Content Details
ED464039 - Accountability through "Best Practice" Induction Models
- Category
- Executive Agency Publications
- Collection
- Education Reports from ERIC
- SuDoc Class Number
- ED 1.615:
- Date Issued
- January 1, 2002
- Author
- Horn, Patty J.; Sterling, Hillary A.; Subhan, Subi
- Sponsoring Agency
- Department of Education, Washington, DC
- Publication Type
- Information Analyses - - Speeches/Meeting Papers
- Subject
- Accountability, Beginning Teacher Induction, Beginning Teachers, Elementary Secondary Education, Faculty Development, Orientation, Public Schools, Teacher Effectiveness, Teacher Improvement
- Identifiers
- Arizona, California, Connecticut
- Abstract
- This report describes a study on Arizona's beginning teacher induction, examining how induction program elements vary statewide. It also examines three induction models: the California Model, the Connecticut Model, and a model for science teachers in Arizona. In 2000, researchers surveyed 197 traditional public school districts regarding their induction programs. Overall, 137 of the districts had induction programs. The term induction varied enormously in the districts. Only 34 districts addressed new teachers' needs in a systematic, consistent, and ongoing manner. The most common goals for induction programs were teacher success and effectiveness, teacher support and comfort, and policies and procedures. The least reported goals included classroom management and discipline, culture, knowledge of teaching strategies, and student achievement. The most common school orientation topics were policies and procedures, curriculum and standards, and classroom management and discipline, while the least common topics were student achievement, mentoring, expectations of teachers, and a school tour. The most common profe,ssional development activities included curriculum content and standards, teaching strategies, and assessment and evaluation. The least reported categories were social activities, technology, parents, and CLP. The most common forms of follow-up were CLP, teacher evaluations, and observations. Most high intensity induction programs were located in urban areas and large school districts. (Contains 95 references.).