lable at ScienceDirect

Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 1592e1597

Contents lists avai

Teaching and Teacher Education

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

Socialization of new teachers: Does induction matter?q

Fadia Nasser-Abu Alhija a,*, Barbara Fresko b

a Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, IsraelbBeit Berl College, Israel

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 20 August 2009Received in revised form2 June 2010Accepted 7 June 2010

Keywords:Beginning teachersTeacher socializationTeacher induction

q An earlier version of this paper was presented at tin Rovaniemi, Finland, July 2009.* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ972 36405889; fax:

E-mail address: fadia@post.tau.ac.il (F. Nasser-Abu

0742-051X/$ e see front matter � 2010 Elsevier Ltd.doi:10.1016/j.tate.2010.06.010

a b s t r a c t

The present paper focuses on new teachers’ satisfaction with their first year of teaching from theperspective of socialization. The relationship between satisfaction with socialization and teacher back-ground, school environment, placement, and induction variables was examined. Data were collected from243 Israeli beginning teachers by means of questionnaire. Results indicated that satisfaction during theinduction year was moderately high. Hierarchical regression analysis showed five significant predictorvariables: ecological support from mentor, help from the principal, assistance from other colleagues,workload, and having already completed teaching training. Support from mentors and school colleagueshad the greatest impact on new teachers’ assimilation.

� 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Teachers’ socialization refers to the process by which theindividual becomes a participating member of the community ofteachers (Zeichner & Gore, 1989). This process is characterized bythe acquisition of knowledge, skills, values, and norms of both theteaching profession and the local school community. In other words,becoming a teacher involves professional development as well asorganizational assimilation (Brunton, 2007). Successful socializationresults in more competent teachers who are committed to remain-ing on the job (e.g., Hudson & Beutel, 2007;Wong, Britton, & Ganser,2005). Research findings indicate that many new teachers leave theprofession after only a few years, many of them because they failedto become sufficiently assimilated (Dewert, Babinski, & Jones, 2003;Johnson, 2004; Wong, 2004). In order to optimize the socializationprocess, induction programs have been widely implemented (e.g.,Feiman-Nemser, Schwille, Carver, & Yusko, 1999; Ingersoll, 2007;Ingersoll & Smith, 2004; Wong, 2004). These programs vary acrosscountries as well as within countries (Howe, 2006; Moskowitz &Stephens, 1997; Wayne, Young, & Fleischman, 2005; Wong et al.,2005). Variation expresses itself in duration, program components,funding sources, operation, target population, intensity, andcomprehensiveness. For example, in Japan, Israel, and many U.S.states and Canadian provinces new teacher induction is one year,obligatory, systematic, and centrally operated, whereas in Hong

he ISATT biannual conference

þ972 49998138.Alhija).

All rights reserved.

Kong SAR, existing programs are neither centrally organized normandated and in Germany and France new teachers participate ininduction programs over a two year period. The differences amongprograms reflect different cultural, social, geopolitical, and economiccontexts. However, all induction programs share a common goal andthat is to provide new teachers with a gradual acculturation into theteaching profession (Howe, 2006; Stoel & Thant, 2002).

The purpose of the present study is to examine the uniquecontribution of an induction program to predicting new teachers’satisfaction with their socialization in the school.

1.1. Factors fostering socialization

According to Achinstein, Ogawa, and Spieglman (2004), researchhas identified three factors that shape the socialization process:teacher background, local context, and state policy environment.Teacher background includes gender, race, and personal histories andcan influence teacher socialization by forming teachers’worldviews,affecting where they chose to work, and influencing their contactwith students. Moreover, teachers’ prior experiences in educationalframeworks are interrelated with their perceptions of teachers andteaching (e.g., Achinstein et al., 2004; Lortie, 1975).

With respect to local context, socialization can be influencedby the professional culture of the school and/or community.New teachers’ professional beliefs, values, and practices can begreatly affected by the instructional andorganizational culture of theprofessional community that they encounter at their workplace.Aspects of local context include school variables and teacher place-ment characteristics. In a recent study of new teachers in Chicago,Wechsler, Caspary, Humphrey and Matsko (2010) have concluded

F. Nasser-Abu Alhija, B. Fresko / Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 1592e1597 1593

that the school context exerts the greatest influence on beginningteachers’ success. Empirical research into the socialization of pre-service teachers has confirmed the importance of the school inteacher socialization. For example, in one study by Su (1992) it wasfound that student teaching, cooperating teachers, school pupils,and school teachers were more influential in shaping the educa-tional beliefs and values of new teachers as compared to the teachertraining curriculum, college faculty, family, and significant others.Another important school variable includes the school environment,which is shaped by principal leadership, an ethos of collaborativepractice, and a supportive milieu that have been shown to facilitateteacher assimilation (e.g., Angelle, 2002; Johnson, 2004; Schonfeld,2001; Su, 1992).

Successful socialization has also been found to be facilitated bysuitable placement of teachers in the school system (e.g., Ingersoll,2003; Liu, 2005). Placement variables, such as in-field teaching,permanent-track positions, and sufficient number of hours inschool, are more likely to promote assimilation by increasing thelikelihood of the new teacher’s involvement in school.

One of the effects of state policy environment on teachers’socialization can be found in state curriculum and instructionalpolicies that mandate how certain subjects are to be taught in theschools (Achinstein et al., 2004). New teachers are prone to adoptsuch instructional policies that specify curricular materials, peda-gogy, and standards. In addition, state policies can deal directlywith how teachers begin their careers and how they assimilate intothe profession and thereby influence socialization. In many placesstate policy manifests itself in induction programs for new teachers.Such policies often determine the length of induction, fundingof induction activities, definition of the target population, andthe implications of participating in induction for licensing newteachers (Moskowitz & Stephens, 1997).

1.2. New teacher induction programs

Induction programs are designed to deal directly with teachersocialization. Teacher induction programs offer assistance, guidance,and support to new teachers. Although the most common compo-nent of inductionprograms ismentoring (Ingersoll, 2007; Ingersoll &Smith, 2004; Wong, 2004), other components include orientation,workshops, distribution ofwrittenmaterials, classroomobservation,and reduced workloads. Implementation of induction activities isoften a joint venture of the school, the regional or national educa-tional authorities, and academic teacher training institutions.

The need for induction programs derives from the difficultiesencountered by new teachers in their transition from being studentsof teaching to teachers of students (e.g., Kelchtermans & Ballet, 2002;Veenman,1984). The inductionphase of becoming a teacher has beendepicted as a complex interaction of personal and situational factorsthrough which new teachers negotiate professional and organiza-tional socialization (Zeichner & Tabachnik, 1985). This phase in theirprofessional development is not just about anxiety, stress, and frus-tration, rather it is an important learning stage inwhich they expandtheir content-specific repertoire of teaching strategies, acquireimportant practical knowledge related to students, curricula, work-place norms, and school policies, test their beliefs and ideas aboutteaching, andmold their professional identity (Feiman-Nemser et al.,1999; Kelchtermans & Ballet, 2002; Wayne et al., 2005).

Although induction programs have become widespread aroundtheworld, their impact on teacher socialization is still not fully clear.Research has tended to concentrate on the impact of induction onteacher retention, as well as on mentoring as a critical element fordeveloping effective instructional skills among new teachers (e.g.,Fletcher & Barret, 2004; Ingersoll & Smith, 2004; Rippon & Martin,2003; Villar & Strong, 2007). Structured, sustained, comprehensive,

and seriously monitored programs have been found to be mosteffective (Wong et al., 2005). Beginning teachers who are givenmultiple supports are less likely to move to other schools and lesslikely to leave teaching (e.g., Johnson, Clift, & Klecka, 2002; Smith &Ingersoll, 2004). Moreover, data exist which show that inductionprograms can contribute to high levels of professional growth (e.g.,Fletcher & Barret, 2004, Kelley, 2004).

The present study, which focuses on the relationship betweennew teachers’ satisfaction with their socialization into the schooland various induction, school context, and personal variables, willadd to this body of knowledge.

2. Research context

The study was part of a comprehensive evaluation study of thenational teacher induction program in Israel. After a 4-year trial ona small scale, the Israeli induction program was gradually intro-duced over a period of several years and, since 2003, successfulcompletion of the one-year program has been a prerequisite forobtaining a permanent teaching license. It was initiated as part ofa general undertaking to increase the professional status of teachersas well as to reduce the “reality shock” of entry into the profession(Israeli Ministry of Education, 1999). The program is financed andoperated by the Israeli Ministry of Educationwith the cooperation ofthe higher education institutions and the public school system.The program was originally intended for new teachers who hadalready completed pre-service training. In practice many educationstudents begin teaching during their last year of training andsimultaneously take part in the induction program.

The three major components of the induction program are 1)individual mentoring by a colleague in the same school, 2) a weeklyor bi-weekly workshop given by a teacher training department atone of the universities or colleges, and 3) formal evaluation ofteaching for formative (professional development) and summative(licensing) purposes. Mentors are required to be veteran teacherswho have experience teaching the same grade levels and subjectstaught by the new teachers. Their task is to familiarize the newteachers with school norms and procedures, help them adapt to theschool culture, assist them with instructional planning and class-room management issues, and provide feedback on their teachingbased on observation of lessons. In theory, the school principal isexpected to assign a suitable mentor to the new teacher. However,many new teachers have to recruit a mentor on their own.

The induction workshops operate as reflective practice groupsaimed at assisting new teachers in analyzing and thinking abouttheir experiences on the job while connecting theory and practice,and at providing themwith a supportive professional environment.Workshop leaders are staff members at a teacher training institu-tion and workshop groups generally number 15 participants.

The third component of the induction program is evaluation.Formative evaluation of new teachers’ performance is required inmid-January, while summative evaluation is conducted towards theend of the school year. This component was not included in thepresent study. The study focused on variables related to mentorshipand the induction workshop, in view of the fact that these compo-nents embody the program’s main support frameworks for the newteachers and are explicitly intended to aid the socialization process.

3. Method

In order to examine the relationships among the research vari-ables a correlational designwas employed, using hierarchical linearregression. The criterion variablewas satisfaction from socializationat school and the predictor variables included personal, schoolcontext, and induction variables.

F. Nasser-Abu Alhija, B. Fresko / Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 1592e15971594

3.1. Participants

Participants in this study were beginning teachers, who wereparticipating in the induction program. Complete datawere obtainedfrom a national sample of 243 new teachers who were randomlyselected from 35 induction workshops.

3.2. Research instrument and variables

Data were collected by means of a questionnaire which includedsix parts that are related to background and teacher training,employment during the first year of teaching, the mentoring expe-rience, the induction workshop, the evaluation process, and theirattitudes towards the induction program and their socialization intothe school. Below is a description of the variables which are relevantto the present analysis.

Satisfaction with socialization, the criterion variable, wasmeasured by asking participants to rate their satisfaction with eightaspects of their school experience during their first year of teachingon a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (low satisfaction) to 5 (high satis-faction). These aspects included satisfaction with teaching, dutiesother than teaching, sense of belonging, support received fromcolleagues, relations with pupils, relations with parents, generalinvolvement at school, and how they were received by schooladministration. Principal axis factor analysis on the satisfactionwithsocialization data yielded one general factor accounting for 45.15% ofthe variance in the data. Internal consistency as measured byCronbach’s a was .86.

The predictor variables were grouped into four categories:personal variables, school variables, mentoring variables, and work-shop variables.

3.2.1. Personal variablesTwo variables were included in this category: gender

(0¼ female and 1¼male) andwhether or not the new teachers hadalready completed teacher training.

3.2.2. School variablesSeven variables were used to obtain information about place-

ment of the new teachers and the school environment in whichthey were employed: school type (elementary/secondary), type ofplacement (permanent/temporary track), job responsibilities(teaching only/teaching and homeroom duties), when began towork (start of the school year/later), workload (as the percentage ofa full-time job), having received help from the school principal, andhaving received help from colleagues at school.

3.2.3. Mentoring variablesParticipants reported how they were assigned a school mentor.

Cases in which the principal selected the mentor were coded 1, andcases in which the new teacher had to find a mentor on his or herownwere coded 0. New teachers were also asked about initiation ofmentoring sessions. Cases in which both they and the mentorequally initiated meetings were coded 1, while cases in which thenew teacher tended to initiate meetings were coded 0. (There wereno instances reported inwhichmentors were the primary initiatorsof mentoring sessions.) In addition, participants were presentedwith 21 items on which they were asked to rate how mentoringcontributed to their professional development on a scale from 1(low contribution) to 5 (high contribution). Principle axis factoranalysis with oblique rotation yielded three factors that corre-sponded to the emotional, pedagogical and ecological domains,accounting for 59.8% of the variance in the data. Cronbach’s a coef-ficients corresponding to the emotional, ecological, and pedagogicaldomainswere .91, .90 and .88, respectively. These 21 items and their

distribution into the three domains are presented in the Appendix.The emotional domain relates to coping, encouragement andmotivation; the pedagogical domain refers directly to the teachingactivity and includes reference to application of instructionalmaterials and methods; and the ecological pertains to adjustmentto the school culture and assistance with non-instructional schooltasks. It should be pointed out that the three domains identifiedhere coincide with Vonk’s three dimensions of novice teachers’professional development (Vonk, 1995).

3.2.4. Induction workshop variablesRespondents were presentedwith the same 21 itemsmentioned

above and asked to rate the contribution of the inductionworkshopto their professional development. The same three factors wereobtained explaining 54.0% of the variance in the data. Cronbach’sa coefficients corresponding to the emotional, ecological, andpedagogical domains were .93, .90 and .88, respectively, and werealmost identical to those obtained in relation to mentor contribu-tion data.

3.3. Procedure

The induction coordinator at each of the teacher training insti-tutions administered the questionnaires to the new teachers in oneof the workshop meetings which took place towards the end ofthe induction year. Questionnaires were completed and returned ina sealed envelope to the coordinator, who forwarded them on tothe researchers.

4. Findings

4.1. Descriptive statistics

Table 1 provides descriptive information about the sample ofnew teachers on each of the research variables. As can be seenfrom the table, teacher satisfaction during the induction year wasmoderately high, with a mean score of 3.81 on a 5-point scale. Withrespect to personal variables, most new teachers were female andhad not yet completed their teacher training.

Two types of variables related to the schools where the newteachers were employed. The first type included variables thatdescribe placement characteristics while the second type referredto school environment as expressed by the treatment the newteachers received from the principal and others in the school.The data in Table 1 show that the new teachers in the sample werealmost equally divided between elementary and secondary schools.Most had received permanent-track positions that involvedteaching only and for the most part they were not working full time(on the average, 60% of a full-time job). Only 70% of the newteachers had begun teaching at the start of the school year inSeptember while the others had been hired as late as December.

Formally, new teachers are assigned a mentor as part of theinductionprogram.However it is reasonable to expect that theywilloften receive assistance from others in the school. In fact, about halfof the new teachers reported receiving help from the school prin-cipal and 75% of them received help from other teachers at schoolbesides their mentor.

Induction variables related to both thementor and the inductionworkshop.

Although, as noted above, the principal is supposed to select anexperienced teacher to mentor the new teacher, in reality 54% ofthe new teachers had to find a mentor on their own. When askedwho tended to initiate mentoring sessions, 40% of the new teachersreported that they tended to initiate mentoring sessions whereasthe others indicated that mentoring sessions were equally initiated

Table 1Description of the research variables (means, standard deviations, frequencies).

Variables Values Mean SD N %

Satisfaction with socializationin first year

3.81 0.76 243

PersonalGender Female 193 79.4

Male 50 20.6Completed teacher

trainingYes 78 32.1No 165 67.9

School (placement & environment)School type Elementary 127 52.3

Secondary 116 47.7Type of placement Permanent track 172 70.8

Temporary 71 29.2Job responsibilities Teaching only 177 72.8

Teachingþ homeroom 66 27.2Workload (% job) 60.5 23.4 243Beginning of work Start of school year 170 70.0

After start of school year 73 30.0Received help

from principalYes 117 48.1No 126 51.9

Received help fromother teachers

Yes 183 75.3No 63 24.7

Induction: mentorMentor selection Principal 111 45.7

New teacher 132 54.3Initiator of

mentoring contactNew teacher 97 39.9Mentor and newteacher equally

146 60.1

Emotional support 2.91 1.01 243Pedagogical support 2.95 1.04 243Ecological support 2.66 1.11 243

Induction: workshopEmotional support 3.19 1.08 243Pedagogical support 2.14 0.94 243Ecological support 2.46 1.10 243

Note. Satisfaction and support scores are on 1e5 scale.

F. Nasser-Abu Alhija, B. Fresko / Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 1592e1597 1595

by the mentors and by themselves. New teachers rated the supportthey received from mentors and workshops as low to moderate.With respect to the mentors’ contribution, pedagogical andemotional support was rated higher than ecological support. Withrespect to the contribution of the induction workshop, ratings ofthe different dimensions were more varied, and emotional supportwas rated highest while pedagogical support was rated lowest.

Table 2Pearson correlation coefficients among research variables.

Variable 1 2 3 4 5

1. Gender e

2. Completed teacher training �.023 e

3. School type .186 .243 e

4. Type of placement .148 .093 .125 e

5. Job responsibilities e.036 .115 e.065 .067 e

6. Beginning of work e.067 e.124 e.069 e.270 e.2197. Workload .126 .167 .114 .127 .4488. Received help from principal .080 .043 .052 .003 .1719. Received help from other teachers e.015 e.076 e.045 e.032 .15710. Mentor selection .024 e.117 e.165 .026 .05311. Initiator of mentoring contact e.001 e.088 e.079 .068 .00712. Mentor’s emotional support .055 �.067 �.077 .048 �.03313. Mentor’s pedagogical support .006 �.025 �.022 .011 �.03914. Mentor’s ecological support .090 �.097 L.136 .120 �.04715. Workshop’s emotional support L.157 �.082 �.103 �.003 �.00116. Workshop’s pedagogical support �.004 �.019 �.025 .040 �.02017. Workshop’s ecological support �.040 �.101 �.093 .097 �.05918. Satisfaction with socialization in first year �.034 .096 �.012 .054 .132

Note: significant correlation coefficients at a¼ .05 are written in bold.

4.2. Prediction of satisfaction

Hierarchical linear regression analysis was performed in orderto determine the extent to which personal, school, mentor, andworkshop variables predicted satisfaction with socialization in thefirst year of teaching. Table 2 presents the correlation matrix for theresearch variables on which the regression analysis was based. Ingeneral, low correlation coefficients were found between satisfac-tion and each of the predictor variables. The highest correlationwasonly .361 between satisfaction and ecological support receivedfrom mentors.

The hierarchical regression results as shown in Table 3 indicatethat 25.2% of the variance in satisfaction scores was accounted forby the predictor variables. Two blocks of variables (school andmentor) contributed significantly (p< .01) to predicting satisfac-tion. Of the two blocks, the mentor variables accounted for a largerproportion of the variance in satisfactionwith socialization (14.4%),as compared to the school variables (9%). Inspection of the regres-sion results per variable revealed that only five variables contrib-uted significantly to predicting the variance in satisfaction: havingalready completed teaching training, workload, receiving help fromthe principal, being aided by other colleagues, and ecologicalsupport from the mentor.

Regression analysis with only these five variables as predictors ofsatisfaction revealed that together they accounted for 22.9% of thevariance. The most important variable for predicting satisfaction wasmentor’s ecological support, with a unique contribution of 13.8%.Workload, help from principal, and help from others at schooltogether accounted for 8.2% of the variance in satisfaction. Havingcompleted teacher training had a very small unique contribution (1%).

5. Discussion

A critical stage in the socialization of teachers occurs when theyhave to make the transition from being a student in a pre-servicetraining program to being a teacher in a classroom of their own. Thistransition has been described using such terms as “reality shock”(Veenman, 1984) or “praxis shock” (Kelchtermans & Ballet, 2002),terms that highlight the emotional reactions of new teacherseverywhere when they confront the realities and responsibilities oftheir job. Findings in this study indicate that, on the whole, the newteachers were moderately-satisfied to highly-satisfied with theirexperiences during the first year of teaching. This finding suggests

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

e

e.281 e

e.164 .077 e

e.062 .016 e.002 e

.084 .018 .208 e.031 e

.039 .030 e.022 .118 .022 e

�.023 �.017 .004 .041 .097 .151 e

.001 �.059 �.021 .030 .055 .178 .752 e

.000 .020 �.034 .001 .189 .220 .797 .635 e

.230 �.051 �.066 .039 .066 �.049 .344 .267 .262 e

.209 .050 �.050 �.066 .132 .000 .312 .294 .281 .705 e

.198 �091 �.011 �.002 .125 �.003 .390 .337 .395 .752 .726 e

�.098 .224 .170 .121 .122 .145 .289 .245 .361 .160 .161 .165

Table 3Results of hierarchical regression analysis of satisfaction with socialization onmentor, workshop, school, and personal variables.

Predictor variables b SE b R2 change

PersonalGender �0.162 0.116 �.087 .010Completed teacher training 0.172 0.100 .106*

School (placement & environment)School type 0.029 0.096 .019 .090**Type of placement �0.034 0.105 �.021Job responsibilities �0.009 0.115 � .006Beginning of work �0.064 0.110 �.039Workload (% job) 0.602 0.225 .186**Received help from principal 0.252 0.093 .166**Received help from other teachers 0.202 0.105 .115*

Induction: mentorEmotional support �0.027 0.088 �.036 .144**Pedagogical support 0.014 0.066 .020Ecological support 0.246 0.071 .359***Mentor selection 0.054 0.096 .035Initiator of mentoring contact 0.109 0.094 .070

Induction: workshopEmotional support 0.068 0.070 .097 .008Pedagogical support 0.029 0.076 .036Ecological support �0.024 0.070 .097

R2 total¼ .252

Note. *p< .05, **p< .01, ***p< .001.

F. Nasser-Abu Alhija, B. Fresko / Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 1592e15971596

that most of them are likely to succeed in the process of socializationof both becoming a teacher and becoming part of the schoolcommunity.

While teacher background and school context can be expected tocontribute to the socialization of new teachers, induction programsare being implementedwith the specific goal of easing entry into theteaching profession and facilitating adjustment to the school culture(e.g., Feiman-Nemser et al., 1999; Ingersoll, 2007; Ingersoll & Smith,2004; Wong, 2004). Unlike the informal support new teachers mayreceive from school staff, induction programs are official and havethe potential of furnishing support also in less supportive schoolenvironments. The question is towhat extent do inductionprogramsactually contribute to the socialization process of new teachers overand beyond the contribution of teacher background and schoolcontext variables.

Looking first at teacher background variables, gender was foundto be unrelated to satisfaction from socialization. However, newteachers who began teaching while still in pre-service trainingreported lower levels of satisfaction from their school experiences. Itis reasonable to assume that these teachers had less time to becomeinvolved in school life. Moreover, as compared to new teacherswho had completed their studies, theywere likely torn between twoidentities, that of student and that of schoolteacher. Since profes-sional socialization involves acquiring an identity, filling two rolesconcurrently seems to be confusing and counter-productive.The results suggest that entry into the teaching profession with theresponsibilities of a full-fledged teacher should preferably bedelayed until formal completion of pre-service training.

Two types of school context variables were included in thisstudy: school environment variables and placement variables. Bothschool environment variables, that is whether or not the principaland teachers had provided support and assistance to the newteachers, accounted for a significant amount of variance in satis-faction with socialization at school. Providing new teachers withhelp and guidance may be indicative of a collaborative schoolenvironment. As Johnson (2004) has pointed out, schools which donot assume that good teaching is an innate talent, purposefully andcontinuously engage new teachers in the culture and practices of

the school. School staffs that show a professional interest in theirnew teachers and help them deal with difficulties encountered inteaching send implicit messages to them that they are not aloneand that their success in teaching is a shared effort. Therefore, it isnot surprising that satisfaction with socialization into the schoolwas found to be positively correlated with the help that newteachers received from principal and colleagues.

The only placement variable significantly related to satisfactionwas the teacher’s workload. A possible explanation of this findingmight be that new teachers with greater workloads spendmore timeat school and have more chance to interact with colleagues, pupils,andparents. Greater time at schoolmaymeangreater involvement inschool life and a greater likelihood of becoming assimilated. Schooltype, job responsibilities, whether the job was permanent track ortemporary, or when they had begun working were placementvariables unrelated to new teachers’ satisfaction with socialization.

The major components of the induction program examined hereincluded mentoring and a reflective practice workshop for newteachers. According to program directives, mentoring was intendedto provide mainly ecological and pedagogical support and work-shop activities were supposed to providemainly emotional support.Results deviated somewhat from these expectations, particularlywith respect to ecological support from both mentors and work-shops which was rated relatively low as compared to the other twodomains.

Hierarchical regression analysis, which included eight inductionvariables as well as all personal and school variables as predictors ofsatisfaction, revealed that ecological support from the inductionmentorwas themost important predictor. Thisfinding togetherwiththe fact thatmentors provide insufficient support in this domain hasimplications for the content of mentoring in an induction program.Not only do mentors have to provide emotional support and peda-gogical guidance, but they also have an important mission to helpnew teachers assimilate in all facets of a specific school culture.As official representatives of the school, their task is to help themnotonly to become good teachers, but also to be active members ofthe school staff and the community of educators. Because of theimportance of mentors to the socialization of new teachers, mentorsshould receive proper training that addresses all aspects of thementorship, including their role as agents of socialization.

Other induction variables, whether related to the mentor or tothe workshop, had no significant contribution to satisfaction withsocialization. The fact that workshop variables had no significantcontribution in this study does not necessarily mean that the work-shop component of the induction program is superfluous. Its contri-bution may be in areas of professional development not examinedhere, such as the development of reflective thinking, linking theoryand practice, and professional sharing with peers. Some support forthis contention can be found in the literature (e.g., Cady, 1998; Wood,2007). Further research is needed in general to examine the differ-ential impact of various induction program components on differentaspects of new teacher professional development and retention in theschool system. Such research can be used as a basis for planning andimplementing effective induction programs for new teachers.

In summary, although school and teacher background factorscontribute to a satisfying socialization experience of new teachers,induction, specifically mentoring, also plays a role. Mentors as keyplayers in induction as well as colleagues of the new teacher, havethe greatest impact on new teachers’ assimilation. Besides providingpedagogical and personal assistance, they have an important role innew teachers’ adjustment to the school culture. Support from theprincipal and other colleagues, as well as more time spent in school,all augment the mentor’s contribution. In conclusion, there isevidence that induction programs can make a difference in terms ofteachers’ socialization.

F. Nasser-Abu Alhija, B. Fresko / Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (2010) 1592e1597 1597

Easing entry into the teaching profession is a concern in mosteducational systems around the world and consequently inductionprograms have proliferated in recent years in an attempt to relievethe reality shock of new teachers. The purpose of the Israeliinduction program, its core components, and duration are highlysimilar to induction programs in other countries. Therefore,although this study was conducted as part of an evaluation ofa national program in one country, it is likely that the findings areapplicable in other settings as well.

Appendix

Items measuring the mentor and workshop contribution to new teachers’professional development and reliabilities by domain.

Items Cronbach’sa mentorcontribution

Cronbach’sa workshopcontribution

Emotional support .91 .93Fostering my confidence as a teacherProviding emotional support when

coping with frustrationCoping with didactic problems

which arise in classCreating a positive

classroom environmentCoping with pupils’ personal problemsCoping with discipline problemsCoping with time managementMotivating me to persist in teachingMotivating pupils to learn

Pedagogical support .88 .88Adapting teaching materials

and methods to pupil’s needsAssessing pupils’ achievementUsing instructional aids

(computers, library, films)Mastering subject matterPreparing instructional materials

(worksheets, games, assignments)that fit learners’ needs

Becoming familiar with curriculum

Ecological support .90 .90Becoming familiar with school

norms and regulationsCommunicating with others in the school

(principal, secretary, school counselor,nurse, maintenance staff)

Becoming part of teamwork in schoolOrganizing activities such as parent

meetings, field trips and class partiesCommunicating with parentsCarrying out additional tasks at school

References

Achinstein, B., Ogawa, R. T., & Spieglman, A. (2004). Are we creating separate andunequal tracks of teachers? The effects of state policy, local conditions, andteacher characteristics on new teacher socialization. American EducationalResearch Journal, 47(3), 557e603.

Angelle, P. S. (2002, April). Socialization experiences of beginning teachers in differ-entially effective schools. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

Brunton, K. (2007, July). Beginning teachers and their reality of teaching: negotiatingthe micro-political world. Paper presented at the bi-annual conference of theInter national Study Association on Teachers and Teaching (ISATT), BrockUniversity, St. Catherines, Canada.

Cady, J. M. (1998). Reflective practice groups in teacher induction: building profes-sional community via experiential knowledge. Education, 118(3), 459e470.

Dewert, M., Babinski, L. M., & Jones, B. D. (2003). Safe passages: providing on-linesupport to beginning teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4), 311e320.

Feiman-Nemser, S., Schwille, S., Carver, C., & Yusko, B. (1999). A conceptual review ofliterature on new teacher induction. Washington, DC: National Partnership forExcellence and Accountability in Teaching.

Fletcher, S. H., & Barret, A. (2004). Developing effective beginning teachers throughmentor-based induction. Mentoring and Tutoring, 12(3), 321e333.

Howe, R. E. (2006). Exemplary teacher induction: an international review. Educa-tional Philosophy and Theory, 38(3), 287e297.

Hudson, S., & Beutel, D. (2007, July). Teacher induction: what is really happening?Paper presented at the Australian Teacher Education Association conference,Wollongong, Australia.

Ingersoll, R. M. (2003). Out-of-field teaching and the limits of teacher policy. Researchreport (R-03-5). Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy,University of Washington.

Ingersoll, R. M. (2007, April). Research on new teachers from a national perspective.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational ResearchAssociation, Chicago, IL.

Ingersoll, R. M., & Smith, T. M. (2004). Do teacher induction and mentoring matter?National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 88(638), 28e40.

Israeli Ministry of Education. (1999). Induction in teaching: Principles, guidelines, anda framework for action. Jerusalem: Author. (in Hebrew).

Johnson, N. L., Clift, R. T., & Klecka, C. L. (2002, August). Novice teacher support project(NTSP): Following program participants. Paper presented to the Association ofTeacher Educators, Williamsburg, VA.

Johnson, S. M. (2004). Finders and keepers: Helping new teachers survive and thrive inour schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kelchtermans, G., & Ballet, K. (2002). The micropolitics of teacher induction:a narrative-biographical study on teacher socialization. Teaching and TeacherEducation, 18, 105e120.

Kelley, L. M. (2004). Why induction matters. Journal of Teacher Education, 55(5),438e448.

Liu, E. (2005, April). Hiring, job satisfaction, and the fit between new teachers and theirschools. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American EducationalResearch Association, Montreal, Canada.

Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Moskowitz, J., & Stephens, M. (1997). From students of teaching to teachers of

students: Teacher induction around the Pacific Rim. Washington, D.C.: U.S.Department of Education.

Rippon, J., & Martin, M. (2003). Supporting induction: relationships count. Men-toring and Tutoring, 11(2), 211e226.

Schonfeld, I. S. (2001). Stress in 1st-yearwomen teachers: the context of social supportand coping. Genetic, Social & General Psychology Monographs, 127(2), 133e168.

Smith, T. M., & Ingersoll, R. M. (2004). What are the effects of induction andmentoring on beginning teacher turnover. American Educational ResearchJournal, 41(3), 681e714.

Stoel, C. F., & Thant, T. (2002). Teachers’ professional lives e A view from nineindustrialized countries. Washington, DC: Council for Basic Education & TheMilken Family Foundation.

Su, J. Z. X. (1992). Sources of influence in pre-service teacher socialization. Journal ofEducation for Teaching, 18(3), 239e258.

Veenman, S. (1984). Perceived problems of beginning teachers. Review of Educa-tional Research, 54(2), 143e178.

Villar, A., & Strong,M. (2007). Ismentoringworth themoney?Abenefitecost analysisandfive year rate of return of a comprehensivementoring program for beginningteachers. ERS Spectrum: Journal of Research and Information, 25(3), 1e17.

Vonk, J. H. C. (1995, April 12e16). Conceptualizing novice teachers’ professionaldevelopment: A base for supervisory interventions. Paper presented at the annualmeeting of the American Education Research Association, Atlanta, Georgia.

Wayne, A., Young, P., & Fleischman, S. (2005). Improving teacher induction.Educational Leadership, 62(8), 76e78.

Wechsler, M. E., Caspary, K., Humphrey, D. C., & Matsko, K. K. (2010). The effects ofnew teacher induction. Menlo Park, CA: U.S. SRI International.

Wong, H. K. (2004). Induction programs that keep new teachers teaching andimproving. National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 88(638),41e58.

Wong, H. K., Britton, T., & Ganser, T. (2005). What the world can teach us about newteacher induction. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(5), 379e384.

Wood, D. R. (2007). Professional learning communities: teachers, knowledge, andknowing. Theory Into Practice, 46(40), 281e290.

Zeichner, K., & Gore, J. (1989). Teacher socialization. In W. R. Houston (Ed.), Hand-book of research on teacher education. New York: Macmillan.

Zeichner, K., & Tabachnik, B. R. (1985). The development of teacher perspectives:social strategies and institutional control in the socialization of beginningteachers. Journal of Education for Teaching, 11(1), 1e25.