Pedagogical oversights: Age and experience in New Zealand's teacher induction

Journal of Education for Teaching

Volumn 34, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 121-136

  Main, Squirrel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Beginning teacher; Induction; New Zealand

Indexed keywords

EID: 42949177460     PISSN: 02607476     EISSN: 13600540     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02607470801979566     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Achinstein, B. 2001. Building a community of learners and leaders for transformational induction programmes. Paper presented at the American Educational Researchers Association, 10-14 April 2001, in Seattle.
2. Barrett, A. 2005. New teacher test survey, http://www.newteachersurvey. org/testsurvey.taf
3. Battersby, D. 1989. The beginning teacher scheme: An evaluation: Final report. Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand Department of Education.
4. Bubb, S. ed. 2002. Improving induction: Research-based best practice for schools. London: Routledge Falmer.
5. Cameron, M., R. Dingle, and K. Brooking. 2007. Learning to teach: A survey of provisionally registered teachers in Aotearoa New Zealand. Wellington: New Zealand Teachers Council.
6. Canberra Department of Education Science and Training. 2002. An ethic of care: Effective programmes for beginning teachers. Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Education, Science and Training.
7. Chester, M.D., and B.Q. Beaudin. 1996. Efficacy beliefs of new teachers in urban schools. American Educational Research Journal 33, no. 1: 233-57.
8. Fletcher, S., M. Strong, and A. Villar. 2005. An investigation of the effects of variations in mentor-based induction on the performance of students in California. Santa Cruz, CA: New Teacher Center, University of California.
9. Galvin, A., and S. Murray. 2005. Teacher supply key statistics report: May teacher loss rates. Wellington: Ministry of Education.
10. Gill, B. 2004. Collegial partnerships: A report on the 2004-2005 beginning teacher induction programme in New Brunswick. New Brunswick: New Brunswick Centre for Educational Administration.
11. Green, K. 1997. Effects of population type on mail survey response rates and on the efficacy of response enhancers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, March 24-28, 1997 in Chicago, IL.
12. Grudnoff, L., and B. Tuck. 2005. Beginning teaching: Stress, satisfaction and resilience. SET 3: 11-14.
13. Hargreaves, A. 2003. Teaching in the knowledge society: Education in the age of insecurity. New York: Teachers College Press.
14. Ingersoll, R. 2004. Why do high-poverty schools have difficulty staffing their classrooms with qualified teachers? A report prepared for: Renewing our Schools, Securing our Future, a National Task Force on Public Education. Center for American Progress and the Institute for America's Future, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
15. _. 2004 Why teacher induction matters. Consortium for Policy Research in Education and the University of Pennsylvania.
16. Ingvarson, L., E. Kleinhenz, S. Toon Khoo, and J. Wilkinson. 2007. The VIT program for supporting provisionally registered teachers: Evaluation of implementation in 2005. Melbourne: Victorian Institute Of Teaching.
17. Johnson, S.M., S.M. Kardos, D. Kauffman, E. Liu, and M.L. Donaldson. 2004. The support gap: New teachers' experiences in high income and low income schools. Education Policy Analysis Archives 12, no. 61. Retrieved 12 December 2005.
18. Lave, J., and E. Wenger. 1991. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19. Main, S. 2007. Toward a pedagogical framework: New Zealand induction. Journal of In-service Education 33, no. 2: 237-40.
20. McKenzie, P. 2005. Teachers matter: Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers. Paris: OECD.
21. McNally, J. 2002. Developments in teacher induction in Scotland and implications for the role of higher education. Journal of Education for Teaching 28, no. 2: 149-64.
22. Murray, S. 2006. Beginning teachers 2000-2004: Characteristics, employment trends, qualifications and subjects. Wellington: Ministry of Education.
23. Myint Myint, S. 1999. Japanese beginning teachers' perceptions of their preparation and professional development. Journal of Education for Teaching 25, no. 1: 17.
24. Renwick, M. 2001. Support for beginning teachers: Final report. Wellington: Ministry of Education.
25. Rippon, J.H., and M. Martin. 2006. What makes a good induction supporter? Teaching & Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies 22, no. 1: 84-99.
26. Strong, M. 2006. Induction, mentoring and teacher retention: A summary of the research. Santa Cruz, CA: New Teacher Center.
27. Tickle, L. 1994. The induction of new teachers: Reflective professional practice. London and New York: Cassell Educational.
28. _. 2000. Teacher induction: The way ahead. Buckingham: Open University Press.
29. Totterdell, M., S. Bubb, L. Woodroffe, and K. Hanrahan. 2004. The impact of newly qualified teachers (NQT) induction programmes on the enhancement of teacher expertise, professional development, job satisfaction or retention rates: A systematic review of research literature on induction. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Sciences Research Unit, Institute of Education.
30. Villar, A., and M. Strong. 2005. Is mentoring worth the money? A benefit-cost analysis and five-year rate of return of a comprehensive mentoring program for beginning teachers. Santa Cruz, CA: University of California, New Teacher Center.
31. Williams, A., S. Prestage, and J. Bedward. 2001. Individualism to collaboration: The significance of teacher culture to the induction of newly qualified teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching 27, no. 3: 253-67.