by Robert W. Glover and Sue E. Mutchler

In order to gain a qualitative look at existing Texas mentoring programs implemented at the district and school levels, researchers conducted interviews with individuals who hold diverse perspectives of local mentoring activities, including mentor and novice teachers, school administrators, and district staff. As described in the preceding chapter of this report, mentoring programs in three school districts served as case studies for this effort.

This fieldwork provided a richer understanding of how mentoring for beginning teachers occurs in practice. In so doing, the information and ideas offered by thoughtful practitioners during their personal interviews informed the answers to two of SEDL's three research questions. Profiles of the three case study districts, beginning in Chapter 5, add important detail to the data based picture painted in Chapter Three. Together, they answer the first question, "How have schools and districts planned and implemented mentoring programs?" The first-hand experiences of beginning teachers and the school staff who work closely with them bring to life the day-to-day operation of mentoring programs, which SEDL intended to capture through its second research question, "What are characteristics of district or school mentoring programs in the state?" Finally, although the case studies revealed that these three sites are only minimally addressing beginning teachers' needs relative to working with increasingly diverse student populations (the focus of SEDL's third research question), this finding clearly points to implications for the continued development of mentoring programs in the state of Texas.

In total, researchers conducted individual interviews and focus groups with approximately 100 teachers and 40 administrative and instructional staff in 20 schools across the three districts. Teachers were interviewed from all levels of schooling-- elementary schools, middle schools, and high schools--and across numerous academic disciplines and areas of specialization. Among the non-teaching staff, approximately 20 were school administrators, 15 had key roles at the school site in the mentoring program (primarily, instructional specialists or lead mentor contacts), and 6 were central office administrators responsible for district-wide activities associated with beginning teacher mentoring.

After describing the methodology used for the three case studies, this chapter offers a "profile" of the first year teaching experience developed as a result of comparing and contrasting themes that emerged across interviews and field notes. Following this section, each school district is described in terms of the key features of its mentoring program, such as program structure and resources. Finally, a set of cross-cutting findings are presented to highlight four key areas schools and districts might consider carefully as they work to create and implement sound mentoring programs for their beginning teachers.

Methodology

Three school districts with established and active mentoring programs were selected for this field study: In this report these districts are referred to by the following pseudonyms: Urban ISD, County Wide ISD, and Mid-City ISD. Administrators in each of these districts strongly believe in mentoring and in providing professional development to educators. Each of these districts began mentoring programs for beginning teachers in the early 1990s, and staff have taken a persistent interest in developing and improving mentoring for new teachers. Each district also has a highly diverse student population.

Although the districts selected for study provide some geographic distribution and some variety in size, time and resources limited the number to only three districts. The cases, therefore, are not meant to be representative of mentoring activities in the state. The district site selection process is described in detail in the previous chapter. Briefly, researchers considered existing district-level data and mail survey results and then consulted external advisors to identify three districts with diverse student populations that also have established mentoring programs.

Central office staff who administer the mentoring initiatives in each district selected the schools researchers visited. They were not selected randomly. Indeed, since we were seeking established mentoring initiatives, we naturally were referred to schools that appeared to have the most effective mentoring efforts offered in the district.

Site Visit Protocol. Researchers discussed and developed site visit protocols with the cooperation of each selected district or school. School and district personnel also assisted in identifying appropriate interview subjects and in scheduling interviews during site visits.

Data Collection. Data were collected from case sites through individual and/or group interviews and document review. The individuals selected as key respondents varied from site to site and depended on such factors as size and scope of mentoring activities, existence and availability of staff assigned to mentoring program administration, and number of active mentors and beginning teachers. Interview guides were developed to facilitate data collection. Structured, open-ended questions were used as well as formats that yielded quantifiable information such as cost, program activities, duration, and number of mentors and protégés.

Recording and Transcription. Researchers recorded interviews manually and through audio recording. Transcription of audiotapes was performed on selected interviews; however, manual field notes served as the primary data record used for analysis.

Analysis. Researchers used both qualitative methods, such as content analysis, and analysis of quantifiable information to elicit detailed descriptive information on mentoring activities in each of the sites.

Document Collection. Relevant documentation about mentoring policies and activities at each of the case sites was obtained from school and district staff. Documentation was used to clarify information gained from interviews and to corroborate researchers' understanding of local policies and procedures with regard to teacher mentoring.

The most striking impression one receives in interviews with new teachers is the wide variety of individual circumstances, ages, backgrounds, and paths through which they came to teaching. In Texas, the opportunity to enter teaching through alternative certification programs as well as traditional college and university-based programs has broadened the diversity of new teachers' preparation. As a result, there is considerable variety in the extent to which they have had exposure to classroom practice in some form or other prior to their first year as professional teachers.

Perhaps the diversity among new teachers can best be demonstrated by describing a few of the individual teachers researchers interviewed. Names of these teachers have been changed to preserve anonymity.

Linelle graduated from a teacher education program that provides its students three semesters of classroom experience before full-time student teaching. To be certified in early childhood education, she student taught for six weeks in kindergarten followed by another six weeks in second grade. Despite these many experiences in other teachers' classrooms, Linelle is finding management a challenge in her own classroom. She commented, "when you're student teaching, the teacher has it all set up for you."

Jim and Susan are newly married, first year teachers at the same middle school. In addition to teaching eighth grade language arts and mathematics, respectively, they each teach an athletics course and coach. Susan graduated from a major Texas university with certification as an elementary education teacher. As part of her teacher education program, Susan gained classroom experience through observations and student teaching. Jim graduated from the same university with a degree in English. Although he took four or five education courses, which included classroom observations, he decided to graduate without student teaching. As a result, Susan is fully certified, and Jim was hired on an emergency certificate. Next summer he plans to begin work toward full certification via a "deficiency plan" through another university. While still in college, Jim and Susan both gained classroom experience working as substitute teachers in local middle and high schools. Even with their various field experiences, Jim and Susan reported that they are spending an extraordinary amount of time beyond the typical workday and week at school. Their mentors expressed concern that this pace could place them at risk of "burning out."

Roberto has a business undergraduate degree in strategic management. After college graduation, he worked for three years as manager of a discount retail superstore before deciding to enter the teaching field. He received a teachers' license through an Alternative Certification program and is now in his second year of teaching remedial mathematics to 10th graders. Roberto indicated his first teaching year was not a bad experience, saying he was used to working hard and required little assistance from his mentor.

Jane earned a double bachelors degree in biology and elementary education. Next summer, she plans to begin taking course work toward a master's degree in education. Jane did her student teaching in a second grade classroom in the same district that hired her, but just before the school year began she was offered a sixth grade position. With no prior experience with upper elementary students, Jane was feeling the stress of planning lessons with unfamiliar curriculum.

In the midst of this diversity, interviews with first-year teachers, veteran mentor teachers, and school administrators yielded a rather consistent picture of the beginning teacher experience. Three themes emerged as characteristic of how new teachers and their schools grapple with this critical transitional period into the profession.

Theme 1: Overwhelmed

"Overwhelming" was by far the most common term used to describe the experience of the first year of teaching by nearly everyone. New teachers find themselves inundated with unfamiliar responsibilities and overwhelmed by their students, by paperwork, by lesson planning, by the flood of information they suddenly receive about detailed school district and campus procedures, and occasionally by the load of professional development training they are required to take. As one teacher mentor claimed, "survival is your objective the first year." Another explained: "Every day is a new day and you don't know what is ahead of you."

Rachel, a second-year teacher of middle school social studies, acknowledged that her first year was tough. She did not have a classroom, but instead was a "travelling" teacher who taught in other teachers' assigned classrooms during their planning and preparation periods. She reports that her initial reaction to teaching was, "Oh my gosh, I can't possibly do this for the rest of my life! You feel like you are drowning."

Mentors and other teachers in Susan and Jim's school were seeking ways to ease their burden of being overwhelmed during the first few weeks of school. Susan's mentor helped her stock and organize the cart that is her "classroom" as a traveling teacher. Jim receives assistance with lesson planning from both his mentor, who teaches language arts at a different grade level, and the school's instructional specialist, who was a veteran English teacher before she left classroom teaching. Most importantly, colleagues urge Susan and Jim to "take at least one day during the weekend in which you do nothing related to school."

Theme 2: First Things First

The needs driving new teacher concerns and the bulk of mentoring assistance early in the year cluster in two particular areas: classroom management and school procedures. New teachers and mentors interviewed by researchers identified classroom management, including both organization and student discipline, as the most common area of concern. In talking about her struggles with managing a class full of first graders, Linelle said "when I first started, it was like, oh my goodness, how am I going to teach these kids if I can't get them to sit down and be quiet?"

At the other end of the age continuum, Alonda encountered the same challenges in her first-year experience with high school English students: "The content area was no problem--all I really needed to work on was the discipline. Being consistent, like I am with my own child, in the classroom." Now in her fourth year of teaching at the same school, Alonda talked about the perspective she now shares with beginning teachers:

The kids are already set up for me versus you. And that's teenage, that's adolescence. ... [I tell them] We want you to learn. I want you to graduate. I want you to pass. I will hunt you down when you're not in my class. But I say it's because I love you. And I want you to do well and you can't do well if you're not here. So I tell them I'm selfish. I want you for 90 minutes a day and that's what I'm going to have.

Among the educators interviewed, there appears to be consensus that creating the classroom teaching and learning environment is the first step to a successful year. The new teacher must be prepared and comfortable in that environment in order to provide students the structure they need to be confident and secure as learners. There also is general agreement that few beginning teachers, even those who enjoyed the best possible student teaching experience, are prepared to carry out this feat on their own.

The second need that drives new teachers' concerns early in the school year is simply their naivete regarding "the way we do things around here," that is, school and district procedures. They require immediate and frequent support from veteran faculty and staff as they become familiar with district-level policies and with the campus culture and standard procedures. Rachel said her mentor seemed to be very aware of her need for support in this area. During inservice training sessions at the very beginning of school, "We sat together ... [and] she would whisper to me, 'This is important' or 'This is not so important.'" Once school began, Rachel found that her first and last classes were taught in the room directly across from her mentor's classroom, so they saw one another daily. Her mentor was highly organized and tried to answer all her questions as they arose, many concerning administrative procedures and school policies.

Finally, lesson planning can offer significant challenges for teachers with no experience in the subject or grade level. Jane had a mentor who was responsive and genuinely helpful in answering questions about school policies and procedures--telling her where to obtain textbooks and order school supplies and how to fill out attendance reports appropriately. But Jane's sixth grade team did not work together at all on curriculum and instruction. After struggling through the first few weeks, Jane got some help from a most surprising source. One Saturday, while shopping with her husband, they bumped into his third-grade teacher whom he had not seen for several years. In the ensuing conversation, Jane related that she was a new 6th grade teacher and having difficulties. The following Monday, her husband's former teacher contacted the 6th grade team at her own elementary school, and they quickly compiled a stack of lesson plans and curriculum ideas for Jane. They even made for her a copy of a computer disk full of sample 6th grade lesson plans.

Theme 3: A Mentoring Culture

In schools exhibiting a fertile climate of professional development, first-year teachers appear to gain support from teaching colleagues in addition to (or sometimes even instead of) a single, formally assigned mentor. In such situations, much additional informal mentoring and collaboration takes place among instructional-level team members and teachers who teach in the same academic area. Protégés may be mentored also by different teachers according to the particular domains of practice--for example, one colleague may have special skills in classroom management while another is very helpful with lesson planning.

The following examples illustrate the different ways in which schools researchers visited bring their human and other resources to bear on creating a mentoring culture to support new teachers. The school-wide components of each campus approach, as a result, extend the benefits of mentoring to many other members of the faculty. Names of the schools are withheld to preserve anonymity.

School A. In this elementary school, the philosophy and practice of mentoring is integrated into the school's implementation of a district-wide initiative--a comprehensive effort to transform the district into a model district actively engaged in the practices of a "high-performance learning community." Beginning teachers at School A are not assigned individual mentors. Instead, individual veteran teachers are asked to work with one or another new teacher on a particular task or activity, according to their particular expertise or experience in that area.

Two staff specialists, a second source of mentoring support, work with both new and veteran teachers individually and in small groups. The first, a school-based instructional specialist, is considered by the principal a "master mentor teacher" who provides a full array of assistance to any teacher in the form of model teaching, co-teaching, resource acquisition, and more. The second, a literacy specialist who is on campus one day a week, uses a peer coaching approach to provide assistance in the area of literacy, which is a special curriculum focus across the school district. She provides mentoring to individual teachers and also works with groups of teachers through dialogue about instructional strategies and hands-on materials development.

A third source of mentoring for the entire faculty comes in the form of group meetings led by the principal and instructional specialist. Weekly grade level (horizontal) team meetings and subject area-based (vertical) cadre meetings serve as mini-staff development sessions.

School B. In this middle school, all new teachers are assigned an individual mentor. According to the principal, the goal for the relationship is "similar to what we want to achieve in student advisory [arrangements]: to have a person a new teacher feels comfortable coming to with any problem." If at all possible, a beginning teacher is matched with a veteran teacher who teaches the same academic subject. This personal mentor contacts his or her protégé as early as possible in the summer before school, to get acquainted. From the first day of the school year to the last, the mentor provides day-to-day support in key areas of materials acquisition, classroom management, and curriculum and instruction. One of the new teachers this year is a traveler. Although this situation has its drawbacks, her teaching schedule includes a block class (two-periods in length) in her mentor's classroom. As a result, her mentor is potentially available every day during this time (which is her planning and preparation period) to observe or assist the protégé. Another protégé is informally observed two or three times a week during his mentor's conference period.

Scheduling time and allocating classroom space are used in School B to facilitate a second source of mentoring through regular, focused opportunities for other teachers to interact with beginning staff. Classroom assignments are clustered to create grade-level hallways, and grade-level teams have a common lunch period. The grade-level team, which shares most if not all of the same students, also has a common planning and preparation period. In the opinion of this year's new teachers, the grade-level team actually is proving to play a greater role in their support than the academic departments. Overall, the strong team structure facilitates regular interaction between the beginning teacher and veteran faculty and allows for cross-team cooperation on behalf of individual students.

A campus-based instructional specialist is a third source of mentoring support to all new teachers. In addition to coordinating campus participation in any centralized mentoring activities (documentation of mentoring, mentor attendance at the district-provided training session), the campus instructional specialist meets weekly with each new teacher. The content of the meetings varies according to teacher needs, ranging from acquainting them with campus initiatives relevant to their teaching area, to assisting with lesson planning, to providing organizing tips.

Finally, a school-wide faculty study program engages all teachers in reading, discussing, and applying the ideas presented in a current, well-regarded book on education. Discussions take place weekly by teaching team and, once a month, in a whole-faculty meeting. The principal and instructional specialist believe that, in addition to serving as a collaborative professional development strategy, the faculty study program creates a common bond between the mentor and protégé as they study together. Furthermore, the program "sets a climate and tone so that new teachers can approach anyone on the campus" with a question or a problem.

Profiles of Mentoring in the School Districts Studied

The following chart summarizes key features of the mentoring programs in each of the three school districts in which researchers conducted fieldwork. A narrative description of the activities within these districts follows the chart.

Table 5.1 Key Features of Mentoring Programs in Case Study Districts
Program feature	Urban ISD	County Wide ISD	Mid-City ISD
New teacher training	Prior to start of school year, two (2) days new teacher induction, including: orientation to district by district staff information fair work with peers and master teacher at same grade level and/or area of specialization orientation to home campus by campus staff.	Prior to start of school year: One (1) day district orientation. One (1) day at home campus with mentor. During school year: One day of technology training. One-half day of training on the Texas Professional Development and Appraisal System (PDAS) for teachers. Weekly half-hour television series.	Eight (8) day, new teacher induction year program. Prior to start of school year: Four (4) days training, including overview of state and district programs and procedures by district staff and half day on home campus with mentor. During school year: Three (3) days additional training by district staff during first semester. One (1) day observation of a master teacher on home campus or at another school.
Mentor training	All lead mentor teacher contacts receive two (2) days of training. They each then train the mentors on their campus. Training is provided through district educator development office.	Two (2) days of training for lead mentors. Weekly mentor television series.	Four (4) hours training for all mentors every three years. Provided by instructional specialists, mentor training is offered during summer on 15 designated campuses and addresses district- and school-level issues. During "off" years, mentors choose from array of supplemental training sessions (e.g., conflict resolution, resiliency, adult learning).
New teacher compensation	District participates in teacher induction and mentoring program funded through Regional Education Service Center by the TxBESS pilot. District uses these funds for teacher stipends, substitutes, and supplies for the four (4) schools participating in Project TIM.	No special arrangements.	$1500 bonus for new teachers who: begin district service at start of school year and successfully complete induction year program and remain with district through the school year.
Mentor compensation	2000-2001 pilot program provides: $300 for mentoring each protégé, with up to two protégés per mentor allowable. $300 per lead mentor teacher contact.	$250 stipend for mentoring a teacher enrolled in a Texas Alternative Certification Program (ACP).	$450 stipend for mentoring an ACP teacher. $350 stipend for mentoring a non-ACP teacher.
Program materials and other resources	Substitute pay and stipends for mentors and protégés as they participate in model teaching and observation, work together after school hours, and engage in other professional development activities. District-created mentor manual.	Professional development guidebook provided to all mentors. Supplemental resource materials provided to mentors throughout the school year.	District-created mentor manual. District-created protégé manual. Substitute pay for protégé in order to observe master teacher (day 8 of teacher induction program).
Recognition	Left to discretion and initiative of local campus.	Year-end celebration reception.	Convocation at beginning of school year recognizes mentors. End-of-year reception recognizes mentors and protégés.
New teacher assessment	Assessments by master teachers in the 2000-2001 TxBESS pilot project.	Feedback is provided to both new teachers and their mentors. Assessments by master teachers in the 2000-2001 TxBESS pilot project.	Formative assessments (not used in connection with PDAS): Observation at least once each semester by mentor. Reciprocal observation between protégé and mentor once per semester. Walk-throughs and practice observations with feedback by campus-based instructional specialist.
Program evaluation	None at present.	Year-end evaluation survey for both mentors and induction year teachers.	Annual evaluation of all mentoring components by mentors and protégés via focus groups. Written surveys of mentors and protégés, reviewed by a district-wide evaluation committee composed of campus-level and district level staff.
Special staff	Lead mentor teacher contact is designated on each campus. Campus-based instructional or curriculum specialist on over half of the campuses, funded through special programs or at principal’s discretion. This person does not have classroom teaching responsibilities.	Lead mentor contact at each campus.	Campus-based instructional specialist oversees school’s mentoring program (as well as conducts other faculty professional development). This person does not have classroom teaching responsibilities.
Linkages with other entities	Region Education Service Center for mentoring of TxBESS project teachers and ACP teacher mentoring. Faculty of teacher preparation programs at two nearby state universities.	Region Education Service Center. Faculty of teacher preparation program at a nearby state university.	Region Education Service Center and faculty of ACP program at a nearby state university for ACP teacher mentoring.

Urban ISD

Urban ISD is one of the largest urban school districts in Texas. In 1998-99, the district had nearly 80,000 students and more than 100 campuses. At that time, over 60 percent of the student population was of ethnic and language minority background, and half of the students were economically disadvantaged. Urban ISD leaders are in the midst of implementing a number of significant reforms intended to bring district-wide and system-wide cohesiveness to a focus on student learning, high quality instruction, and the concept of "learning community." The booming economy in the metropolitan area is producing an abundance of attractive job opportunities that appear to be luring teachers away from the classroom. In fall of academic year 2000, 800 teachers attended new staff orientation.

Urban ISD presently takes a decentralized approach to mentoring. From its inception in 1993, the Office of Educator Development has guided the district's teacher mentoring initiative. However, the professional development staff has been too small to implement a district-wide system of teacher mentoring. Recognizing the need for participation at the campus level, at the beginning in the 1999-2000 school year, the Director of Educator Development asked all principals at each of the campuses in Urban ISD to designate a lead mentor to serve as a campus liaison to her office. Her office then offered several training sessions for the lead mentors, and distributed selected research papers and articles on mentoring to participants to share on their campuses.

A significant factor that has handicapped Urban district staff in developing a more systematic approach to teacher mentoring has been lack of information. Staff simply has not had the data available on which to base a district-wide program. Most critically, the Office of Educator Development does not know at the beginning of the year how many novice teachers Urban ISD has hired nor in which schools they are located. Accurate numbers are not available until October of each school year. Fortunately, significant improvements in the district's technology systems are underway, and the office expects to be one of the first to benefit from ready access to both teacher and student population statistics.

Urban ISD currently depends on local campus leaders to recognize or reward the effort of mentors. Except for teachers in four schools participating in the TxBESS pilot through the nearby Regional Education Service Center, the district does not yet pay a stipend to its mentors. The district relies heavily on the voluntary efforts of teacher mentors at the campus level. Via a train-the-trainer approach, the Office of Educator Development trains each lead mentor teacher who, in turn, is expected to transfer these skills to all the mentors who work with beginning teachers on his/her campus.

The new Director of Educator Development is moving quickly to begin putting together the diverse pieces of a district-wide approach to teacher development. Nearly 60 of the district's schools have on-campus instructional specialists or other non-teaching staff member who are devoted to teacher support and instructional improvement on that campus. This cadre of educators is actively building capacity for ongoing professional development across the district. The director also is working with her second cohort of teachers preparing for certification by the National Board of Professional Teaching Standards; these 14 join 18 others who are in their second year of development toward certification. Urban ISD pays the examination fee, supports monthly cohort meetings, provides substitute pay, and is beginning to advertise the opportunity more widely through the Office of Teacher Development course catalog.

County Wide ISD covers the entire county, including a mid-size city. In 1998-1999, the school district had an enrollment of over 28,000 students. The student population is approximately 40 percent white and 60 percent ethnic minority, and over half of the students were economically disadvantaged. Historically, the area has been heavily dependent on the oil industry, which has exhibited an unstable employment pattern responding to world oil prices. The city's population in the 1990 census numbered 95,700. It has fallen to an estimated 85,000 since then. As families have moved away to seek their livelihood elsewhere, student enrollment has declined and staff turnover has been larger than average. The city is trying to diversity its economy now; but it is a difficult task. Recruiting teachers to come to the area is often difficult. County Wide ISD has found the most success in targeting their recruitment efforts to folks who have grown up in the region, who left the area to attend college or get a job somewhere else, and want to "return home."

County Wide ISD has been officially trying to organize, encourage, and guide the mentoring of new teachers since 1990 when the present Director of Professional Development assumed her duties. The approach to mentoring new teachers used in County Wide ISD has evolved and improved significantly over time. The first efforts were more of an informal "buddy system." Next, the director tried to place teacher mentoring responsibility on principals, soliciting them to identify mentors. The results were spotty; some principals did an excellent job while others made little effort. In short, results were highly variable in this totally decentralized mode. This phase lasted about two years, when surveys of induction-year teachers revealed that they needed and wanted more help.

Administration of the mentoring program has shifted during various reorganizations of the central district office. Begun in the Office of Professional Development, oversight of teacher mentoring and all other professional development was moved to the Department of Human Resources in 1994. Although an Office of Professional Development was established once again in 1997, mentoring remained the responsibility of Human Resources until fall 1998. At that time, the mentoring program again came under the purview of the Office of Professional Development, where it has remained since.

In 1998, the professional development office placed a staff member in charge of mentoring and she established a network of "lead mentors" at each of its 42 campuses. The principal on each campus was asked to select an individual who would serve as liaison to the district office and who would supervise the novice teacher mentoring function on the campus. Teachers were invited to apply for the job of lead mentor, and the principal was to select the lead mentor from among those who volunteered. District staff held a two-day training session for the lead mentors in 1999-2000.

Several innovations have been piloted in County Wide ISD over the past decade. Some have worked well; others not so well. For example, County Wide ISD has made at least one attempt to engage the participation of a nearby post-secondary educational institution in supporting novice teachers. Since its establishment, this branch of the University of Texas has become a resource for the preparation of teachers. The relationship with County Wide ISD, however, does not seem to have quite "clicked" yet. The novice teacher project, conducted in 1998, was judged as unsuccessful in part because it was based on organizing groups of teachers across schools. Further, it relied on graduate students to convene the groups. The level of effectiveness varied considerably across the groups. Some groups were quite active and successful. Others did not meet at all. Also, a "grow your own teachers" program, begun by County Wide ISD in 1994 to encourage high school students to consider entering the teaching profession, was abandoned in Spring 1999 because a program evaluation revealed insufficient return on the investment the district was making.

In a current innovation, County Wide ISD is participating in a TxBESS pilot project with the Education Service Center in its region, which brings a selected group of retired and experienced teachers into classrooms to observe novice teachers in action. In a debriefing session, the experienced observer provides constructive criticism in a meeting with both the novice and to his/her mentor.

Mid-City ISD is located in the central region of Texas. In 1998-99, the district served over 28,000 students on 43 campuses. The student population is diverse, with the 1998-99 ethnic composition including 60 percent ethnic minority and 40 percent White. About half of the students were economically disadvantaged (51 percent), while only a small proportion (5 percent) was limited English proficient. The community is affected by its relatively mobile population, which brings an influx of teachers and students into and out of the school system.

Mid-City ISD began a formal induction program for teachers new to the district in 1984. The program has evolved over time into its present form as a highly organized program, involving eight (8) full days of training. Four of the training days occur in a block before classes begin each Fall and Spring semester. The training provides new teachers with an introduction to Texas state education requirements and features, including the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS), the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) accountability system, the Professional Development Appraisal System (PDAS). Further, the training provides an overview of the Mid-City District's philosophy, procedures, and current educational initiatives. The training also includes a video introduction Harry Wong's "The First Day of School," a training package especially designed to assist novice teachers to prepare for the first day of class. The training is conducted by a team of experienced instructors and provided for the District as a whole. On the final afternoon of this four-day block of training prior to the start of school, new teachers spend on the campus where they will be teaching and they meet their mentor teachers, who show them around and introduce them to the school. Through this technique, Mid-City's mentoring system is integrated with the induction training program for teachers new to the district.

The new teacher induction year training program includes three additional days of training after classes begin. During the eighth day of the program, new teachers observe a master teacher at another school. Substitute teachers are arranged and paid for by the District Professional Development Office. Upon successful completion of the eight day program, new teachers who remain with the district through the school year earn a $1,500 bonus.

The Mid-City ISD district undertakes other important roles in the mentoring program for new teachers. The district pays all mentors an annual stipend of $350. To qualify for the stipend, mentors must participate each year in a four-hour training for mentors offered by the district and they must fill out and submit a series of paperwork assignments to the District Professional Development office. The required paperwork includes checklists and a brief diary of meetings held with the protégé, summarizing the issues discussed at each. One observation by the mentor of each protégé teaching must be conducted each semester. Written evaluations of mentor training and the mentoring program also must be submitted.

In addition to funding stipends and providing mentor training, the Mid-City school district provides other resources and assistance to promote high quality mentoring. A manual for mentors offers guidance toward establishing a good working relationship with protégés and providing help at critical points during the year. The manual also includes the forms to be completed and submitted to the District Staff Development Office as documentation for mentor stipend payment. Each protégé also is provided a manual, designed with the beginning teacher in mind. When requested, district staff often suggest master teachers on other campuses a protégé can observe. Further, they serve as back-up resource staff to assist mentors with problems or issues that the mentors cannot handle.

The District recognizes its mentors by printing their names in the program for a staff convocation held at the beginning of the year and, in the spring, with a recognition reception for mentors and their protégés. At both of these events, the Superintendent participates and personally thanks mentors for their efforts. The spring reception also includes small, structured focus groups in which mentors are encouraged to provide feedback on the mentoring program and to suggest improvements. The Mid-City ISD mentoring program is in a state of "continuous improvement" based on this and other feedback it receives each year. Participating teachers evaluate all training components. Most important, the district takes action on the basis of the feedback received. The mentoring program and all of its evaluations are reviewed by Professional Development staff and also by a special District Evaluation Committee composed of knowledgeable campus-based individuals, including a new teacher.

An Instructional Specialist on each of the 43 campuses in Mid-City serves as a lead mentor as part of his/her role. The activity level of the Instructional Specialist varies significantly by campus. Some perceive their role as "lead mentor" mainly as an administrative function--collecting and reviewing the required paperwork required of mentors and submitting it to the District Professional office to trigger payment of stipends at the end of the year. Other Instructional Specialists get more involved, providing some of the mentoring themselves, and arranging for meetings with mentors and new teachers, and other activities.

Cross-Cutting Findings

The educators whose voices informed these case studies represent just a small fraction of the many teachers and administrators serving Texas' students. They hail from various parts of the state, work under different cultural and organizational circumstances, and clearly are engaged in their own unique approaches to meeting the needs of first-year teachers. Despite these differences, some generalizations from the experiences they shared with SEDL researchers seem reasonable and appropriate.

First and foremost, individual new teachers have different needs and preferences to which their mentors must adjust. A rigidly uniform approach to mentoring will not suit the needs of all novices. This was clearly illustrated by the testimony of the first experienced mentor we interviewed. She noted that, unlike her protégé last year, who was strongly independent and preferred receiving little assistance, her protégé this year was more "needy."

Second, even in school districts and campuses with good mentoring systems, researchers found new teachers who were "falling through the cracks." Desperate new teachers who do not receive the help they need from their official mentors naturally try to reach out to others. They seek help from fellow teachers teaching the same subjects, from family members who are teachers, and even teachers they meet while shopping at the local grocery store. Fortunately, most fellow teachers usually respond to requests for assistance; after all, teaching is a "helping profession."

There is a need, however, for some form of non-threatening appeal process through non-authority channels for beginning teachers to use to ensure they gain the help and support they need. Many new teachers feel vulnerable and some have difficulty asking for help or admitting their problems to anyone--especially to those in authority or to individuals they do not trust. They think, "I should know this," and fear exposing their weaknesses to fellow teachers and administrators. The task is made easier when mentors model the desired behavior, disclosing their own mistakes and acknowledging weaknesses and vulnerabilities.

The Aims of Mentoring

We did not find total agreement among respondents about the aims of mentoring, but the aims given tend to cluster around a few objectives:

• To ease the transition into the profession for new teachers to improve and encourage their retention in teaching,
• To improve the quality of teachers,
• To foster career development,
• To improve schools.

A few respondents pointed out that the purpose of mentoring did not include making sure all teachers are retained--only good teachers. Some induction-year teachers should leave the profession because teaching is not an appropriate career for them.

In sum, good mentoring can have beneficial effect on improving the retention of new teachers in their jobs; but retaining all teachers--whether good or bad--should not be the primary goal of mentoring. Fostering the development of high quality teachers and effective teaching are more important aims of mentoring.

Roles and Responsibilities

There is no "single best way" to organize or structure the mentoring process; but there may be common principles for achieving success in this endeavor. There are important roles for state, district, and campus-level administrators in fostering good mentoring. Any good mentoring system needs to have a presence at both the district and the campus levels.

Across all three districts and all school levels, teachers and administrators voiced the need to address these "first things first" needs as soon as possible. The first official week of school for teaching staff--typically just a week or so before students arrive--is too late. Beginning teachers need to be assigned and have access to their classrooms well before the date experienced staff arrive. They should have in-hand instructor's versions of the textbooks and other instructional materials required for each of their assigned courses. In addition, selected practical professional development courses might be offered prior to the start of school to give these beginners a head start on their first year.

Finally, during the first few weeks of school, time is especially short for all teachers and the pressures are great. For first-year teachers, as a principal observed, "The most precious resource during this period is time--not funding. If we could figure a way to give new teachers an extra 24 hours each day, it would help more than anything else!"

The Content of Mentoring

The issues most commonly addressed by mentors who work with beginning teachers include:

• Classroom management (including student discipline),
• District and campus procedures (especially important during the first few days of school),
• Emotional support and assurance.

The questions and issues that mentors and protégés most commonly address in their interactions are generally the same across levels of schooling (i.e., elementary, middle school and high school), but the answers differ by level of school.

Special Challenges to Mentoring

From information collected in our interviews with campus personnel, we identified several factors that present special challenges to mentoring. For example, new teachers trained out of state often are unfamiliar with the Texas K-12 student assessment and school accountability system. Other examples of special challenge to mentors and mentoring systems, as well as the new teachers themselves, include:

• being hired late,
• taking over classes in mid-academic year,
• teaching at a school that uses unique or innovative instructional approaches (with which the teacher has little experience or prior preparation),
• teaching in a subject or grade level in which the new teacher had no contact or field preparation,
• being a travelling teacher without one's own classroom or being assigned to an isolated portable classroom, and
• teaching in a school with a high proportion of new teachers.

The Broader Context: Mentoring As Part of a Larger Picture

This research began as a study of one-on-one mentoring arrangements; but it did not take many visits to schools to see that one-on-one mentoring was only a part of the full picture of successful teacher induction and development. Schools with the best mentoring programs do much more than establish official mentors. As an elementary school principal from Urban ISD explained, "We all mentor one another here."

In short, a good environment of mentoring generally involves more than one mentor. New teachers learn from a variety of peers. Good mentoring involves a variety of formal and informal contacts. An important task for the campus principal is building an environment that fosters such interaction and cooperation.

Teacher mentoring thrives in collaborative school environments. Mentoring is especially fostered through effective teaming arrangements, whether by grade level or academic discipline. Other collaborative practices that tend to build an environment that facilitates mentoring include the following:

• Emphasis on building a collaborative school climate from campus leaders. This can take various forms and employ various means.
• A participatory process for hiring new teachers.
• A teacher appraisal system that rewards collaborative activity.
• An accountability system that gives greater emphasis to accountability for teams of teachers than for individual teachers.
• Group study sessions, book clubs, and other devices that promote group professional development and promote active "learning communities" at the campus.