is a free resource that provides lessons to assist

with reading, spelling, and vocabulary development for students and

adults.

PACT–Performance-Based Academic Coaching Teams

(pact.tarleton.edu/pact) is a free resource developed by Tarleton State

University for all educators, novice and veteran teachers, as well as

administrators. The site offers teachers educator test preparation; the

PACT Academy, which offers free online staff development modules with

certification of the hours, counting for 2 hours of continuing education

credit; classroom resources; immediate teacher helps with access to a

trained eMentor; teaching tools; a live chat room for networking with

other educators; and core subject-area resources including lesson plans.

Also, the site offers administrator support including state test preparation,

administration mentor training, leadership and management, including

budget, training, and curriculum, and instruction administrative resources.

PACT T-CERT—TExES Certification Exam Review for Teachers

(pact.tarleton.edu/tcert/) is a free site to help teachers pass the state’s

educator exams. Each module contains handouts, a review with practice


93

test questions, a video review with a subject matter expert, and a

conversation is available if needed.

Pinterest.com is a resource for creative ideas, such as science experiments

and activities for all different disciplines.

Projectsharetexas.org is TEA’s learning management system that

provides an “interactive and engaging learning environment” for all

Texans—students, teachers, administrators, parents, anyone interested in

education. The site includes networking opportunities to increase teacher-

to-teacher collaboration, allows access to state-adopted and approved

materials and educational resources, and to iTunes U, as well as online

professional development sessions and courses. Appropriate resources are

linked to each of the TEKS in the four core subjects. It includes graphics,

videos, and online activities, categorized by grade level, subject, and

strand with resources for each targeted area.

Quizlet.com allows teachers to create flashcards, study guides, and games

to be used by students to reinforce learning.

Readworks.org is a free site for English/Language Arts teachers grades

K–12 to use in the development of their personalized curriculum. The site

provides reading passages to be used with reading skill building, even

paired passages on selected topics. The teacher can select by grade level,

topic, type of passage, and selected skill strategies.

Readwritethink.org is a free site of the National Council of English

Teachers that has lesson plans, student activities, printouts, videos, and


94

calendar activities suited for particular days of the year for use with

students K – 12 categorized by grade level and subject matter.

Starfallplay.com provides free preschool and early elementary

educational games available for use in the classroom.

Studiesweekly.com is an online subscription for a digitally interactive

textbook containing social studies content in an electronic magazine

format.

Studyjams.scholastic.com provides over 200 short math and science

videos using a multimedia format that the students enjoy. They can be

used daily at the start of class to reinforce a lesson from the previous day,

so for instant reteach while the teacher takes attendance.

Teacherspayteachers.com is a website from which teachers can

purchase, very inexpensively, the creative work of other teachers willing

to post and share lesson plans, graphic organizers, activities, worksheets,

and other teacher-made resources. Also, a teacher can share things he or

she has created and earn a little extra money. The resources may cost as

little as $.05 up to $5.00.

Teachertube.com is a free site for educators and students to find

instructional aids such as videos, audios, lesson plans, project ideas,

speeches, and other educational resources useful in planning and

supplementing lessons.

Think Through Math (ttmtexas.com) provides a free web-based math

curriculum for students grades 3 through high school that personalizes a


95

student’s math instruction through explicit instruction, meaningful

practice, and real-time live teacher support. The site is funded and

supported by the Texas Success Initiative (TSI).

Twitter.com is a great resource to use to keep parents informed about

class assignments, tests, due dates, events, etc. Administrators use it to

send message blasts to the staff, and teachers can use it to send message

blasts to students.

Typingclub.com provides free exercises to learn touch typing; it tracks

the student’s progress in level of accuracy and speed by words typed per

minute.

Writefortexas.org provides free professional development to support

academic writing and the resources needed by the teachers to use in their

classrooms. The online materials link is filled with ideas that are spelled

out including the graphic organizers, outlines, strategies, and other

resources needed to teach the lesson.

Writeguy.net is a useful free website for writing and grammar teachers.

Under Teacher Extras are posted recommended reading lists for students,

as well as grammar and writing hints.

Books.

Assertive Discipline by Lee and Marlene Canter is a book written for

educators to present a structured, systematic approach for a teacher to run

an organized, teacher-in-charge classroom. The strategies provided

promote appropriate classroom behavior.


96

Discipline in the Secondary Classroom by Randall Sprick is a book

providing step-by-step guidance for teachers to design a behavior

management plan to prevent misbehavior and increase student motivation

at the same time.

The Book Whisperer: Awakening the Inner Reader in Every Child by

Donalyn Miller is a highly recommended book that provides insights into

getting all children to become life-long readers.

The Classroom Management Book by Harry and Rosemary Wong

provides 50 procedures on “how to organize and structure a classroom to

create a safe and positive environment for student learning and

achievement to take place.”

The First Days of School: How to Be an Effective Teacher by Harry

Wong is a book and video series especially effective when read or viewed

before the start of the school year.

Tools for Teaching by Fred Jones describes how “highly effective”

teachers work “smarter” not “harder” while giving advice to novice

teachers on how to keep the class focused and engaged bell-to-bell.

Whole Brain Teaching for Challenging Kids by Chris Biffle is a book for

new teachers even before they step into the classroom and teachers facing

burnout to read to learn strategies for effective teaching while controlling

behavior issues.

Whole Brain Teaching: The Basics by Chris Biffle is available through

free online downloads at WholeBrainTeaching.com and youtube.com


97

covering a wide range of topics including teaching techniques and

classroom management.

Worksheets Don’t Grow Dendrites by Marcia Tate provides instructional

strategies for teachers to use rather than relying upon worksheets to

effectively engage students in remembering what they learn.

Videos.

Dream English Kids is a series of free videos

(www.youtube.com/user/DreamEnglshKids) on youtube providing catchy

songs for children to use to learn many different concepts such as days of

the week, months, planets, continents, etc.

Other.

Daily 5 is a series of literacy tasks that students complete daily while the

teacher meets with small groups or confers with students individually.

The series provides a framework for structuring literacy time, so students

work on developing habits of reading, writing, and working

independently.

Mentor assignment is a most impactful induction support. Ensure that

mentors are qualified, trained, and accessible, held accountable, and

receive a stipend for the extra time required for them to work with the new

teachers, including time to observe each other and discuss the results. For

a rural campus, finding a mentor for a subject-area teacher such as foreign

language, physics, or upper-level math courses is unlikely. Talk to a

larger school’s administrator and arrange for a semi-mentoring situation


98

with a veteran teacher working in that larger district. Allow opportunities

for the rural school’s beginning teacher to go to the larger school and

observe the veteran teacher in action. Encourage their maintaining

communication through telephone or email. This type of support is

especially effective when the rural district has only the new teacher in a

specific subject area. This strategy gives that teacher a same-subject

teacher with whom to collaborate.

Networking opportunities are encouraged. Encourage the use of Twitter

and Facebook to help the new teachers connect with other professional

educators in and out of district.

TEKS Resource System (formerly CSCOPE), developed by the Texas

Curriculum Management Program Cooperative, is a “customizable, online

curriculum management system including curriculum and assessment

components based on the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS).”

The resource presents curriculum and assessment, professional

development, and innovative technology components. “Its focus is to

impact instructional practices in the classroom to improve student

performance.” It is offered through each of the state’s Education Service

Centers.

The researcher also collected qualitative data to assist in the identification of the

variety of induction supports offered to the first-year ACP teachers in their rural school

districts during the 2014-2015 school year. The ten principals interviewed employed a

total of 27 new teachers with 19 or 70.4% of them being ACP-trained teachers. The most


99

often-cited induction support by the principals was the assignment of a quality mentor

teacher (7 of the 10 principals). The second most-used support was the support offered

by the Education Service Centers (5 of the 10). Six of the ten principals also stressed the

importance of the collaboration of the staff working together with these new teachers in

sharing, planning together, and, encouraging the new teachers. Four of the principals

cited the continuous involvement of the principal in the activities of the campus. The

principals did walk-throughs on a regular basis, built a trust relationship with the staff,

and offered support and guidance.

Additional qualitative data collected from the 15 teacher interviews indicated that

the support provided by the Education Service Centers (ESC) was most-often cited. The

ESC’s support included New Teacher Academies, as well as a myriad of staff

development offerings and specialists’ visits to the campuses. Eleven of the 15 teachers

(73.3%) named the ESC as providing valuable induction support, especially the four

teachers who participated in a New Teacher Academy sponsored by an ESC. Teacher 1

talked about the “Back to School” event hosted by the ESC at a neighboring school

district for the area’s rural districts. She benefited from the keynote speaker’s

encouragement, as well as from the information presented in the break-out sessions. She

felt this type of induction benefit would not have been possible in her small district alone,

and she expressed her appreciation that the ESC organized and hosted it. Teacher 1 also

identified an ESC training session on writing individualized education plans as required

by law as being very helpful to her. However, the “greatest help” was the ESC’s special

education specialist’s regular visits to the campus to assist the first-year special education

teacher “to remain in compliance in all aspects of the program.”


100

Teacher 3 labeled an ESC training on Rigor in the Classroom as being

“fantastic.” Also, she identified a training on how to use Google slides as being “very

beneficial.” Teacher 5 said the foremost training she received from the ESC was “How

to Prepare Kids for the 5th Grade STAAR Science Test” where she learned to

disaggregate test data in order to prepare her students for the state test. Teacher 6

reported attending one ESC-sponsored staff development in a neighboring district that

provided three break-out sessions on a variety of topics. However, she said the training

was later in the year so not as beneficial as it could have been if presented earlier.

Teachers 7 and 8 identified the support received on campus from ESC specialists as being

highly beneficial to them; however, neither teacher identified any other type of ESC

support. Teacher 9 was directed by her principal to select two ESC staff developments

for which release time would be granted for her to attend. The principal had to approve

of the two selections as being beneficial to her teaching assignment. She identified the

staff development on teaching strategies as most helpful. Teacher 10 was a participant in

the ESC’s New Teacher Academy. The Academy afforded her “the opportunity to form

a cohort network from across the region.” She said the cohort network was most helpful

“especially for the subject-area teachers who had no one else teaching their subject in

their districts.” Teacher 11 participated in a three-day New Teacher Academy with the

three days interspersed throughout the year that she identified as “very helpful.” Teacher

12 described the benefits of attending a one-day new teacher orientation at the ESC for

first-year teachers from across the region. Teacher 14 also cited the benefits of attending

a New Teacher Academy which met one day each month at the ESC. She cited he

greatest benefit as “the opportunity to form a cohort group within the region.”


101

Five of the ten principals (50%) identified the ESC supports as the second-most-

often cited support for teacher induction. These five principals identified the New

Teacher Academies, the staff development, or the on-campus support of ESC specialists

as being beneficial to the induction of the first-year teachers. Principal 2 said her district

was so small that the administrator could not assign a same-subject or same-grade-level

mentor so instead relied upon the ESC New Teacher Academy to support the new

teachers. The New Teacher Academy convened one day each six weeks allowing new

teachers the time necessary to “make network connections with each other for support.”

Principal 4 encouraged the new teachers to enroll in ESC staff development sessions

pertinent to their teaching area. Principal 4 stressed the importance of understanding that

the ACP-trained first-year teacher is “not a finished product; they have to be given the

time and opportunity to grow in a supportive environment. They will make mistakes, but

they have to be re-directed and encouraged continuously.” Principal 6 described the

ESC’s five-day New Teacher Academy which provides training two days prior to the

start of school and three additional days, one in the fall, one in the spring, and one at

year’s end, and provides the new teachers the opportunity to “meet and network and

collaborate with other new teachers across the region, as well as to learn some important

information about a variety of topics from guest speakers.” Principals 8 and 9 direct new

teachers to applicable staff development sessions hosted by the ESC. Principal 9

specified Marzano’s Building Academic Vocabulary and a writing workshop for

elementary teachers. Principal 9 also pays for ESC training on Professional Learning

Communities for the campus staff.


102

Eight of the fifteen teachers (53.3%) were assigned mentors, the second most-

often cited type of induction support by those interviewed. Teacher 4 had a mentor

assigned; however, the mentor did not share the same subject area with the teacher. The

teacher reported feeling “lost as I had to find my own curriculum resources, so I turned to

online curriculums posted on larger school districts’ websites.” Teacher 5 identified her

assigned mentor as the principal “whose door was always open for any questions or other

needed assistance.” Teacher 7 reported she had the opportunity to observe her mentor

and to have her mentor observe her teaching. These observations were followed by a

time to discuss the observations that the teacher found to be “very enlightening.”

Teacher 8, a special education teacher, was assigned a mentor based upon proximity;

however, no other veteran special education teacher was available to be assigned as a

mentor. Teacher 8 felt “the experience would have been greatly enhanced had a special

education teacher been assigned as my mentor.”

Teacher 9 reported being assigned a same-subject mentor who was given release

time to observe and debrief with her on two occasions. Teacher 9 was also given release

time to observe and discuss the observation with the mentor teacher. Teacher 9 said these

experiences were “very enlightening, probably my best developmental experience during

my first year of teaching.” Teacher 11 reported her assigned mentor was a “mismatch.”

The mentor had no technology background, and the first-year teacher taught technology

classes. Teacher 12 identified his mentor as another coach who had once taught in the

teacher’s subject area. The teacher said “the rapport we shared was a very positive

experience for me.” Teacher 14 was assigned a same subject-area mentor who proved to


103

be “very helpful. We worked collaboratively all through the year. I felt I had a hall full

of mentor teachers who were very supportive and helpful.”

The principals also valued the assignment of a quality mentor to each first-year

teacher. Seven of the ten principals reported assigning mentors to their first-year teachers

making assigned mentors the number one option for induction support among this group

of administrators. Principal 1 did admit to making the mentor assignments based upon

proximity or same-subject area, not considering mentor training or skill set. He admitted

to the assignment being rather “hit and miss.” Principal 4 commented on the importance

of assigning “a trained, quality mentor” to each first-year teacher. Principal 5 described

his process of assigning a mentor, “a veteran teacher who is willing to spend time and

share with the new teacher. The pair does observations and discussion both ways.”

Principal 6 described a day spent together, first-year teacher and mentor, meeting with

the principal to cover district policies, calendar, technology, and the employee handbook.

The meeting was “followed by time reserved for the mentor and teacher to work together

to set up the new teacher’s classroom in preparation for the start of the new year.”

Principal 7 reported that the assigned mentors have one of their two planning periods in

common with the assigned novice teachers allowing them time to meet on a daily basis

which she considered to be “significantly important to establishing successful working

relationships.” Principal 7 went on to say, “The key to the success of this district’s

mentoring program is relationship building between the mentor and new teacher. A level

of trust has to be built for the process to succeed.” Principal 8 assigns a mentor to each

first-year teacher and encourages their regular communication. Finally, Principal 10

assigns only trained mentors. She emphasized the level of experience as being in a


104

primary consideration in selecting the appropriate mentor. Because the campus is so

small, everyone is in proximity, and no one has the same subject or grade level in

common.

The teachers and principals interviewed also identified the support of the

administrators for the first-year teachers as being the third-most-effective type of

induction support found in these rural districts. Six (40%) of the 15 teachers and four

(40%) of the principals named administrator support as being an effective induction

support for the first-year ACP teachers. Teacher 3 identified her “unofficial” mentor as

being the vice-principal who had taught her subject area. Teacher 8 declared the

principal to be “highly supportive and easily available” to her; Teacher 11 concurred

saying her principal was “available and responsive.” Teacher 12 appreciated “being given

the freedom to design my curriculum as long as I stayed within the rules,” and she stated

her administrators were “highly supportive and kept an open-door policy,” remaining

available as needed. Teachers 9 and 15 both stated their appreciation for the assistance of

their building principals in assisting them during that first year in the classroom.

Principal 3 compared her role to that of “acting as a coach” in lieu of assigning a

mentor teacher to her first-year ACP teacher. Principal 4 discussed his belief that the

first-year ACP teachers are “not finished products.” He believes the new teachers have to

be “given the time and opportunity to grow in a supportive environment.” He knows the

teachers will make mistakes along the way and need to be “redirected and encouraged

continuously. We need to give them the time and ability to fail.” Principal 8 assists the

new teachers with accessing technology. She shares information with the staff regularly

using Google drive. Principal 9 who does not assign mentor teachers chooses instead to


105

step into the role of mentor for the first-year teachers. She sees a benefit for the new

teachers working on her campus as they are “given the opportunity to practice their craft

and to improve; however, they can also hang themselves.” The principal remains

“diligently engaged with what is going on in the classroom.”

The other beneficial types of support reported by the participants of the 25

interviews included relationship building with other teachers and the assistance of the

ACP supervisors. Two of the principals discussed with pride their efforts to build

camaraderie among the staff by hosting regularly scheduled luncheons each six weeks for

the teachers and administrators throughout the year or hosting a “Meet and Greet” to

introduce the new teachers not only to the staff but also to the community. Principal 9

described her efforts to provide “a social time without any of the trappings of a faculty

meeting. It is a bonding time in which the unity of the staff is built.” Five of the

teachers expressed their appreciation for the continued assistance of their ACP

supervisors in the field. The teachers felt the supervisors provided classroom

management techniques and guidance with differentiating instruction, as well as acting as

the first-year teachers’ “cheerleaders.”

After examining the quantitative and qualitative data collected to answer question

one, the researcher suggests that the induction supports listed in Table 3 and in the

section entitled Induction Supports Identified as Making a Difference are the effective

support mechanisms that were identified by the principal and teacher participants in the

study as having made a difference for the first-year ACP teachers working in up to 77

rural districts across the state. The two most- identified types of induction supports by

the principals and first-year ACP teachers interviewed on these campuses were the use of


106

the Education Service Centers for staff development and specialist assistance and the

assignment of mentor teachers. Administrator support and the relationships built with

other teachers were also lauded as making a difference for the first-year teachers.

Question Two: Do the numbers and types of support mechanisms offered contribute to the


Quantitative data collected from both the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale and

the Demographics and School Supports questionnaire were used to answer question two.

The responses were extended with qualitative data collected from the 15 teacher

interviews. The 12 items on the TSES were subsequently examined by subscale. The

subscales of the TSES include items 2, 4, 7, and 11 to measure the perceived level of self-

efficacy involving student engagement; items 5, 9. 10, and 12 to measure the perceived

level of self-efficacy in instructional strategies; and items 1, 3, 6, and 8 to measure the

perceived level of self-efficacy in classroom management.

The data collected from the TSES instrument was used to calculate descriptive

statistics for the TSES, including the mean, standard deviation, and the reliability of the

instrument using Cronbach alpha for the overall scores, as well as for each of the three

subscales: engagement, instruction, and management. The responses to the TSES survey

were found to have a high level of internal consistency as determined by Cronbach’s

alpha (α=0.891). This degree of reliability is similar to the reliability of α= 0.90 reported

by Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001), thus confirming the reliability of the survey.


107

Table 4: Reliability and Validity Participants’ TSES Short Form Results

Factors Mean SD Alpha

TSES 7.081 11.355 .891

Engagement 6.632 4.908 .838

Instruction 7.283 3.905 .727

Management 7.296 4.898 .898

The data from the TSES and the School Supports questionnaire were combined to

answer question two. The data were subjected to a univariate analysis of variance, and

the results indicate that the number and types of support mechanisms were not significant

predictors of teacher self-efficacy. A regression analysis was performed to examine the

effects of the types and numbers of induction supports on teacher self-efficacy levels.

This univariate analysis of variance or ANOVA does not show that the numbers and

types of induction supports had a statistically significant impact upon the teachers’ level

of self-efficacy. The mean of the group having no out-of-district supports is slightly

higher (7.242) than the mean of the group identifying one (6.907) or more than one

(6.916) out-of-district supports, but it is not necessarily statistically different; the

difference could be related to the sample size of 31 (no induction supports), 31 (one

induction support), and 11 (more than one induction support) which is not an ideal

sample size. The analysis, other than the sample size, met the assumptions of the

analysis.


108

Table 5: Self-Efficacy and Induction Supports (Types and Numbers)

ODPD Out-of-District Staff Development

DPD In-District Staff Development

# Supports No. Recipients

Mean SD No. Recipients

Mean SD

0 31 7.242 .846 40 7.089 .876

1 31 6.907 .781 18 6.965 1.073

1+ 11 6.916 1.35 15 7.050 .852

Though the teachers’ receiving induction supports or not was not found to have a

statistically significant effect on their levels of self-efficacy, the majority of the interview

participants stated their beliefs that specific supports helped increase their ability to make

a difference in the classroom. The lack of significance in predicting the impact of

induction supports on the self-efficacy of a first-year teacher could be explained by the

idea that self-efficacy is an innate characteristic of a teacher, one likely developed before

a teacher’s arrival in the classroom. According to Bandura (1977), self-efficacy can be

affected by verbal persuasion, mastery experiences, social modeling, or psychological

factors, all experiences that the first-year teachers would bring with them into the

classroom.

The researcher also used a qualitative research approach to answer this question.

Though the quantitative data did not show that the numbers and types of induction

supports contributed to the teachers’ level of self-efficacy, the interview participants did

not concur. Only one of the fifteen teachers interviewed identified his or her perceived

level of self-efficacy as being higher at the beginning of the year than at the end of the

year. The other 14 all felt their level of self-efficacy increased.


109

Teacher 2, the only one who declared a drop in the level of self-efficacy from an 8

to a 5, also described a very weak induction process. The teacher reported receiving no

resources including technology assistance or curriculum direction; having waves of “self-

doubt which were not addressed by the administrator;” and not being assigned a mentor

teacher with whom to work. The only induction offered this new teacher included two

ESC staff developments in the first weeks of the school year. This teacher felt very

isolated with the only person to whom to turn being the ACP supervisor who visited five

times during the year. The teacher felt “beaten down” by year’s end, and though the

teacher did receive a recommendation for standard certification, the teacher’s contract

was not renewed for the following year. He stated his plans to “go in a different

direction.”

The other fourteen teachers identified a perception that their level of self-efficacy

grew over the course of the year. The mean of the 15 participants’ stated level of self-

efficacy at the start of the year was 5.46. The mean of the same 15 participants’

perceived level of self-efficacy at the end of the first year was 8.46.

Seven of the fourteen teachers cited the coaching and support of the ACP

supervisors as impacting the increase in their self-efficacy. Teacher 1 said her ACP

supervisor “helped me realize that I had the skills needed to impact my students’

learning,” a type of verbal persuasion. Teacher 5 identified the ACP supervisor a having

a “positive impact on my development as a teacher.” Teacher 15 credited the ACP

supervisor as steering him away from teacher-centered lessons to student-centered

lessons which he said “made my workload less stressful and led to my enjoying teaching

more.”


110

Six of the 14 participants identified the reason for the increase in their self-

efficacy was due to their having “lived through the first year and surviving it,” which is a

form of mastery experience. Teacher 3 described her experience as “jumping into the

water and swimming upstream.” She stated that her experiences during the year

“provided me the challenges I needed for professional growth and moved my self-

efficacy from a 6 to a 9.” Teacher 5 stated that she “felt lost.” However, her level of

self-efficacy grew over the course of the year as she became more comfortable in the role

of teacher. She said “she quit straining so much” and began to enjoy her position.

Teacher 6 said her level of self-efficacy rose from a 4 to a 9 due to “Experience, living

through it day by day and learning from each mistake or experience.” Teacher 8

identified the experiences she had over the year as she learned who she could trust as a

reason for her increase in self-efficacy from a 7 to a 9. Teacher 11 said her growth was

due to “trial and error” during the year. Teacher 13 credited the experience of success

with her students’ benchmark and state test scores as helping increase her level of self-

efficacy.

The third most-often cited cause identified by the first-year ACP teachers for the

rise in perceived self-efficacy (5 of 14) was having a qualified mentor willing to spend

time with them. The five teachers who credited the help of their mentors with an increase

in their self-efficacy gave differing reasons. Teacher 5 said her informal mentor, the

vice-principal, was “brutally honest” yet “available and encouraging” thereby helping to

increase her level of self-efficacy. Teacher 10 had the assistance of a veteran teacher she

describes as “readily available” and as having “worked hard to help me develop my

teacher skill set.” With that assistance, Teacher 10 reported a jump from a 5 to a 10 by


111

the end of the year. The other teachers interviewed described the mentors’ help with

curriculum issues and classroom management techniques, their patience with the novice

teachers as they learned their craft, and their continued encouragement of the first-year

teachers’ efforts.

Tied with citing having a mentor teacher with whom to work was having a strong

cohort group of teachers (5 of 14) with whom to share ideas and experiences. Teacher 1

specified the support of the teachers working close to her classroom as making a

difference in her belief in her ability to make a difference in her students’ learning.

Teacher 5 described the “safe place” she found for her to get her questions answered and

to work on strategies to be implemented in her classroom as she spent time with her

mentor and with her peers as a reason for her enhanced self-efficacy during the year.

Teacher 3 gave credit to “a community of educators” for assisting her move from a 6 to a

9 in level of self-efficacy. Teacher 9 specifically mentioned the “cohorts were highly

supportive and assisted me especially in the area of curriculum development.”

Another reason identified by four of the fourteen teachers interviewed for the

increase in their levels of self-efficacy was the opportunity to participate in a New

Teacher Academy hosted by the Education Service Centers. Each ESC Academy

described in the interviews had a different schedule of sessions; however, most were at

least three days in length. One Academy was seven days long, having two days before

the school year, and one at the start of the second six weeks, another at the start of the

third six weeks, and two more in the spring semester. The others had two or even three

sessions at the beginning of the year with other sessions interspersed later in the year. The

teachers identified not only the information learned in the sessions, but also the power of


112

having a cohort group sharing similar experiences during the trying first-year in the

classroom as having a positive impact on their self-efficacy.

Question Three: Do the level of self-efficacy and the numbers and types of support

mechanisms offered contribute to the successful induction of these first-year ACP teachers

as identified by the renewal of their teaching contracts or their principals’ recommendation

for certification?

To answer the first part of question three, Does the level of self-efficacy

contribute to the successful induction of these ACP teachers?, the researcher performed a

logistic regression to determine if the level of self-efficacy was a predictor of the

teachers’ success in obtaining the standard teaching certification at the end of the year.

The mean of 7.084 for the self-efficacy of the teachers who succeeded in obtaining their

standard certification (Cert) was not statistically significant when compared to the mean,

6.738, of the self-efficacy of teachers who did not succeed in obtaining their standard

certification (NotCert). This result could be attributed to the small sample size of the

population that was not successful in obtaining a standard certificate (n=7).

Table 6: Impact of Self-Efficacy on Successful Certification

No. Mean SD

Cert 66 7.084 1.214

NotCert 7 6.738 0.879

However, the qualitative responses from the 15 teacher interviews do not agree

with the reports from those interviewed. All fifteen of the teacher participants in the

interview identified a relationship between the increase in their level of self-efficacy and

their being successful in obtaining their standard certification or getting their contracts

renewed. The one teacher who rated his or her self-efficacy decreasing from an 8 to a 5


113

did relate the drop to the lack of effective induction supports and ongoing support

throughout the year. The teacher expressed a belief that the lack of an effective induction

process as well as administrator support did play a role in his or her not being extended a

contract for the following year. This one participant’s response needs to be viewed with

an element of caution as this teacher was the only respondent not successful in obtaining

a contract renewal, though the teacher was recommended for standard certification. This

viewpoint may be unique to this case as there is not another participant with whom to

compare responses. The other fourteen teachers said they would be back in the same

district the following year, or they were changing to another district, usually one closer to

their home.

The second part of question three, Do the number and types of support

mechanisms offered contribute to the successful induction of these ACP-trained

teachers?, was determined using a logistic regression to determine if the number of

school supports (either zero, one, or more than one) and types of school supports (either

in-district professional development or out-of-district professional development)

contributed to the successful induction of rural, first-year ACP teachers’ success in

obtaining a standard certificate at the end of the year. The logistic regression variables

entered into the analysis included success in obtaining standard certification (Cert) or not

successful in obtaining standard certification (NotCert); district professional development

(DPD) with no supports (none), one support (1), or more than one support (1+); and out-

of-district professional development (ODPD) with no supports (none), one support (1), or

more than one support (1+).


114

To answer question 3b, the researcher determined the data indicated in-district

staff development to be the only factor that was statistically significant to a teacher’s

successful certification indicating a level of significance of 0.033 which is less than 0.05.

It is important to note that though the level of significance is strong and robust, the data

collected is self-reported. Though the data show there are differences elsewhere, they are

not statistically different. The quantitative results of the study failed to indicate that the

types and numbers of induction supports emerged as impacting teachers’ certification.

Table 7: Analysis of Variance: Induction Supports and Standard Certification

Type of Support Certification Level of Significance

ODPD Cert .294 NotCert .628

DPD Cert .033 NotCert .570

ODPD * DPD Cert .087 NotCert —

Another logistical regression was performed on the data. The number of

respondents included in the analysis was 76, but three responses were declared missing

(n=73). The logistical regression is an analysis allowing the researcher to identify the

likelihood of something’s occurring or not; in this case, the analysis showed the

likelihood of the teachers’ obtaining their standard certification. The researcher had to

exercise caution in interpreting the results due to the small number of negative responses,

seven who were not recommended for standard certification. This was done by inputting

six variables: ODPD, ODPD(1), ODPD(2), DPD, DPD(1), and DPD(2) where ODPD is

out-of-district staff development and DPD is in-district staff development; no number

represents none offered, (1), one support offered, (2) more than one support offered.


115

The coefficient of the in-district staff development (DPD) variable has a Wald

coefficient of 6.681 which is signficant at the .05 level. This result suggests that DPD

may have an effect on the successful induction of teachers. Caution, however, should be

exercised when interpreting these findings given the relatively small number of teachers

who declared they were not being recommended for their standard certification by their

principals. In addition, when consulting the qualitative data, the researcher found that

some teachers expressed confusion regarding exactly which staff developments were

considered in-district as opposed to out-of-district. An example would be a teacher’s

attending a staff development on his campus or even in a neighboring district but one

presented by an Education Service Center specialist, would that be considered in-district

or out-of-district?

Table 8: Numbers and Types of Supports’ Impact on Successful Certification

No. + Type Supports

No. Incl. Wald df Sig.

ODPD 40 4.434 2 .109 ODPD(1) 18 .010 1 .921 ODPD(2) 15 3.233 1 .072 DPD 31 6.681 2 .035 DPD(1) 31 .049 1 .825 DPD(2) 11 2.596 1 .107

All fifteen teacher participants again agreed there was a relationship between the

induction supports they received and their being successful in obtaining their standard

certification or having their contract renewed for the following year. The one teacher

who did not receive a contract renewal though did receive the recommendation for

standard certification related the lack of renewal to the lack of effective induction

supports and ongoing support throughout the year. The teacher expressed a belief that

the lack of an effective induction process as well as administrator support did play a role


116

in his or her not being extended a contract for the following year. The teacher was not

able to identify any ESC support other than this teacher’s attendance at one staff

development session during the summer. Rather than feeling supported, the teacher

described his or her feelings of being “overwhelmed.” This one participant’s response

needs to be viewed with an element of caution as this teacher was the only respondent not

successful in obtaining a contract renewal, though the teacher was recommended for

standard certification. This viewpoint may be unique to this case as there is not another

participant with whom to compare responses.

Teachers’ Ideal New-Teacher Induction Process

The final part of the interview was to allow the participants to describe their ideal

new-teacher induction process. Seven of the teachers wished for a New-Teacher

Academy that included new teachers from other rural schools in the region so they could

be part of a cohort group. This academy could be hosted by an Education Service Center

or a consortium of rural districts working together in support of the new teachers. This

ideal New-Teacher Academy would begin with a few days offered in the summer, and

then have days interspersed throughout the rest of the year. The teachers identifying a

new teacher academy as desirous felt this would be a great opportunity for them to build

relationships with other teachers in similar situations in other districts. In addition, they

would have the opportunity to engage with the other new teachers in their own district,

ones possibly assigned to another campus. This opportunity for a New-Teacher Academy

was especially important for the secondary teachers who wanted to link with another

same subject-area teacher, something not always possible within a rural district as there

tends to be one physics teacher, one agriculture teacher, one government/economics


117

teacher, one calculus teacher, one speech and drama teacher, one foreign language

teacher, and one technology teacher. Having connections to another teacher in the same

discipline even though teaching in another district would give them someone with whom

they could share ideas, questions, and concerns. They felt this would make a big

difference.

Another common suggestion for this “dream induction process” given by six of

the fifteen teachers was that each new teacher would be assigned a trained mentor, ideally

one in the same grade level or subject area, whenever possible, and one in close

proximity having a common planning period so the two would be able to communicate

on a daily basis. This mentor would have the time needed to observe the new teacher in

action over a class period on multiple occasions; then the two would discuss the

observation with concerns discussed and suggestions shared. Teachers 13 and 14

mentioned having had this opportunity, and both felt they would also benefit if that

process were reversed, and the new teacher had the opportunity to go into the mentor’s

classroom and observe for a class period followed by the opportunity to discuss what was

done and why. This could be extended so that the new teacher was able to observe in

several other veteran teachers’ classes especially teachers strong in a skill that the new

teacher is developing such as classroom management or the use of high-level questioning

techniques or project-based learning.

Along with the discussion of the desire for a New Teacher Academy and a trained

mentor arose the topic of ementoring. Ementoring is a concept that has finally arrived

and is readily available. PACT, available online, offers free ementoring assistance


118

especially developed and designed to assist rural school districts who do not have the

personnel needed to fulfill the requirements of a trained mentor for each new teacher.

The suggestion made by four teacher participants in the interviews was the need

for a well-organized beginning-of-the-year in-service experience for the new teachers.

Teacher 10 suggested that the district provide a binder, maybe one with the district’s logo

on the cover, for each new teacher. All handouts and materials, forms, instructions and

procedures, and handbooks distributed to be kept for reference could be placed into these

binders. That would be a nice way to welcome the new teacher to the district. Within

this district notebook could be placed the outline for a substitute folder, one to be

completed by the new teacher. Giving the new teachers the outline of what needed to be

included in a substitute teacher folder could also prove very beneficial to the new teacher,

the students, and the campus. Teachers 1 and 5 mentioned the importance of having an

employee handbook that could be referenced as needed. Have policy readily available

and in writing prevents misunderstandings and mistakes from being made.

To build the community of educators within the district, four of the interview

participants brought up the social aspect of induction. Teachers 5, 6, 8, and 9 mentioned

the value of an introduction to the campus personnel and even to the rural community. A

“meet and greet” for the new staff members hosted by the district the week before or even

during the beginning- of-the-year in-services would be appreciated and would afford the

new teachers the opportunity to meet parents, community, and staff people in a less

stressful situation, at a social event. Getting to know some of the staff, especially those

with whom the new teacher(s) would be working the most closely, would be very helpful

before the first day of school.


119

The teachers interviewed mentioned the importance of their getting curriculum

and resource information and not being left to develop them on their own while

completing all the other required activities that also include those required by the

alternative program in which they are enrolled. The administrator should spend time

going over the TEKS and the connection to the STAAR testing. In addition, if the

principal could give the new teacher a list of exactly where to find the TEKS, practice

STAAR questions, and TEKS-aligned curriculum ideas and resources, that would be

extremely beneficial to the new teachers.

Another topic the teachers wished to be covered by the principal was classroom

management and discipline procedures followed in the district. The principals must not

assume the new teachers automatically know these procedures and expectations. Rather,

the new teachers need guidance. Enhanced communication between new teachers and

the administrator was encouraged. They wanted to build relationships with trust going

both ways. They felt it important that the principal take the time to get to know the new

teachers and show a genuine desire to see them develop professionally. One suggestion

made by Teacher 14 was that the principal schedule an after-school meeting once a six

weeks to sit down with the new teacher or teachers and have a roundtable discussion,

with open and honest expressions of questions, concerns, and expectations to be shared.

The group would come closer to bonding through this shared recurring experience. At

one of these meetings, the counselor could join the group and show the teachers how to

disaggregate their students’ testing data. Doing so would allow the teachers to know

exactly what each student needs to master of the curriculum to pass the state evaluations

as well as the year so they can be promoted to the next grade.


120

Principals’ Ideal New-Teacher Induction Process

The ten principals were also asked to describe their ideal new-teacher induction

process if they were empowered to design it without limitations. The principals also saw

the need to introduce the new teachers to the staff, and Principal 4 mentioned including

the members of the Board of Education and the superintendent. Principal 4 also wanted

to include all the new staff, not just the teachers. She said, “Especially in smaller, rural

districts, each and every staff member has a vitally important role to play and must be

welcomed as part of the same team.”

Principal 4 also mentioned the importance of administrators’ taking the time to

instruct the new teachers in the disaggregation of the student data so that the teachers

could identify the individual strengths and weaknesses of the students to their class.

Also, the teachers should be oriented to the district’s curriculum and not sent into the

classroom to design their own without the skill set needed to do so. However, Principal 5

added a caution; principals need to avoid causing “information overload.” When too

much information is presented over a short period, it does not have time to really “sink

in.” Maybe the administrator should divide the information into sections and present one

section at a time allowing time for it to “marinate for a while” before adding more

content.

Principals also identified the need to ensure that each new teacher has all possible

resources available to them to allow them to be successful in the classroom, including

working, up-to-date technology and the instruction needed in order to exploit its benefits.

Having expensive technology available in the classrooms not being used because no one

has been instructed in its use is a huge waste of money and opportunity for learning.


121

Each year more and more of the students in the classrooms of even the rural districts are

totally integrated with technology. They have smartphones, iPads, computers, Kindles or

other electronic readers, and GPS equipment available to them at home; that is what they

know and how they know how to access information. It is important that the schools

keep up. The resource list that is being provided by this researcher will be a useful tool

to the rural school leaders to bring an awareness of what it readily available, free, and

accessible, for the teachers to use in planning their lessons and engaging the students

capturing their attention with technology.

Principal 9 mentioned that sharing a new-teacher academy with other districts

made sense when the Education Service Center was not able to host this important event

before and even during the year. The districts could share in the cost, the effort to

organize and plan, alternate locations, and build a camaraderie among multiple staffs

providing the opportunity for new teachers to meet other new teachers from nearby

districts. That helps to decrease the feelings of “being alone on an island.”

Principal 9 also mentioned the importance of encouraging health and wellness

among the staff, including the new teachers. Wellness programs could benefit everyone

by reducing substitute and insurance costs, having teachers in the classrooms more

consistently, and giving the staff more energy to put forth with the students. This

program could be introduced during the induction process. It could also be introduced as

a form of competition challenging each other to meet health goals including distance

walked, weight loss, change of eating habits, and reduction in doctor visits.

Discussing the importance of trained mentors for these first-year ACP teachers,

Principal 1 suggested that the mentors who are to be sent to be trained should all receive


122

a stipend. That will encourage them to take the assigned job more seriously and

encourage the administration to pick only the most highly qualified to receive this extra

remuneration. The mentor should, in this principal’s opinion, come to school early

(before the rest of the staff returns) in order to assist the new teacher being mentored to

set up his or her classroom to be its most effective, to ensure that all materials and

resources have been procured and are in place, that the necessary technology is available

for the teacher’s use, and that he or she is comfortable using it. The principals should to

schedule time to meet with the new teachers, to go over the school calendar including

deadlines to be met, discipline procedures, and to familiarize them with the culture and

expectations of the campus. Also, Principal 4 stated the importance of the principals’

remembering that these teachers are not “finished products;” they are still developing.

They need to be given space to experiment, permission to fail, and the patience to

continue to work with them to guide them toward becoming a master teacher one day.

The principals must be consistent in their support of these new teachers, continuing to

encourage them. If these suggestions are incorporated into an induction process for new

teachers, the principals believe these new teachers will have a “jumpstart on being

successful” in completing their certification.

Summary of Research Findings

Question One: What various practices are the leaders in REAP schools in Texas using to


This question was answered qualitatively by the ten principals and 15 teachers

during the telephone interviews. Using the participants’ responses as well as the

quantitative responses obtained from the School Supports Questionnaire, the researcher


123

created a list entitled Induction Supports Identified as Making a Difference detailed in

Chapter 4. Also, the list of the induction supports listed in rank order of the most often

experienced by the participating teachers was obtained from the School Supports

Questionnaire (See Table 3). The results include a list of the various practices being used

in the REAP schools in Texas to assist the first-year ACP teachers obtain their standard

certification.

Question Two: Do the numbers and types of support mechanisms offered contribute to the


The quantitative data do not show that a first-year ACP teacher’s self-efficacy is

affected by the numbers and types of support mechanisms they receive during their first

year in the classroom. However, the qualitative data indicate that the teachers’ level of

self-efficacy did rise from the beginning of the year to the end of the year. The teachers

and principals interviewed identified reasons for the increase including the experience of

being the teacher-of-record for the year; the opportunities for staff development,

including New Teacher Academies; the assistance of ACP supervisors, mentors,

administrators, and cohort teachers; and the relationships they built within the schools.

The interview participants recognized that the inductions supports were valuable to their

success in increasing their level of self-efficacy.

Question Three: Do the level of self-efficacy and the number and types of support

mechanisms offered contribute to the successful induction of these first-year ACP teachers


124

as identified by the renewal of their teaching contracts or their principals’ recommendation

for certification?

Due to the small sample size, especially collecting only seven responses from

participants who were not successful in obtaining their standard certificate, the researcher

was not able to correlate the teachers’ level of self-efficacy and the number and types of

induction supports with the teachers’ success in obtaining their standard certification or

having their teaching contracts renewed. However, the qualitative responses do indicate

the participants’ belief that their perceived level of self-efficacy grew during the year due

to the experiences they had and the supports they received. The respondents indicated

their belief that their enhanced self-efficacy and the number and types of induction

supports offered did contribute to their being recommended for their standard

certification.


125

CHAPTER V

IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Teaching is the only profession in which there is so little concern for the

clients that we are willing to give new practitioners the most difficult and

burdensome assignment, leave them without teaching materials, close the

door and tell them to sink or swim on their own. (Whitaker, 2000, p. 165)

Introduction

The researcher remembers the first-day experience of her teaching career in a

rural Texas district in 1972. Once hired and the forms all filled out, she was issued a

textbook, a teacher’s edition, a lesson plan book and a grade book, and a box of chalk.

The principal’s secretary led her to her new classroom, gave her the keys to the building

and the classroom door, and wished her good luck. She was left unassisted in any other

way to figure out what she needed to do to prepare to meet the students the next day. It

was truly an overwhelming experience, a feeling of being alone to face the impending

challenges.

Educators have come to the realization that what was just described is not an

effective way to induct new teachers (Ingersoll & Smith, 2004). The researcher, trained

through a university school of education, had just completed a semester of student

teaching and still felt isolated and dismayed, even somewhat fearful. The “sink or swim”

method of inducting teachers is one of the reasons for the high attrition rate of especially

the beginning teachers (Ingersoll & Smith, 2004). With the steady increase in the number

of alternative-certification teachers being hired, school administrators have come to the

realization there is a need to identify measures to enable these teachers to be successful

despite their not having had a student teaching experience under the tutelage of an

experienced teacher. Research also indicates that the first year of teaching is critical in


126

the development of an effective teacher (Nemser, 1983; Mastropieri, 2001; Ingersoll &

Smith, 2004). This research was meant to meet the need of identifying effective

induction supports readily available and currently being used in different REAP school

districts across Texas.

Working with three different ACP programs for the past ten years, the researcher

has been a supervisor for over 45 first-year ACP teachers on both rural and urban

campuses. During the time spent with the principals of these schools, the researcher was

asked multiple times, “What can I do to help this first-year ACP teacher succeed?” That

question was the catalyst for this study. What can the principals do to provide effective

induction supports to help retain teachers and increase their effectiveness was the

overarching question of this dissertation.

The primary purpose of this research was to identify effective induction supports

identified by principals and first-year ACP teachers working in rural Texas school

districts during the 2014–2015 school year. The intention of the researcher was to share

that cumulative list with the school leaders of the REAP districts across Texas to provide

those school leaders with a reference list of supports identified as benefiting first-year

ACP teachers working in Texas’s rural schools. The secondary purpose was to examine

the level of impact the district’s induction process had on a first-year teacher’s perceived

level of self-efficacy, a characteristic research has correlated to teacher effectiveness in

the classroom. A third purpose of the study was to determine if the level of self-efficacy

and the numbers and types of induction supports impacted the likelihood of the teachers’

successful completion of their standard certificate. To address these three purposes, the

researcher relied on the collection of quantitative and qualitative data to perform a


127

parallel mixed-methods study of rural school teacher induction with the focus on ACP

teachers in such a way as to ensure their obtaining their standard certification at the end

of the year.

From the quantitative data collected from the TSES and the Demographics and

School Supports questionnaire, the researcher’s analysis indicated that neither the number

nor the types of school supports offered factored into the level of self-efficacy of the first-

year ACP teachers. One possible explanation is that a larger percentage of ACP-trained

first-year teachers are older than the traditional college graduate, many already in their

thirties with other career experiences behind them. Those teachers were likely to have

already developed a level of self-efficacy, a belief in their ability to affect change in those

around them, based upon their life and career experiences. This type of teacher would

not need to rely on induction supports to raise that level of self-efficacy; the teacher’s

sense of self-efficacy would have already been established.

Though these school supports offered might not have been responsible for raising

the level of self-efficacy of the teacher, they could positively impact other areas of

education such as the success of the students, the retention of the teacher, the climate of

the campus staff, and more. Analyzing the School Supports questionnaires and adding to

that data the qualitative interview responses from ten principals and fifteen teachers

regarding the induction processes used in their rural districts allowed the researcher to

generate a list of all the identified supports that were made available to these rural school

teachers during the 2014-2015 school year. This list can benefit rural school leaders

across the state by providing a ready reference of supports to assist them as they support

the first-year teachers seeking resources and assistance. The first-year teachers who will


128

find their jobs made easier with some of the identified resources will also benefit. The

list can also benefit those teachers with lower levels of self-efficacy to identify resources

or processes that could assist them in developing effective instructional strategies so they

can build their level of self-efficacy with mastery experiences. Also, the ACP program

coordinators who can provide the tool to the ACP supervisors and coaches to be used as

they support their intern teachers could benefit from this research.

Results

The researcher’s first question was answered with the identification of the

effective induction supports being used in REAP districts across the state. A list was

created using the data the induction supports questionnaire generated from the responses

of 73 volunteer teacher participants. In addition, the researcher interviewed fifteen of the

first-year ACP teachers randomly selected from the 42 volunteer teachers asking about

the induction supports they received that helped them work to complete their

certifications. Also, the researcher interviewed ten of the 28 volunteer principals asking

them about the induction supports used on their campuses and in their districts. To

complete the principal interview, the researcher asked the principals to describe their

ideal process for inducting new teachers if all limitations were removed. From the

interview responses of these 25 teachers and principals and the results of the School

Supports questionnaire, the researcher developed the list entitled Induction Supports

Identified as Making a Difference included in Chapter 4.

The researcher’s second question was to determine whether the numbers and

types of induction supports contributed to the self-efficacy of the first-year ACP teachers

working in the rural school districts of Texas. A regression analysis performed on the


129

data indicated that the types and numbers of induction supports had no effect on the first-

year teachers’ levels of self-efficacy. However, the qualitative interviews with ten

principals and fifteen teachers indicated that the levels of teacher self-efficacy did

increase for all but one of the sample population by the end of the school year, sometimes

following a period of decrease during the year. The interview participants suggested

various reasons for this increase, many identifying an effective mentor teacher or a very

responsive, supportive campus principal. Their responses indicated a belief that at least

some of the induction supports did impact the first-year teachers’ levels of self-efficacy.

The third research question was whether or not the level of self-efficacy, in

addition to the numbers and types of induction supports, could be positively correlated to

the successful induction of the first-year ACP teachers, meaning that they would be

recommended for their standard certification at the end of the year. Though a regression

analysis of the quantitative data did not correlate the teachers’ level of self-efficacy and

the numbers and types of induction supports with the teacher’s successful induction, it

did indicate that in-district professional development did have a small effect on the

teachers’ success in obtaining their standard certification. This small effect could be

explained in part by the fact that the group reporting in-district staff development

supports was rather small, 33 of the 73 participants or only 45%. This low identification

could be attributed to the lack of clarification as to what constituted in-district staff

development. In this model, in-district staff development would have included mentoring

or other forms of support offered by the district, not the Education Service Center or

another outside entity. Having been a 30-year public school educator, the researcher

cannot remember even one of those years in which she did not participate in at least four


130

or five in-district staff development opportunities. This confusion could be attributed to

the fact that the types of staff development were named individually on the instrument.

They were not grouped into the categories of out-of-district (ODPD) and in-district

(DPD) staff development until after the surveys were completed. Categorizing them

would have helped to clarify the meanings of the terms.

Another factor to be considered in the lack of a positive correlation between the

number and types of induction supports and the level of self-efficacy with the

recommendation for standard certification is that the number of research participants who

did not earn their standard certification was small, only seven teachers of the 73 or

.095%, reported they were not being recommended for standard certification. That small

number does not allow the researcher the power to conduct logistical analysis on the data.

Nor did the logistical regression analysis identify predictors of the success in obtaining

standard certification.

The researcher had to rely, instead, on the qualitative data from the 25 interviews

conducted with principals and teachers. Through the interview process, the researcher

was able to get affirmation from all ten principals that some form of induction process

was beneficial to the first-year teachers’ success in obtaining their standard teaching

certificates. However, there was not consensus as to what the induction process should

be. Seventy percent of the principals indicated that effective mentoring should be a

component of the process. They did not agree whether the mentor should have to be

trained or not and whether the mentor should be same grade level or subject area which is

sometimes difficult in a smaller rural school. Sixty percent of the principals responded

they felt the training offered by the Education Service Center was integral to an effective


131

induction process. The third element, identified by 60% of the principals, for an effective

induction process was an involved, supportive principal, one who was readily available

and seen often in the classroom.

The teacher interviews supported the principals’ position as to the importance of

an effective induction program. As with the principals, the teachers’ descriptions of

which elements constitute an “effective induction program” differed from one teacher to

the next. The majority of the teachers interviewed, 13 out of 15 or 87%, identified

having received beneficial support from the Education Service Centers in the form of

quality staff development and the assistance of specialists coming to the campuses. Four

of the teachers asserted that the New Teacher Academy offered by the ESC was

particularly helpful. Eight of the fifteen teachers (53.4%) agreed with the principals as to

the effectiveness of having assigned mentors. Six of the teachers, 40%, identified

supportive administrators as having a positive impact of their success during that first

year of teaching. Five of the teachers, 33%, credited their ACP supervisors’ assistance

for helping them through the challenges of the first year of teaching.

Influence of Social Media in Education

Many of the effective induction supports listed in the findings from both the

quantitative and the qualitative responses included the use of social media. Today’s

educators can benefit from leveraging social media to enhance instruction and to prepare

students for the realities of their future workplaces. Social media also provides a vehicle

for educators to share information and to become a part of a community of educators

even beyond the walls of their campuses allowing them to carry on a conversation in

cyberspace. Teachers can make use of sites including Instagram, Twitter, Facebook,


132

LinkedIn, Google Hangouts, Pinterest, and YouTube to enlarge their community of

educators with whom to share ideas, ask for advice, and express concerns. The sense of

isolation behind one’s classroom door can be eased with the support of educational

colleagues from around the world made possible through the use of social media

technology.

The use of social media is second nature to the new teachers from the millennial

generation who have never known a time when social media was not a part of their lives.

They are comfortable using it and can benefit from shared resources and discussion

groups providing a sense of community among educators, a means of extending a

conversation using social media outposts and Twitter chats worldwide. Blogging is

another aspect of social media that can be useful in assisting first-year teachers to obtain

answers to pressing questions and to comment and receive feedback on relevant issues

impacting them in their careers. Twitter facilitates conversation among educators from

the next door classroom, to a neighboring school district, to educators in others states and

even those in other countries. It allows a teacher the opportunity to reach out across the

globe. Facebook groups can be formed to generate a global conversation about a topic of

interest or concern. The variety of social media tools which have been identified by the

educators participating in this study can be used as 21st century professional development

resources for educators in rural districts.

Educators can access “blogs, articles, and videos aimed at helping educators to

employ social media tools to develop professionally, connect with parents and

communities and engage students in 21st century learning” (Cronin, 2015). Educators


133

such as Don Power (2012) have seen the value in social media applied to education, both

as a tool for educators, as well as for students:

Never in the history of education has access to new methods and theories been so

immediate or ubiquitous. Educators no longer need to feel they are teaching in

isolation. Teachers can communicate instantly and directly with the current

leaders in their fields to compare notes on educational techniques, curriculums,

and so on. For example, teachers are using social media sites to find out

innovative concepts like ‘flipped classrooms’ or to share the latest iPad apps for

high schools (Power, 2012).

The expanded use of social media in education opens a door for major changes in the

availability of staff development customizable for an individual teacher’s need and able

to be shared not only across the campus, but the nation, and the world. This brings

teachers together into a worldwide community of educators.

Limitations of the Study

One of the biggest limitations to this study is the small number of first-year ACP

teachers volunteering to participate. The researcher’s goal was to have 125 participants

to increase the generalizability of the study and enhance the power of the series of

logistical regressions performed to determine predictors among the variables being

studied. Without the ability to coerce participation or offer financial remuneration for

participation, the researcher had a difficult time getting 77 volunteer participants. That

was accomplished only after sending out three email appeals to the candidate pool of 214

first-year ACP teachers employed in Texas’s rural districts for the 2014–2015 school


134

year. The final sample size of 77 first-year rural ACP teachers restricted the

generalizability of findings.

Another limitation was the reliance on the induction supports questionnaire’s

asking respondents to identify the induction supports they received and the qualitative

responses received to answer question 2, do the number and types of support mechanisms

offered contribute to the self-efficacy of ACP teachers across rural Texas schools. The

limitation was that the respondents were not forced to identify all the possible types of

induction supports. They may have listed or spoken about only one induction support

that they found to have had a particular personal significance, but in actuality they had

received other induction supports. Also, the respondents may have identified an

induction support such as a guest speaker brought onto the campus as being an in-district

staff development when in reality the speaker was contracted by the Education Service

Center. The narrative of the induction supports relies upon the qualitative responses to

clarify the meaning.

The researcher recognized that the responses were self-reported by the

participants, so the responses cannot be totally objective. The researcher accepted that

this self-reported data is subjective in nature. The TSES and the Demographics and

School Supports questionnaire both required self-reported responses by their very nature.

Relying on self-reported responses does allow for exaggeration, under evaluation, and

purposefully misleading or even erroneous data. However, the researcher did what could

be done to appeal to the professionalism of the respondents, highlighting the value of the

outcomes to the schools by enabling the principals to have access to the list of available

induction supports and a list of suggestions for creating highly effective induction


135

processes for the rural schools across the state. The research is also beneficial to the first-

year ACP teachers in that it provides a list of ready resources these teachers can access to

find books, videos, websites, and trainings that could make their jobs easier and help

them to increase their effectiveness as teachers.

The level of the teachers’ self-efficacy could have been better identified if the

quantitative data from the TSES had been collected at the beginning of the year and again

at year’s end. That would have provided an enhanced objectivity to the increase or

decrease identified by the teachers. Waiting until the end of the year to obtain the

teachers’ perception of the self-efficacy could have allowed the experiences of the year to

fade the memory of nine months earlier.

Another limitation of the study was the use of telephone interviews rather than

face-to-face interviews. In a face-to-face interview, the interchange between the

interviewer and the respondent can be much more relational meaning that better

conversation can occur allowing for more in-depth exchanges. Without the assistance of

facial expressions and body language, much was lost in the interpretation of the

responses. However, the size of the state of Texas precluded the possibility of the

researcher’s driving to all the rural locations. A consideration was made to interview on

site in just the Region XV area; however, that would have made the responses less

generalizable to the entire state. The researcher believed that this limitation was

overcome by the use of the pre-arranged telephone interviews with the randomly selected

participants.

Still another limitation was the number of volunteer participants from which to

select the interviewees. Only 28 of the 143 (19.6%) principals invited to participate in


136

the interview volunteered to do so. The researcher has to take into consideration the

motivation of their volunteering to participate in the interview. Did those volunteer

principals have a bias one way or the other regarding ACP teachers and the induction

processes needed to be in place to help them succeed? That bias was considered as their

responses were analyzed. Also, only 42 of the 214 (19.6%) teachers invited to participate

in the interviews volunteered to submit their names for the random selection. Again, the

researcher weighed the consideration that there was a bias involved in the decision to

volunteer to participate.

Implications for Future Research

This study focused on identifying best practices in the induction of first-year ACP

teachers in rural Texas school districts due to the researcher’s personal involvement as a

supervisor/coach for first-year ACP teachers in Texas’ rural schools. The results include

the identification of effective induction supports identified by a small group of

participants in the quantitative research (n=77) and in the qualitative research (n=25).

Replicating the study with a larger sample could engender the identification of a wider

variety of induction supports. The population could be expanded to include first-year

teachers across the state whether in rural or urban districts. It could also include all first-

year teachers no matter that preparation program they used to train to become educators.

That, too, would increase the identification of even more supports to assist all first-year

teachers to improve their knowledge and skills.

Future researchers could use this research as a beginning of a closer scrutiny of

the impact of induction supports on teachers’ self-efficacy. A researcher could

accomplish this by taking a measurement of the teachers’ level of self-efficacy at the


137

beginning of the year along with the identification of the specific induction supports

experienced during the summer and during first six weeks of the year. The researcher

would then need to take the measurement of the teachers’ self-efficacy at the end of the

year and identify the additional induction supports that had been experienced throughout

the year. Next the researcher would perform a logistic regression on the data collected to

determine the specific induction supports that had an impact on the teachers’ self-

efficacy.

Another approach a future researcher could take would be to determine the effects

of different components of teacher induction on the retention rates of these rural school

educators. The goal could be to prioritize which induction supports provide the best

value in terms of effectiveness. Since the literature identifies that the turnover is greater

among the novice teachers as well as in the smaller, rural districts, this could be a

valuable study when school leaders consider the costly impact teacher attrition has on the

districts’ budgets.

Research demonstrating the value of an effective induction support process on

student achievement could also prove valuable to districts across the state. A

correlational study could determine the impact of various induction supports on student

improvement that could lead to the development of research-based induction program.

Few studies are available that identify the components of a research-based effective

induction program or how the components should be combined to be most effective.

Implications for Practice and Recommendations

Research has demonstrated that induction programs with strong mentoring, a

focus on instruction, and a variety of supports can positively impact self-efficacy and


138

professional growth as an educator (Ingersoll & Smith, 2004; Guarino et. al., 2006;

Silverman & Davis, 2013). Due to the increased demands for improving student

achievement and the correlation of improved teaching effectiveness with professional

development (Newmann, et. al, 2000) which includes effective teacher induction, this

study can impact the practice of rural school leaders whose role is to be the instructional

leaders who must lead teachers in such a manner that increases student learning (Fullan

2002).

However, rural school principals are often beginning administrators challenged by

the many aspects of their job since the smaller districts do not have other administrators

to cover the personnel, transportation, maintenance, food service, safety, discipline, and

attendance issues. The instructional leader’s all-important role in developing teachers to

improve instruction and increase teacher retention is sometimes postponed in light of the

seemingly more pressing issues that demand immediate attention. Therefore, the

Induction Supports Identified as Making a Difference list can be very helpful as the rural

leader addresses the needs of the first-year teachers, especially those trained through an

alternative certification program who have not yet experienced the realities of being the

teacher-of-record. The findings of this study can assist the rural school leaders become

effective instructional leaders of the first-year ACP teachers on their campuses.

The narrative section of the research describing the teachers’ and principals’ ideal

new-teacher induction process can help rural school leaders generate ideas that could be

implemented on their campuses to cause the new-teacher induction process to be more

effective. The narrative does not intend to prescribe an induction process; however, it

might inspire principals to create their own version of an effective induction process.


139

Summary

This research focused on identifying effective induction methods for use in

smaller, rural districts. The study would be just as relevant in the larger districts. No

matter where a new teacher begins his or her career, an effective induction process can

impact the rest of that teacher’s career. The foundation is critical. Whitaker identified

the truth of this concept when he said:

Teaching is the only profession in which there is so little concern for the clients

that we are willing to give new practitioners the most difficult and burdensome

assignment, leave them without teaching materials, close the door and tell them to

sink or swim on their own. (Whitaker, 2000, p. 165).

Educators today have recognized that Whitaker’s description of teacher induction cannot

continue to be an acceptable method of inducting teachers if the profession wants to

retain quality teachers and raise student achievement. Many of the induction supports

valued by the participants in this study described elements of a professional network

including the support of the administrator and staff beyond the assigned mentor. The

new teachers in this study valued the camaraderie that was created when the whole staff

took ownership in inducting the new educators. They found that sense of camaraderie

also within the New Teacher Academies some were fortunate to attend. The networking

made possible through email and other social media including Facebook, Twitter, and

Instagram was also identified as providing a level of cohort support for teachers who

sometimes feel isolated when they are one-of-a-kind on a campus far removed from other

campuses, such as in a rural area.


140

Plato’s belief in the importance of the beginning of a task is well-founded when

considering the value of teacher induction. It cannot be postponed to a later time. The

inherent value in effective teacher induction is found in starting the teacher off with all

the assistance and guidance needed to steer him or her toward excellence. Albert

Einstein supported the idea of the importance of teacher induction when he affirmed the

value of developing the individual, “All that is valuable in human society depends upon

the opportunity for development accorded the individual.” Beginning teachers are

transforming from students into teachers and need affirmation and support to complete

the process.

This study focused on first-year ACP teachers who are working in the rural

classrooms of Texas and the school leaders charged with helping them develop

professionally. The purpose of this study was to identify effective induction supports that

are available to help these school leaders assist their first-year ACP teachers to be

successful in completing their standard certifications. The researcher also wanted to

determine if the teachers’ level of self-efficacy would be affected by the numbers and

types of induction supports offered to these first-year teachers. Although the quantitative

data did not support the correlation, the qualitative responses of those interviewed

affirmed their beliefs that the level of self-efficacy of these first-year teachers was

impacted by the induction supports they received. Finally, the researcher collected both

quantitative and qualitative data to determine whether the level of self-efficacy and the

number and types of induction supports offered were factors in the successful completion

of the standard certifications of these first-year teachers. Again the quantitative data did

not support that the level of self-efficacy and the number and types of induction supports


141

were correlated to the success of the teachers’ obtaining their standard certifications;

however, the qualitative responses in the interviews did affirm the teachers’ and

principals’ beliefs that a correlation existed. Educational researchers have not determined

definitively what constitutes an effective induction process (Ingersoll & Kralik, 2004).

However, this research provides a list of those induction supports actually being used in

the REAP districts across Texas, supports which have been identified by current

educators, teachers and principals, as making a difference for the first-year teachers.


142

REFERENCES

Abell, S., Arbaugh, F., Chval, K., Friedricshen, P., Lannin, J., & Volkmann, M. (2008).

Research on alternative certification: Where do we go from here? Retrieved from

http://www.stemtec.org/act/PAPERS/Sandra%20Abell.doc

Acheson, K. A., & Smith, S. C. (1986). It is time for principals to share the responsibility

for instructional leadership with others. Eugene, OR: Oregon School Study

Council. University of Oregon.

Adelman, N., Michie, J., & Bogart, J. (1986). An exploratory study of teacher alternative

certification and retaining programs. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates.

Retrieved from http://www.catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/4015123

Angus, D. L., & Mirel, J. (Eds.). (2001). Professionalism and the public good: A brief

history of teacher certification. Washington, DC: The Thomas B. Fordham

Foundation. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED449149.pdf

Ashton, P. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A motivational paradigm for effective teacher

education. Journal of Teacher Education, 35, 287–232.

Ballou, D., & Podgursky, M. (1995). Rural schools—fewer highly trained teachers and

special programs, but better learning environment. Rural Development

Perspectives. 10:6–16. Retrieved from

http://naldc.nal.usda.gov/download/IND20532391/pdf.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy. Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.

Psychological Review. 84, 191–215. Retrieved from

http://www.scribd.com/doc/863516


143

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning.

Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.

Barley, Z. A., & Brigham, N. (2008). Preparing teachers to teach in rural schools (Issues

& Answers Report, REL 2008-No. 045). Washington, DC: U.S Department of

Education, Institute for Education Sciences, National Center for Education

Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Education Laboratory Central.

Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs.

Billingsley, B. S., Griffin, C. C., Smith, S. J., Kamman, M., & Israel, M. (2009). A review

of teacher induction in special education: Research, practice, and technology

solutions. (NCIPP doc. No. RS-1). Retrieved from

http://ncipp.org/reports/rs_1.pdf

Bolich, A. M. (2001). Reduce your losses: Help new teachers become veteran teachers.

Southern Regional Education Board. Retrieved from

http://publications.sreb.org/2001/01S05_teacherattrition.pdf

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1991). Leadership and management effectiveness: A multi-

frame multi-sector analysis. Human Resources Management. 30, 509–534.

Branch, G., Hanushek, E., & Rivkin, S. (2013). School leaders matter: Measuring the

impact of effective principals. Educationnext. 13(1). Retrieved from

http://www.educationnext.org/school-leaders-matter

Chaika, G. (2000, January 10). Scrambling for staff: The teacher shortage in rural

schools. Education World. Retrieved from

http://www.educationworld.com/a_admin/admin142.shtml


144

Chalker, D. M. (Ed.). (1999). Leadership for rural schools: Lessons for all educators.

Lancaster, PA: Technomic Publishing.

Cheng, Y. C. (1994). Principals’ leadership as a critical indicator of school performance:

Evidence from multi-levels of primary schools. School Effectiveness and School

Improvement: An International Journal of Research, Policy, and Practice. 5(3),

299–317.

Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. (2011). Chapter 3: Choosing a mixed methods design.

Designing & Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 2nd Ed. Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage Publications, Inc.

Cronin, A. (2015, February 19). Edutopia. Retrieved from www.edutopia.org/social-

media-education-results

Dana Center. (2002). Texas Beginning Educator Support System Evaluation Report for

Year Three, 2001–02. Austin, TX: University of Texas Dana Center. Retrieved

from http://www.utdanacenter.org/downloads/evaluations/txbessyear3.pdf

Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher

Education, 51(3), 155-173. doi: 10.1177/0022487100051003002

Darling-Hammond, L., Berry, B., Haselkorn, D., & Fideler, E. (1999). Teacher

recruitment, selection and induction: Policy influences on the supply and quality

of teachers. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning

profession: Handbook on policy and practice (pp. 183–232). San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.


145

Davis, S. L., Impara, J. C., Launey-Rodolf, R., & Dahlem, K. (2006). Alternatively

certified teachers in Oklahoma: An analysis from multiple perspectives. Paper

presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting,

San Francisco, CA.

Debevoise, W. (1984). Synthesis of research on the principal as instructional leader.

Educational Leadership, 41(6), 14–20.

Dembo, M. H., & Gibson, S. (1985). Teachers’ sense of efficacy: An important factor in

school improvement. The Elementary School Journal, 86, 173-184.

DiPaola, M., & Hoy, W. K. (2005). Organizational properties that foster organizational

citizenship. Journal of School Leadership, 15, 391–410.

Educational Commission of the States. (2005). Two paths to quality teaching:

Implications for policymakers: An ECS staff comparison of the positions of the

National Commission of Teaching and America’s Future and the Thomas B.

Fordham Foundation. Washington, DC: Educational Commission of the States.

Retrieved from http://www.ecs.org/clearninghouse/12/92/1292.htm

Elementary & Secondary Education Act, Title II. (2001). Preparing, training, and

recruiting high quality teachers and principals. Retrieved from

http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg20.html

Elliott, E. M., Isaacs, M. L., & Chugani, C. D. (2010). Promoting self-efficacy in early

career teachers: A principal’s guide for differentiated mentoring and supervision.

Florida Journal of Educational Administration & Policy 4(1), 131-146. Retrieved

from http://education.ufl.edu/fjeap/files/2011/01/FJEAP_2010-

Fall_Winter_Elliott_Isaacs_Chugani_revised5-10-11.pdf


146

Feiman-Nemser, S., & Parker, M. B. (1990). Making subject matter part of the

conversation or helping beginning teachers learn to teach. (Research Report 90).

East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Education, Michigan

State University.

Feistritzer, C. E. (2005). State policy trends for alternative routes to teacher certification:

A moving target. Conference on Alternative Certification: A Forum for

Highlighting Rigorous Research. Washington, DC: National Center for

Educational Information and National Center for Alternative Certification.

Retrieved from www.teach-now.org/CEFState%20Overview%20FINAL4.pdf

Fives, H., & Buehl, M. M. (2010). Examining the factor structure of the teachers’ sense

of efficacy scale. The Journal of Experimental Education, 78, 118–134. doi:

10.1080/00220970903224461. Retrieved from

www.montclair.edu/profilepages/media/1391/user/Fives&Buehl_2010_JXE.pdf

Fry, S. W., & Anderson, H. (2011). Career changers as first-year teachers in rural

schools. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 26(12). Retrieved from

http://jrre.psu.edu/articles/26-12.pdf

Fullan, M. (1993). The complexity of the change process. In change forces: Probing the

depth of educational reform, 19–41. Philadelphia, PA: Falmer Press.

Fullan, M. (2002). The change leader. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 16–21. Retrieved

from www.ascd.org/publications/educational-

leadership/may02/vol59/num08/The-Change-Leader.aspx

Fullan, M. (2003). The moral imperative of school leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA:

Corwin Press.


147

Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership and sustainability: System thinkers in action. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Fullan, M. (2009). The awesome power of the principal. Prepared for the National

Association of Elementary School Principals. Retrieved from

http://www.michaelfullan.ca/media/13435865440.html

Fullan, M., Cuttress, C., & Kilcher, A. (2005). 8 Forces for leaders of change. National

Staff Development Council, 6(4), 54–64. Retrieved from

http://www.michaelfullan.ca/articles/#2005

Fulton, I. K., Yoon, I., & Lee, C. (2005). Induction into learning communities.

Washington: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. Retrieved

from www.jctaf.org/documents/nctaf/NCTAF_induction_Paper_2005.pdf

Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational Research: An introduction.

6th Ed. New York: Longman Publishers.

Garreis, C. R., & Nussbaum-Beach, S. (2007). Electronically mentoring to develop

accomplished professional teachers. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in

Education, 20, 227–246.

Gay, L. R., & Airasian, P. (1996). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and

application. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Gentilucci, J. L., & Muto, C. C. (2007). Principals’ influence on academic achievement:

The student perspective. NASSP Bulletin, 91(3), 219–236. Retrieved from

http://bul.sagepub.com/content/91/3/219.


148

Gersten, R., Keating, T., Yovanoff, P., & Harniss, M. K. (2001). Working in special

education: Factors that enhance special educators’ intent to stay. Exceptional

Children, 67(4), 549–567.

Ghaith, G., & Shaaban, K. (1999). The relationship between perceptions of teaching

concerns, teacher efficacy, and selected teacher characteristics. Teaching and

Teacher Education, 15. 487–496.

Glazerman, S., Isenberg, E., Dolfin, S., Bleeker, M., Johnson, A., Grider, M., & Jacobus,

M. (2010). Impacts of comprehensive teacher induction: Final results from a

randomized controlled study. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education,

Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/upbs/20104027/.

Goddard, R. G., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, W. A. (2000) Collective teacher efficacy: Its

meaning, measure, and impact on student achievement. American Educational

Research Journal, 37, 479–508.

Goldrick, L., Osta, D., Barlin, D., & Burn, J. (2012). Review of state policies on teacher

induction. Policy paper. New Teacher Center. Retrieved from

www.newteachercenter.org/sites/default/files/ntc/main/resources/brf-ntc-policy-

state-teacher-induction.pdf

Graham, S., & Weiner, B. (1996) Theories and principles of motivation. In D. C. Berliner

& R. C. Calfee (Eds.). Handbook of educational psychology. (pp. 63–84). New

York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.


149

Guarino, C. M., Santibanez, L., & Daley, G. A. (2006). Teacher recruitment and

retention: A review of the recent empirical literature. Review of Educational

Research, 76(2), 173–208.

Guyton, E., Fox, M. C., & Sisk, K. A. (1991). Comparison of teaching attitudes, teacher

efficacy, and teacher performance of the first year teachers prepared by alternative

and traditional teacher education programs. Action in Teacher Education, 13(2),

1–9. doi.10.1080/01626620.1991.10462766

Heneman, H. G., Kimball, S., & Milanowski, A. (2006). The Teacher Sense of Efficacy

Scale: Validation Evidence and Behavioral Prediction. Madison, WI: Wisconsin

Center for Education Research. Retrieved from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED496313.pdf

Henson, R. K. (2001). Teacher self-efficacy: Substantive implications and measurement

dilemmas. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the Educational Research

Exchange. College Station, TX. Retrieved from

www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Pajares/EREkeynote.pdf

Howe, E. R. (2006). Exemplary teacher induction: An international review. Educational

Philosophy and Theory, 38(3), 287-297.

Howley, C. (1996). Compounding disadvantage: The effects of school and district size on

student achievement in West Virginia. Journal of Research in Rural Education.

12(1), 25-32.


150

Hoy, A.W. (2000) Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of teaching. Paper

presented at Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association,

New Orleans. Retrieved from http://www.wps.ablongman.com/wps/media/

objects/290/297451/changes%20in%20efficacy.pdf

Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover, teacher shortages, and the organization of

schools. Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of

Washington.

Ingersoll, R. M., & Kralik, J. M. (2004). The impact of mentoring on teacher retention:

What the research says (Research Review). Denver, CO: Educational

Commission of the States.

Ingersoll, R. M., & Smith, T. M. (2003). The wrong solution to the teacher shortage.

Educational Leadership 60(8), 30–33.

Ingersoll, R. M., & Smith, T. M. (2004). Do teacher induction and mentoring matter?

NAASP Bulletin, 88(638), 28–40. Retrieved from

http://repository.upenn.edu/gse_pubs/134

Institute of Educational Leadership (IEL). (2000). Leadership for student learning:

Reinventing the principalship. School Leadership for the 21st Century Initiative:

A Report of the Task Force on the Principalship. Retrieved from

http://www.iel.org/publications/21st/reports/principal/pdf

Institute for Educational Leadership (IEL). (2001). Leadership for student learning:

Redefining the teacher as leader. School leadership for the 21st Century

Initiative: A Report of the Task Force on Teacher Leadership. Retrieved from

http://www.iel.org/publications/21st- Century-School-leaderhsip.html


151

Institute of Educational Sciences (IES). (September 2013). National Center for Education

Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Addressing teacher shortages in

disadvantaged schools: lessons from two institute of education sciences studies.

Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsifo.asp?pubid=NCEE20134015

Jaffe, R., Moir, E., Swanson, E., & Wheeler, G. (2006). Online mentoring and

professional development for new science teachers. In C. Dede (Ed.), Online

teacher professional development. Emerging models and methods (pp. 89–116).

Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Publishing Group.

Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of

mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research. 1(2), 112–133.

doi: 10.1177/1558689806298224

Johnson, B., & Stevens, J. J. (2006). Student achievement and elementary teachers’

perceptions of school climate. Learning Environments Research, 9, 111–122.

Johnson, J., & Strange, M. (2009). Why rural matters 2007: The realities of rural

education growth. The Rural School and Community Trust. Retrieved from

http://www.ruraledu.org/site/apps/s/link.asp?c=beJMIZOCIrH7b=3508815

Johnson, L. S., Goldrick, L., & Lasagna, M. (2010). New teacher excellence: The impact

of state policy on induction program implementation. Santa Cruz, CA: New

Teacher Center. Retrieved from http://www.newteachercenter.org

Labone, E. (2004). Teacher efficacy: Maturing the construct through research in

alternative paradigms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 341–359.


152

Leithwood, K., Louis, K., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). Executive summary:

How leadership influences student learning. University of Minnesota: Center for

Applied Research and Educational Improvement. Retrieved from

www.scribd.com/doc/154664710/How Leadership-Influences-Student-Learning

Ludlow, C. (2010). A study of efficacy and professional development among alternatively

certified teachers in Arizona. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3412336)

Luekens, M. T., Lyter, D. M., & Chandler, K. (2004). Teacher attrition and mobility,

results from the Teacher Follow-Up Survey, 2000—2001. Retrieved from

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2004/2004301.pdf

Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs. (1985). The initial effects of House Bill 72

on Texas Public Schools: The challenges and effectiveness. Policy Research

Report 70. Austin, TX: University of Texas.

Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School leadership that works:

From research to results. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and

Curriculum Development.

Mastropieri, M. A. (2001). Is the glass half full or half empty? Challenges encountered by

first-year special education teachers. The Journal of Special Education, 35(2), 66-

74.

Mazzeo, C. (2003). Improving teaching and learning by improving school leadership.

Issue Brief: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Education

Division, Sept 12, 2003. Retrieved from

www.nga.org/files/live/sites/NGA/files/pdf/091203LEADERSHIP.pdf

http://www.scribd.com/doc/154664710/How


153

McDonald, F. (1980). The problems of beginning teachers: A crisis in training. Study of

induction programs for beginning teachers (Vol. 1). Princeton, NY: Educational

Testing Service.

Mikulecky, M, Shkodriani, G, & Wilner, A. (2004). A growing trend to address the

teacher shortage. Policy Brief: Alternative Certification. Denver, CO: Education

Commission of the States.

Monk, D. H. (2007). Recruiting and retaining high-quality teachers in rural areas. Future

of Children, 17(1), 155–174. Retrieved from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ795884.pdf

National Center for Education Statistics. (2010). Characteristics of traditional public and

public charter schools. Retrieved from

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cla.asp

National Center for Education Statistics. (2014). Bachelor’s degrees conferred by

postsecondary institutions by field of study: Selected years, 1970–1971 through

2012–13. Retrieved from

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d14/tables/dt14_322.10.asp

National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (2003). No dream denied: A

pledge to America’s children. Washington D.C. Retrieved from nctaf.org/wp-

content/uploads/no-dream-denied_summary_report.pdf

National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future & NCTAF State Partners.

(2002). Unraveling the “teacher shortage” problem: Teacher retention is the key.

A Symposium. Retrieved from

www.ncsu.edu/mentorjunction/text_files/teacher_retentionsymposium.pdf


154

Nemser, S. F. (1983). Learning to teacher. In L. S. Shulman & G. Sykes (Eds.),

Handbook of teacher and policy (pp. 150–169). NY: Longman.

Newmann, F., King, B, & Youngs, P. (2000). Professional development that addresses

school capacity: Lessons from urban elementary schools. American Journal of

Education. 108(4), 259–299. Retrieved from

http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/archieve/pdbo/grand-aje411.htm

No Child Left Behind Act, 20 U. S. C.§§6201-6202 (2015).

Orcher, L. T. (2005). Conducting research: Social and behavioral science methods.

Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing.

Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Education

Research. 66, 543–578.

Peng, C.J., Lee, K.L., & Ingersoll, G. M. (2002). An introduction to logistic regression

analysis and reporting. The Journal of Educational Research. 96(1), Retrieved

from bit.csc.isu.edu/~jianhua/emrah.pdf

Podgursky, M. (2006). Is there a qualified teacher shortage? Education Next, 6(2).

Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/qualified-teacher-shortage

Power, D. (2012, January 10). How social media is changing education. Retrieved from

http://sproutsocial.com/insights/social-media-education

Ravitch, D. (2002, March 5). A brief history of teacher professionalism: A speech

presented at White House Conference on Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers.

Retrieved from

www2.ed.gov/admins/tchrqual/learn/preparingteachersconference/ravitch.html


155

Reeves, D. B. (2011). Finding your leadership focus: What matters most for student

results. New York: Teachers College Press.

Reynolds, W. A. (1990) Foreword in A. I. Morey & D. S. Murphy (Eds.), Designing

programs for new teachers. CA: San Diego State University, Far West

Laboratory.

Riordan, K. (2003). Teacher leadership as a strategy for instructional improvement: The

case of the Merck Institute for Science Education. Philadelphia: Consortium for

Policy Research in Education.

Roach, V., & Cohen, B.A. (2002). Moving past the politics: How alternative certification

can promote comprehensive teacher development reforms. Alexandria, VA:

National Association of State Boards of Education.

Robertson, J., & Singleton, J. (2010). Comparison of traditional versus alternative

preparation of special education teachers. Teacher Education and Special

Education, 33(3), 213-224).

Ross, J. A. (1994). Beliefs that make a difference: The origins and impacts of teacher

efficacy. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association for

Curriculum Studies. Retrieved from www.eric.ed.gov/?id=ED379216

Ross, J. A. (1998). The antecedents and consequences of teacher efficacy. In J. Brophy

(Ed.), Advances in research on teaching (Vol. 7, pp. 49–73). Greenwich, CT: JAI

Press.

Roth, D., & Swail, W.S. (2000, November). Certification and Teacher Preparation in the

United States. Pacific Resources for Education and Learning. Retrieved from

www.educationalpolicy.org/pdf/Pre%20certification.pdf


156

Sass, T. R. (2008). Alternative certification and teacher quality. Florida State University.

Tallahassee, FL. Retrieved from

http://www.nctq.org/docs/ABCTE_FFL_teachers.pdf

Sergiovanni, T. J. (1984). Leadership and excellence in schooling. Educational

Leadership, 41(5). 6–13. Retrieved from http://www.sagepub.com/upm-

data/11217_Serg_Article_1.pdf

Silverman, S., & Davis, D. (2012). Teacher efficacy. Retrieved from

http://www.education.com/print/teacher-efficacy/

Sindelar, P. T., & Marks, L. J. (1993). Alternative route training: Implications for

elementary education and special education. Teacher Education and Special

Education 16(2), 146-154

Smith, D. C., Nystrantd, R., Ruch, C., Gideonse, H., & Carlson, K. (1985). Alternative

certification: A position statement of AACTE. Journal of Teacher Education,

36(3), 24.

Smith, T. M., & Ingersoll, R. M. (2004). What are the effects of induction and mentoring

on beginning teacher turnover? American Educational Research Journal, 41(3),

681–714. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3699442

Spillane, J., & Diamond, J. (Eds.). (2007). Distributed leadership in practice. New York:

Teachers College Press.

Spillane, J., Halverson, R, and Diamond, J. (2001). Investigating school leadership

practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 23–28


157

Spillane, J., Halverson, R, and Diamond, J. (2004). Distributed leadership: Toward a

theory of school leadership practice. Retrieved from

www.sesp.northwestern.edu/docs/twdsldrpracticeSPIHALDIA.pdf

State Board of Educator Certification (SBEC). (2013). Texas education educator

preparation programs accreditation statuses for 2011 – 2013. Retrieved from

http://tea.state.tx.us/alternative-schooling

State Board of Educator Certification. (2015). Educator certification online system,

initial educator certificates by educator preparation program for the period

9/1/2014 through 8/31/2015. Retrieved from

https://secure.sbec.state.tx.us/reports/prodrpts/rpt_edu_tchr_prod_counts_lvl.asp?

sid=&beg_date=9/1/2014-8/31/2015

Strong, M. (2005). Teacher induction, mentoring, and retention: A summary of the

research. New Educator, 1(3), 181–198.

Supovitz, J., and Paglinco, S. (2001). Instructional leadership in a standards-based

reform. Consortium for Policy Research in Education, Philadelphia, PA.

Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED463574.

Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part 7, Chapter 229.2. Retrieved from

http://texreg.sos.state.tx.us/public/readtac$ext.TacPage?sl=R&app=9&p_dir=&p_

rloc=&p_ploc=&

Texas Center for Educational Research. (2000). The cost of teacher turnover. Austin, TX:

Texas State Board for Educator Certification. Retrieved from

www.tasb.org/About_TASB/Related_ sites_and-

Affiliated_Entities/TCER_Reports/documents/17_teacher_turnover_full.aspx


158

Texas Education Agency (2010). Discussion of the implementation of Senate Bill (SB)

174, and 19 TAC Chapter 229, accountability system for educator preparation

programs. Retrieved from portals.tea.state.tx.us//DownloadAsset.aspx?id.pdf

Texas Education Agency. (2014). Certified, employed teachers by preparation route


http://tea/texas.gov/workarea/linkit.aspx?Linkidentifier=id&ItemID=2576981830

3&libID=25769818406

Texas Education Agency. (2014). Employment of certified teachers 2009–2013.

Retrieved from

tea.texas.gov/WorkArea/linkit.aspx?Linkidentifier=id&itemID=25769818310&li

bID=25769818413

Texas Education Agency. (2014). One-year attrition by district size 2010–2013.

Retrieved from tea.texas.gov/teacher_attrition_by_district_size_2010-2013.pdf

Texas Education Agency. (2014). Teacher retention 2009–2013. Retrieved from

tea.texas.gov/Reports_and_Data/Educator_Data/Educator_Reports_and_Data/Tea

cher+retention+2009-2013

Texas Education Agency. (2015). Becoming a certified Texas educator through an

alternative certification program. Retrieved from

http://tea.texas.gov/Texas_Educators/Preparation_and_Continuing_Education/Bec

oming_a_Certified_Texas_Educator_through_an_Alternative_Program

Texas Education Agency. (2015). Certified, employed teachers by preparation route


http://tea.texas.gov/index2.aspx?id=5033&menu_id=886&menu_id2=794


159

Texas Education Agency. (2015). Employment of certified teachers 2010–2014.

Retrieved from

tea.texas.gov/Reports_and_Data/Educator_Data/Educator_Reports_and_Data/em

ployment+of+certified+teachers+2010-2014

Texas Legislative Budget Board. (February 2013). Issue brief: Routes to teacher

certification: Educator preparation programs. Retrieved from

www.lbb.state.tx.us/Documents/.../issue.../384_PE_routesteachercert.pdf

Texas Teaching Commission. (2012). Recommendations for the next generation of

teaching policy in Texas. Retrieved fromwww.edtx.org/uploads/general/pdf-

downloads/teaching-commission?Report-Educate Texas_CFT-web.pdf

The New Teachers Project (TNTP). (2015). The mirage: Confronting the hard truth

about our quest for teacher development. Retrieved from

http://tntp.org/assets/documents/TNTP-Mirage_2015.pdf

Thompson, T. M. (2003). Candidates’ perception of training and self-efficacy in

traditional and alternative teacher preparation programs. (Doctoral dissertation)

University of North Texas. Denton, TX. Retrieved from

http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark/67531/metadc4173/m2/1/high_res_d/dissertation.

pdf

Togneri, W., and Anderson, S. (2003). Beyond islands of excellence: What districts can

do to improve instruction and achievement in all schools. A Leadership Brief for

Learning First Alliance. Retrieved from



160

Tozer, S., O’Connell, C., & Burstein, P. (2006). Four perspectives on alternate routes to

teacher certification: Success in high-need schools. Retrieved from

http://www.acifund.org/aci-center/journal/article/four-perspectives-alternative-

routes-teacher-certification

Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, W. A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive

construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805. Retrieved from

http://wps.ablongman.com/wps/media/objects/2347/24041371/Megan_Anita.pdf

Tschannen-Moran, M, Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998) Teacher efficacy: Its

meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202–248.

Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1170754

Tucker, M., & Coddings, J. (Eds.). (2002). The principal challenge: Leading and

managing schools in an era of accountability. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

University of Texas

U. S. Census Bureau. (2010). Geographic terms and concepts – urban and rural.

Retrieved from www.census.gov/geo/reference/gtc/gtx_urbanrural.html

U. S. Department of Education. (May 1991). America 2000: An education strategy.

Sourcebook. Washington D.C. Retrieved from


U. S. Department of Education. (May 1997). Characteristics of small and rural school

districts. Washington, D. C.: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved

from www.nces.ed.gov/pubs97/97529.pdf


161

U. S. Department of Education. (March 2004). No Child Left Behind flexibility: Highly

qualified teacher’s fact sheet. Retrieved from

http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/methods/teachers/hqtflexibility.html

U. S. Department of Education Office of Postsecondary Education. (2014, March).

Teacher shortage areas nationwide listing 1990–1991 through 2014–2015.

Retrieved from www.2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/pol/tsa.pdf

Vogt, W. P. (1999). Dictionary of statistics & methodology: A nontechnical guide for the

Social sciences (2nd. ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Waller, M. (2015, August 2). Data shows diverse students, financial need. San Angelo

Standard Times. p. B1.

Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2004). Balanced leadership: What 30 years

of research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. Aurora,

CO; Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL).

Weiss, E. M. (1999). Perceived workplace conditions and first-year teachers’ morale,

career choice commitment, and planned retention: A secondary analysis.

Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 861–80.

Wechsler, M. E., Caspary, K., Humphrey, D. C., & Matsko, K. K. (2010). Examining the

effects of new teacher induction. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved

from

http://intc.education.illinois.edu/guide/resources/10B,%2010D%20Examining%2

0Effects%20of%20Induction%20April%202010.pdf

Wheatley, K. F. (2005). The case for reconceptualizing teacher efficacy research.

Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 747–766.


162

Whitaker, S. D. (2000). Mentoring beginning special education teachers and the

relationship to attrition. Exceptional Children 66(4). 546-566.

Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2000). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of teaching.

Paper presented at annual meeting of American Educational Research

Association. New Orleans, LA. Retrieved from:

wps.ablongman.com/…/290/297451/changes%20in%20efficacy.pdf

Woolfolk Hoy, A. E., & Hoy, W. K. (2009). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early

years of teaching: A comparison of four measures. Teaching and Teacher

Education, 21(4), 342–356. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2005.01.007a


163

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Superintendent Contact Letter

Dear Rural School Superintendent:

I am Sharron Hubbard, a retired Texas teacher/administrator who is writing a dissertation

that I feel could benefit your rural school district. I am requesting your permission to

conduct research with your first-year ACP teacher(s), ____________, and possibly a

volunteer principal. The topic of my research is the identification of effective induction

supports used across the state’s rural school districts to enable first-year ACP teachers to

be successful in obtaining their full certification. I will share the results of my research

with you once completed.

I have created a questionnaire about induction supports, and I will include a 12-question

self-efficacy survey in the quantitative component of this study. Participating should take

less than 15 minutes of the teacher’s time to complete. In addition, I am inviting any of

the participants to volunteer to have a 15-minute telephone interview with me once the

quantitative data has been analyzed. I will randomly select ten volunteering principals

and fifteen volunteering teachers from across the state to interview.

I am asking for your support for this research. I assure you all responses will remain

anonymous except to the researcher; none will be identifiable of the participant or the

district in the dissertation. If you agree to allow me to contact your first-year ACP

teachers and their principal(s) to invite their voluntary participation, please fill out the

Request for Permission to Conduct Research and return as indicated via return email or

US mail. Thank you so very much.

Sincerely,

Sharron S. Hubbard,

Doctoral Candidate, Texas Tech University


164

Request for Permission to Conduct Research

I________________________________hereby agree to allow the research study

entitled Best Practices for Texas’ Rural Schools to Enable First-Year ACP Teachers

to Build Self-Efficacy and Find Success in Their New Careers in

___________________(district name).

I understand the persons responsible for this study are Dr. Fernando Valle,

professor, and Sharron Hubbard, a doctoral candidate at Texas Tech

University. Sharron Hubbard has explained that the study’s objectives are the

following:

a. to identify effective induction supports used in Texas’ rural districts to help

first-year ACP teachers be successful in completing their certification and

b. to analyze the relationships among the variables of self-efficacy, induction

supports, and the successful completion of educator certification.

I understand that Sharron Hubbard will collect data in the form of a survey and a

demographics/school supports questionnaire from my district’s first-year ACP

teacher(s),__________________. Also, a 15-minute telephone interview may be

conducted with volunteering principals or first-year ACP teachers. Participation in

the survey/questionnaire research and the interviews is voluntary and does not

affect employee status or evaluations of participants or non-participants. I

understand that all research protocols will be consistent with those allowed by our

district and the Texas Tech IRB.

Signature of

Superintendent__________________________________Date______________

Please return by email to [email protected] or by U.S. mail to Sharron

Hubbard, 1015 Sullivan Rd, Junction, TX 76849 Thank you so very much for your

consideration.

https://mail.ttu.edu/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=IZop4CyuShurxX9gIK_8mSWT2SNu7xKyxpsDkEuCOSlbjHD6QafSCG0AYQBpAGwAdABvADoAcwBoAGEAcgByAG8AbgAuAGgAdQBiAGIAYQByAGQAQAB0AHQAdQAuAGUAZAB1AA..&URL=mailto%3asharron.hubbard%40ttu.edu


165

Appendix B: Principal Contact Letter

Dear Rural School Principal:

I am Sharron Hubbard, a retired Texas teacher/administrator writing a dissertation that I

feel can benefit you as an instructional leader. I have received permission from your

superintendent to invite your first-year ACP teacher(s),________, to take a brief,

anonymous survey regarding induction supports. I want to assure you that all responses

will remain anonymous; none will be identifiable of the participant or the district. The

survey is voluntary and takes less than 15 minutes time to complete.

The topic of my research is the identification of effective induction supports used across

the state’s rural school districts to enable first-year ACP teachers to be successful and

obtain their full certification. I have created a questionnaire about the induction supports

that are being used in Texas’s rural school districts. Upon receiving the data, I will

compile a comprehensive list of various induction supports including as much specificity

as possible which I will then share with the districts participating in the research.

In addition to the quantitative data from the surveys, I also plan to conduct telephone

interviews with ten randomly selected volunteer principals and fifteen randomly

selected volunteer first-year teachers about their thoughts on teacher induction. The

phone interviews will take no more than 15 minutes. If you would be willing to

participate, please indicate your willingness by checking YES below and return emailing

this to me. Then if your name is randomly selected on May 24, I will email you to make

arrangements for the interview once the semester is over.

Upon completion of this study, I will share a summary of my findings with your district; I

believe this summary could be useful in the future induction of any first-year Alternative

Certification Program (ACP) or university-trained teachers you employ.

If you have any questions about this study, please feel free to contact me, Sharron

Hubbard, and I will be happy to answer them. You can email [email protected] or

call 325-446-3809. My committee chair is Dr. Fernando Valle; he can be reached

at [email protected] . Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Sharron S. Hubbard

Doctoral Candidate, Texas Tech University

_______ Yes, I am willing to volunteer to participate in a 15-minute phone interview

about teacher induction. If I am randomly selected to participate in the interview, I will

receive an email to arrange a date and time. No details from the interview will be linked

to the participant or school district in the dissertation.

Please return email if you checked YES to [email protected]

https://mail.ttu.edu/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=Lu8CNku0GeRrBsCKKbo7_2MOPQUdvDc0uF9jBAx005QFsZ8xQKfSCG0AYQBpAGwAdABvADoAcwBoAGEAcgByAG8AbgAuAGgAdQBiAGIAYQByAGQAQAB0AHQAdQAuAGUAZAB1AA..&URL=mailto%3asharron.hubbard%40ttu.edu

tel:325-446-3809

https://mail.ttu.edu/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=eXmJud-L1JMv-Fnwo9DctgAM2-BfRiTVnBjX_bPg6lEFsZ8xQKfSCG0AYQBpAGwAdABvADoAZgAuAHYAYQBsAGwAZQBAAHQAdAB1AC4AZQBkAHUA&URL=mailto%3af.valle%40ttu.edu

https://mail.ttu.edu/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=6LCPne34vzvd-BOv7IWkz2AYBwDHJQjEB_batQ_mkgYFsZ8xQKfSCG0AYQBpAGwAdABvADoAcwBoAGEAcgByAG8AbgBoAHUAYgBiAGEAcgBkAEAAdAB0AHUALgBlAGQAdQA.&URL=mailto%3asharronhubbard%40ttu.edu


166

Appendix C: Participant Contact Letter

Dear First-Year ACP Teacher:

I am Sharron Hubbard, a retired teacher. Since retiring, I have been working as a

coach/supervisor for first-year ACP teachers. I have a passion for seeing you succeed in

obtaining your certification; this passion has led me to focus on this related topic for my

dissertation.

Your superintendent has given me permission to invite you to participate in

an anonymous survey. Your responses to this survey will assist me in identifying different

types of supports used with first-year ACP teachers in rural districts across the state of Texas.

You will not benefit personally from taking part in this study; nor will you have any

consequences if you choose not to participate. However, your participation will help in the

understanding of induction supports available to first-year teachers to help them complete

their certification process. I appeal to you as an educational professional to donate less than

15 minutes of your time to complete the survey. The research includes first, a 12-question

survey to measure self-efficacy and second, a questionnaire that will collect demographic

information and a list of the supports offered to you this school year.

Also, if you are willing to participate in a 15-minute phone interview once the data has been

collected and analyzed, please check Yes at the bottom of this letter and return email it to

me. Then, if I randomly select you as one of 10 first-year ACP teachers from across the state

to interview, I will email you to make arrangements for a phone interview.

I want to assure you that you will remain anonymous, and your responses will be

confidential. No information that could identify you or your school district will be

available. If you feel led to volunteer your time to participate in this study, please click on

the blue link below to fill out the Survey and Demographic/School Supports Questionnaire.

All responses are to be submitted by midnight, Saturday, May 16. You may start and stop

during the taking of the survey as long as you are on the same computer or device.

I want to thank you in advance for your assistance by agreeing to participate in this study. I

could not complete this research without the participation of professional educators willing to

share their honest perceptions based on their experiences. Thank you for your time and

consideration of this research project.

Sincerely, Sharron S. Hubbard, Doctoral Candidate, Texas Tech University

By clicking on the link below, you voluntarily agree to participate in this study.

https://educttu.az1.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_eCH1sg2Jo2BC7Zj If you are willing to have a possible phone interview at a later date, please check YES below

and return email this page to me. I would greatly appreciate it.

____YES, I would be willing to participate in a 15-minute phone interview at a later date.

https://mail.ttu.edu/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=VXbIKU5-Tm-Po6RNlNg3wctXcYWi1TVyV95NAZKx67jBiEolQafSCGgAdAB0AHAAcwA6AC8ALwBlAGQAdQBjAHQAdAB1AC4AYQB6ADEALgBxAHUAYQBsAHQAcgBpAGMAcwAuAGMAbwBtAC8AUwBFAC8APwBTAEkARAA9AFMAVgBfAGUAQwBIADEAcwBnADIASgBvADIAQgBDADcAWgBqAA..&URL=https%3a%2f%2feducttu.az1.qualtrics.com%2fSE%2f%3fSID%3dSV_eCH1sg2Jo2BC7Zj


167

More Information

What is the project studying?

The study is called “Best Practices of Texas Rural Schools Leaders to Use to Enable

First-Year Alternative Certification Program Teachers to Build Self-Efficacy and Find

Success in Their New Careers.” The purpose is to identify effective induction supports

that are available to help school leaders assist first-year ACP teachers teaching in rural

school districts across Texas.

What would I do to participate? You will click on the link at the bottom of the

invitation email (above) which will take you directly to the online survey/questionnaire.

If you check Yes to the invitation to participate in a future phone interview, then please

return email the letter to me. You may be randomly selected to discussion your ideas

regarding new teacher induction at a later date. The survey is to be submitted no later

than midnight, Saturday, May 16, 2015.

How will I benefit from participating?

Your participation will allow the researcher to have a greater participation rate that will

lend more validity to the study. A list of all the induction supports identified from across

Texas will be shared with your district's administration for use with future first-year

teachers.

Can I choose not to participate?

Certainly, your participation is voluntary. There will be no consequences for your

choosing not to participate either in completing the survey or participating in a phone

interview.

How long will my participation take?

The survey and questionnaire will take less than 15 minutes. If you choose to participate

in a phone interview, it, too, would take approximately 15 minutes.

How is my privacy being protected?

All responses to the survey and questionnaire, as well as any interview responses, will

remain confidential except to the researcher. No participants will be identifiable by name

or district in the dissertation. Responses will be kept confidential.

Who can I contact if I have any questions regarding this study?

If you have any questions prior to making the decision to participate in this study, please

contact me, Sharron Hubbard, and I will answer any questions you have. You can call me

at 325-446-3809 or email [email protected]. My committee chair is Dr. Fernando

Valle; he can be reached at [email protected] . Questions can also be directed to the

Human Research Protection Program (HRPP), Office of the Vice President for Research,

Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas 79409, 806-742-2064, or [email protected]

https://mail.ttu.edu/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=meeM82SD3IhR_54SR4cuJUvq1R2d-vRca_dNTf59SGLBiEolQafSCG0AYQBpAGwAdABvADoAcwBoAGEAcgByAG8AbgAuAGgAdQBiAGIAYQByAGQAQAB0AHQAdQAuAGUAZAB1AA..&URL=mailto%3asharron.hubbard%40ttu.edu

https://mail.ttu.edu/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=U-zNX4OK5UO5LxZViEBaAo_iJ_5x-CZJfvg8bGRYf9fBiEolQafSCG0AYQBpAGwAdABvADoAZgAuAHYAYQBsAGwAZQBAAHQAdAB1AC4AZQBkAHUA&URL=mailto%3af.valle%40ttu.edu

https://mail.ttu.edu/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=sxDbGTRSkRQPcz91Ca35JYzEd29bkDWbuRs2KvynK3DBiEolQafSCG0AYQBpAGwAdABvADoAaAByAHAAcABAAHQAdAB1AC4AZQBkAHUA&URL=mailto%3ahrpp%40ttu.edu


168

Appendix D: Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (short form)

Developers: Megan Tschannen-Moran, College of William and Mary Anita Woolfolk Hoy,

Ohio State University


169

Appendix E: Demographics and School Supports Questionnaire

Demographic Information of Participant

1. What is your age?

a. 20-29

b. 30-39

c. 40-49

d. 50+

2. What is your gender?

a. female

b. male

3. What is the educational level you have attained?

a. Bachelor’s degree

b. Master’s degree

c. Doctoral degree

4. Is this your first career?

a. yes

b. no

5. If this is not your first career, what did you do prior to working in the field of

education?

a. health care f. construction

b. financial or insurance g. oil industry

c. retail h. management

d. service i. automobile

e. education/childcare j. other ________

6. If you selected other to the previous question, please specify the field in which you

were previously employed. __________

7. What is/are the grade level(s) you are currently teaching. Select all that apply.

a. pre-K – K

b. 1 – 3

c. 4 – 5

d. 6 - 8

e. 9 – 12

8. In what subject area(s) are you teaching? Include all that apply.

a. language arts/English/reading f. special education, bilingual, or ESL

b. math g. physical education/athletics

c. science h. foreign language

d. social studies i. computer science/technology

e. self-contained elementary j. other _________

9. If you selected other to the previous question, please specify subject area(s):

_____________________


170

10. In what subject area(s) are you being certified this year? Select all that apply.

a. English/language arts or reading e. elementary

b. math f. special education, bilingual, or ESL

c. science g. kinesiology

d. social studies h. foreign language

e. technology/computer science i. other___________

11. If you selected other to the previous question, please specify the subject area(s):

______________________

12. What alternative certification program did you use for your ACP training?

a. Texas Teachers

b. ITeach Texas

c. Educational Service Center program

d. university-based program

e. WebCentric

f. other ACP ___________________________

13. If you selected other to the previous question, please specify which ACP program

you used: ______________

14. Were you a resident of the community in which you are teaching prior to getting this

teaching position?

a. yes

b. no

15. Is your principal recommending you for certification? This can occur even if you are

changing school districts or leaving the profession for another job.

a. yes

b. no

16. Is your contract being renewed for the 2015-2016 school year? This can occur even

if you are planning to leave your current school district.

a. yes

b. no

School Supports Questionnaire

17. Please select YES or NO for any of the following induction supports you have been

offered this year. Where there is a blank following the support you received, please

list a specific title(s) or identifier(s) at the end of this section in the text box

provided.

a. Assigned mentor in the same subject area/grade level

b. E-mentor (electronic mentor online)

c. Mentor teacher located in same area of the campus

d. District new-teacher training

e. District professional development

_________________________________

f. Out-of-district professional

development_____________________________

g. Your involvement on a district professional learning team


171

h. Observation by you of another teacher in action

i. Observation made of you by another teacher with discussion afterward

j. Regular meetings with other teachers to share planning

k. Informal help from campus leaders

l. Assistance and support from building-level administrators

m. Assistance and support from district-level administrators

n. Assistance from district consultants and specialists

o. Assistance from ESC consultants and specialists

p. Assistance from ACP coach or supervisor

q. Extra provision of preparation time in schedule

r. Assigned teacher’s aide (part-time or fulltime)

s. Alterations to teaching schedule

t. Online resources_______________________________

u. Books or videos_________________________________

18. Please provide specific details for any in-district professional development you

attended, especially if you feel it was helpful to you as a first-year teacher.

_______________________________________________________________

19. Please provide specific details for any out-of-district professional development you

attended, especially if you feel it was helpful to you as a first-year teacher.

_______________________________________________________________

20. Please provide specific details for any online resources you used that were beneficial

to you this year. Provide website address if possible.

_______________________________________________________________

21. Please provide specific details for any book(s) or video(s) you used that were

beneficial to you this year. Provide specific titles and authors if possible.

_______________________________________________________________

22. List below any other helpful supports you were offered during this school year.

Please be as specific as possible.

_______________________________________________________________


172

Appendix F: Permission to Use Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES)


173

Appendix G: Principal Interview Protocol

Principal:_____________________District _________________Ph.#_________

1. How many first-year teachers are employed on your campus this year?

2. How many of them are ACP-trained first-year teachers?

3. How would you rate the self-efficacy of these first-year ACP teachers and how do

you feel it has changed during the year?

4. In your opinion, was there a significant difference in the level of self-efficacy of

ACP-trained and traditionally-trained first-year teachers? How or why?

5. Please describe your district’s and campus’s procedures for new teacher induction.

6. What specific induction supports have you used that were particularly effective?

Why do you feel they were effective?

7. What induction supports used, if any, do you feel helped increase the first-year

ACP teachers’ self-efficacy?

8. Which induction supports, if any, would you identify as being ineffective with your

new teachers? Why would you consider them ineffective?

9. Are you aware of any other induction supports you would recommend to rural

school principals?

10. How has the induction process used on your campus helped your campus and your

staff?

11. How would you like to change your campus’s induction procedures in the future?

What if there were no constrictions?

If time allows, what differences do you see in rural and non-rural school districts?


174

Appendix H: ACP Teacher Interview Protocol

Teacher______________________________District_______________Ph #___________

1. How many of the teachers on your campus are first-year teachers?

2. How many of them are ACP-trained first-year teachers?

3. How would you rate your level of self-efficacy at the start of this first year of

teaching?

4. Do you feel your level of self-efficacy has changed during the year? In what

way?

5. What do you think is the cause for the change, if any?

6. Describe your campus’s procedure for new teacher induction.

7. How would you rate your campus’s procedure for new teacher induction? Why?

8. What specific induction supports were particularly beneficial to you? What made

these induction supports effective for you?

9. Which of the induction supports, if any, do you feel helped increase your level of

self-efficacy, and what about it proved most beneficial?

10. Which induction supports, if any, would you identify as not being beneficial for

you? Why would you deem them less beneficial?

11. If you could make a recommendation for any change in your district’s or

campus’s induction procedures, what would it be?

12. Was your contract renewed? If not, what could have helped that to happen?


175

Appendix I: Comparison and Contrast of Rural and Urban Districts

Table 9: Information Gathered from 25 Interviews with Principals and Teachers

Rural Schools and Districts Urban Schools and Districts

More staff turnover so work for retention Less staff turnover and many to waiting to replace so the stress for retention not as great

Quirky personality distinct for many rural schools

More traditional and staid personality of the campus

Lower socio-economic so needs to take that into consideration; learn how to teach children of poverty.

In inner city urban schools, poverty plays a role so need training in teaching children of poverty.

New Teacher orientation needs to be tailored to “our” kids’ needs.

One size fits all.

Assigning mentors is difficult because often only one teacher per grade or subject area.

Many possible mentors from which to select

Less money to spend within district on education due to declining enrollment so impacts salaries to be offered teachers.

More money for spending on educational needs including salaries.

Due to lack of manpower (504 coordinator, textbook coordinator, transportation director, HR person, athletics coordinator), there is no one to plan and coordinate new teacher induction.

HR Director charged with organizing and directing the annual New Teacher Academy for the district.

Hard to recruit; after holding a job fair and advertising, received only one applicant to the open position; so limited quality, too.

Many more applicants than jobs available in many districts.

Easier to recruit ACP-trained to rural district as university-trained usually head for the cities where the money is.

Attract more university-trained first-year teachers who get picked by urban districts so fewer of them remain for rural districts.

Facilities are often dated, sometimes even obsolete.

Most of the time the construction keeps up with the times.

Isolation of many rural areas from shopping, family, cultural activities, universities, etc.

Proximity to shopping, family, cultural activities, etc.


176


We like getting the ACP-trained because we can finish “molding them into our image.” We try to “grow our own” by encouraging our teacher’s aides who have college or university diplomas to go the ACP route.

The university school of education and the student teaching experience has molded the university-trained teacher.

Only two teachers/grade level; one or two per subject area in secondary, so teachers feel “on an island”

Many teachers per grade level and subject area

One half-time counselor for the district Multiple counselors on secondary campuses; one per elementary

Can benefit from a New Teacher Academy since each campus’s numbers are usually low; at the ESC, they can combine the new teachers from all the rural districts within the region.

The district can put on its own New Teacher Academy due to the larger numbers of staff hired annually.

Curriculum planning more difficult, especially vertical and horizontal due to lack of numbers within each grade level; little team alignment of new perspectives to be brought to the table.

Aligning curriculum easier since there are some teachers at each level who can contribute.

Administrators wear so many different hats, it is difficult to carve out the time needed to plan and direct a New Teacher Academy; rather have to pay the ESC to do it for the district.

HR Director is in charge of planning and directing an effective New Teacher Academy.

Usually no department chair is in place; “you are it” for accountability and tracking. Same kids over several years so the teacher really gets to know them and identify their gaps in learning

Department chairpersons, curriculum directors, other administrative supports to assist teachers with curriculum planning and alignment

Not enough time to have the focus on instructional leadership with all the other required duties to be covered, including bus driving, concessions, facilities, etc. They can “ride a horse to death” so be careful of over-commitment. Still 24 hours in a day

Other administrators to cover bus, discipline, curriculum development, parent issues, finances, etc. leaves principal time to truly focus on instructional leadership and not have to fill all the other roles needed for operation of the campus.


177


Advantage is that the principal gets to really know each student and his or her family and their “story.” Easier to individualize

Disadvantage is the large numbers of students and families precludes the principal’s getting to know them individually. Harder to individualize to meet their needs; more “one size fits all” approach.

Principal is closer and more involved with the community so knows the citizens personally. The principal is held to a higher standard because everyone knows him or her, and the citizens are watching.

Principal is not known by most of the community so may not be held to as high a standard of conduct or performance.

Teachers are known and respected as individuals who are very involved in the community. The staff becomes like a family and everyone knows everyone else’s business.

Teachers can get “lost in the shuffle” as they are one of many, and the staff might not know them personally to be aware of what’s going on outside the school. Staff is less familial.

Fewer teachers continue with college moving toward obtaining post-baccalaureate degrees due to distance from universities; may be changing due to online college degree programs.

More teachers continue on with their college education due to the promise of more money and advancement for a higher degree as well as the proximity of the university.

More extracurricular duties assigned: class sponsor, cheerleader, sell tickets, etc.

Fewer extracurricular duties placed upon a teacher as there are more teachers available

Finds that the ACP teachers willing to move to isolated area to teach are more altruistic; money is not their motivator. They are the teachers who don’t see teaching as a job; they have a passion for teaching. They tend to pitch in beyond the school day without questioning that practice. It’s not an 8 to 4 job.

Urban school teachers who arrive at bell and leave at ending bell see teaching more as a job; they have many other options to do after the school day is over so not as committed to staying past 4 to pitch in where needed. It is more an 8 to 4 job.

Teachers expected to test to add certifications to cover all the course requirements

Usually one certificate is enough to get hired

Teachers have closer relationships with the students and vice versa. Teacher probably taught siblings; maybe even parents.

Little outside the school day or historical relationship between student and teacher


178


Teachers will have more classroom preparations but the same or fewer planning periods (ex. English teacher has Eng. I, II, & III)

Teachers most often each one subject/one level so a singular preparation with the same or maybe even more preparation time

Less of a gap between students Large numbers of students equal a greater ability gap within a class.

Greater school pride and unity; only one school for the community so engenders unity and pride.

Not as much loyalty to a school; movement within the city means change in the campuses.

Disadvantage is many have no successful role model to follow in family so little motivation to plan for the future; repeat poverty.

Advantage is that there are educated people around them, in their families, and they are often expected to go on to college.

Better communication and relationship building since within walls of the same building; all get to know one another.

Entire staff probably never get to know everyone else on staff; separate buildings, harder to build relationships and communicate.

Technology often way behind; still using Windows 7 and can’t convert; even copier very limited.

High-speed internet; plenty of up-to-date technologies and someone to instruct how to use it.

Texas Tech University, Sharron S. Hubbard, December 2015

Documents

Transcript of Texas Tech University, Sharron S. Hubbard, December 2015