20
Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers Christopher R. Gareis & Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach Received: 24 January 2008 / Accepted: 14 February 2008 / Published online: 18 March 2008 # Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2008 Abstract With nearly half of all new teachers leaving the classroom within 5 years, schools are faced with the challenge of retaining early-career teachers while simultaneously providing them with the support they need to develop into effective professionals. Mentoring novice teachers by pairing them with experienced teachers in schools is a widely adopted practice for addressing these needs; however, face-to- face mentoring is subject to challenges. A promising complement to face-to-face mentoring may be found in the innovative use of computer-mediated communications, such as online forums. In an effort to support, develop, and retain novice teachers, The College of William and Mary has partnered with the Center for Teacher Quality to create ENDAPTElectronically Networking to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers. ENDAPT is an asynchronous online forum that brings together novice teachers and teacher leaders in a virtual mentoring community. This article provides an overview of the program model and presents research findings from a study of participantspostings using content analysis methodology to identify and describe the nature of professional conversations among mentors and novice teachers. Using grounded frameworks for mentoring conversations and for teacher competencies, the study evaluates the efficacy of online mentoring as a means of supporting and developing novice teachers. Keywords Beginning-teacher induction . Computer-mediated communication . E-mentoring: mentors . Online/virtual community . Online mentoring . Collaborative consultation . Professional development . Content analysis J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227246 DOI 10.1007/s11092-008-9060-0 C. R. Gareis (*) The College of William and Mary, P.O. Box 8795, Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795, USA e-mail: [email protected] S. Nussbaum-Beach 995 Levy Loop, Virginia Beach, VA 23454-6962, USA e-mail: [email protected]

Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

Electronically Mentoring to Develop AccomplishedProfessional Teachers

Christopher R. Gareis & Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach

Received: 24 January 2008 /Accepted: 14 February 2008 /Published online: 18 March 2008# Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2008

Abstract With nearly half of all new teachers leaving the classroom within 5 years,schools are faced with the challenge of retaining early-career teachers whilesimultaneously providing them with the support they need to develop into effectiveprofessionals. Mentoring novice teachers by pairing them with experienced teachersin schools is a widely adopted practice for addressing these needs; however, face-to-face mentoring is subject to challenges. A promising complement to face-to-facementoring may be found in the innovative use of computer-mediated communications,such as online forums. In an effort to support, develop, and retain novice teachers, TheCollege of William and Mary has partnered with the Center for Teacher Quality tocreate ENDAPT—Electronically Networking to Develop Accomplished ProfessionalTeachers. ENDAPT is an asynchronous online forum that brings together noviceteachers and teacher leaders in a virtual mentoring community. This article provides anoverview of the program model and presents research findings from a study ofparticipants’ postings using content analysis methodology to identify and describe thenature of professional conversations among mentors and novice teachers. Usinggrounded frameworks for mentoring conversations and for teacher competencies, thestudy evaluates the efficacy of online mentoring as a means of supporting anddeveloping novice teachers.

Keywords Beginning-teacher induction . Computer-mediated communication .

E-mentoring: mentors . Online/virtual community . Online mentoring .

Collaborative consultation . Professional development . Content analysis

J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246DOI 10.1007/s11092-008-9060-0

C. R. Gareis (*)The College of William and Mary, P.O. Box 8795, Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795, USAe-mail: [email protected]

S. Nussbaum-Beach995 Levy Loop, Virginia Beach, VA 23454-6962, USAe-mail: [email protected]

Page 2: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

Matt is a highly qualified novice teacher. He has a bachelor’s degree in biology, andhe aced his content-area Praxis exam. He has a master’s degree in secondary scienceeducation from an NCATE-accredited university, and he is fully licensed to teachsecondary biology. Matt is also warm-hearted, courageous, and has conviction tospare. He is the kind of person policymakers have in mind when they talk aboutattracting “the best and brightest” to teaching.

However, teaching can be particularly tough on its newest members. After justone quarter in the classroom, Matt commented:

The longer I do this (a whopping 11 weeks now!), I’m realizing that to be aneffective teacher, it will takemy all.MyALL! I constantly think about school: whatI’ve done, all that still needs to get done, the handfull [sic] of students that try tomake the classroom miserable, the other handful that are the reason I get out of bed(some kids are in both groups)….I guess my question is: is it always like this?

Less than a semester into teaching and Matt was already questioning his careerchoice. He then went on to describe the physical and emotional toll that tends totypify the experiences of novice teachers.

I love [to] have a job that I am invested in, but I am NOT loving the sacrificesthat my family is having to make so that I can teach (and my wife is a teacher,also!) We rarely see each other, and when we do, one of us needs to blow offsteam so we vent to the other. We are constantly exhausted, constantly stressedto our limits, and feel like we rarely do the things which we used to enjoy doingtogether or separately. I like teaching (I think), but I’m tired of working 12 h aday, 5–6 days a week for questionable results. Jobs that you can walk awayfrom at the end of the day, and not think about until you return the next seemmighty enticing right now….I am honestly not trying to be pessimistic, but whyteach?

On that late November day, when Matt posted his thoughts to an online forum forbeginning teachers, his frustration was evident. Matt’s situation seemed to illustratean all-too-familiar phenomenon in the teaching profession: attrition. Nationally,nearly one-half of all early-career teachers leave the profession within the first5 years (Ingersoll 2001). Matt seemed destined to become part of that number.

Within a couple hours of posting his thoughts to the ENDAPT online forum,however, Matt received the first of eight responses in a thread of conversation thatwas to continue for 2 weeks. The responses ranged in length from a few sentences toseveral paragraphs. Some were philosophical, some were practical, and every onewas personal to Matt, who continued the conversation himself with additionalpostings of his own.

Who had responded to Matt? Several were veteran teachers—teacher leaders inthe field, district and state teachers of the year, National Board certified teachers—allcurrently teaching in their own classrooms far away from Matt’s school. None ofthem had ever met Matt face-to-face, but they knew him nonetheless. There wereother beginning teachers, too. A few of them knew Matt from their teacherpreparation program, but they didn’t teach the same subject or in the same school asMatt. These fellow novices commiserated and also shared their own personalanswers to Matt’s question, “Why teach?”

228 J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246

Page 3: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

It took the remainder of the school year, though, for Matt to answer his ownquestion. On June 1, unprompted, Matt wrote this:

Today it ends. When the bell rang at 11:28 am, the students walked out the doorfor the last time this academic year. Tonight is graduation. Tomorrow is a work-day. Done. And my friends, what a ride it has been. Ask me how it was. Myresponse: I have no clue—I’ll let you know in a week or two.

Regardless, from a deep place inside, thank you all. It was very reassuring toknow that you were available to run to when my world was collapsing. Yourinput has been internalized and has shaped my approaches this year. As I lookforward to reflecting this summer, know that your input and our conversationswill be one of my primary sources for material.

Again, my sincerest thanks.

Mattsecond year teacher

Matt had described himself as having concluded his first year successfully anddubbed himself “second year teacher.” Matt’s supportive experience and his decisionto become a second-year teacher illustrate the aim of an online group-mentoringforum created as part of an initiative called ENDAPT, an acronym for ElectronicallyNetworking to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers. Designed andlaunched in 2005, ENDAPT represents a collaborative partnership between theSchool of Education at The College of William and Mary and the Teacher LeadersNetwork. The project currently provides both online group mentoring and onlineone-to-one mentoring. The aims of both services are the same:

& To improve pre-service teacher preparation& To improve novice teacher induction& To improve teacher effectiveness& To improve teacher retention& To foster teacher leadership among novice and veteran teachers& To improve K-12 student learning.

The excerpts from Matt’s postings come from ENDAPT’s group mentoring forum,which is an online, asynchronous environment that brings together beginning teachersand recognized master teachers from across the country. Matt’s story is compelling,but there is more to it than a first-year teacher who needed encouragement to see hisway through a tough time. A new teacher does not survive on emotional support alone(Ganser 2002). A new teacher also needs to address practical matters, such ascurriculum planning, instructional delivery, and classroom management (Gareis 2005),and to hear about strategies that work for other practitioners (Carroll 2005). A newteacher needs to be asked thought-provoking questions, needs opportunities to askquestions her- or himself (Rudney and Guillaume 2003), and sometimes simply needssome clearly stated advice (Portner 2003).

Such richness in the purpose and content of mentoring conversations shouldcharacterize face-to-face mentoring experiences (Nielson et al. 2006). We hypoth-esized that online mentoring conversations might be characterized by a similar

J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246 229

Page 4: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

richness in purpose and content, if they occurred within a constructive context(Carroll 2005; Klecka et al. 2004; Ensher et al. 2003). The purpose of our study,therefore, was to analyze, identify, and understand the nature of the conversationsamong mentor and novice teachers in an asynchronous, group-based, onlinementoring environment. Through this study we also aimed to evaluate the efficacyof online mentoring as a process variable in improving novice teacher induction andteacher effectiveness.

1 The First-Year Challenge

The first year of teaching is a unique period of a teacher’s career. Unfortunately, forsome teachers the first year of teaching amounts to their entire “career” in theclassroom. Historically, the culture in schools has characterized the first year ofteaching as a “sink or swim” proposition. This challenge is magnified by the fact thatteaching is a profession that uniquely requires novices to perform on the very firstday of employment the exact same responsibilities as the most veteran members ofthe profession (Stansbury and Zimmerman 2000). It is not surprising, then, thatnationally nearly 50% of all new teachers leave the profession within the first 5 years(Ingersoll 2002).

Why do so many new teachers leave the profession so quickly? Reasons cited inresearch about novice teacher attrition include overwhelming workloads, a pervasivesense of professional isolation, and realization that the experience of full-timeteaching is not what novices expected it to be (Abbott 2003). The transition betweenteacher preparation programs and the realities of classroom life can be overwhelming(Ralph 1994). In addition, novice teachers are apt to feel a lack of sufficientprofessional and emotional support (Chubbock et al. 2001; Hammerness 2003).Beginning teachers may also experience fears about how they will be accepted byother teachers, uncertainty about the pacing of lessons, apprehensions about beingevaluated, worries about their own ability to manage student behavior, anddifficulties in meeting the needs of individual learners (Wilson et al. 1997). Facedwith this array of challenges, a novice teacher’s odds of feeling confirmed about andcommitted to his or her career choice can be severely reduced. The result can be theloss to the profession of qualified teachers.

2 Face-to-Face Mentoring

Providing mentoring support to new teachers offers a promising solution to theproblem of teacher attrition (Southern Regional Education Board 2001). Teachermentoring is “an intentional pairing of an inexperienced person with an experiencedpartner to guide and nurture his or her development” (Pitton 2006, p. 1). The goal isto help first-year teachers make the transition from novice to professional, andseveral studies have suggested that mentoring programs can reduce the attrition ofnew teachers (Alvarado 2006; Darling-Hammond 1997; Heider 2005; Ingersoll andKralik 2004). Smith and Ingersoll (2004) found, for instance, that teachers who

230 J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246

Page 5: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

participated in induction programs1 were twice as likely to remain in teachingcompared to teachers who did not participate in such programs.

Mentoring can also promote teacher effectiveness. Successful mentoringexperiences can lead to beginning teachers’ increased contentment with andproficiency in teaching, and, as a result, the professional development of mentorednovices is more noticeable than their non-mentored counterparts (Spuhler and Zetler1994, cited in Thomsen and Gustafson 1997). Mentoring programs that promote theeffectiveness of early-career teachers do so by complementing new teachers’practical experiences with the wisdom and insight provided by veteran teachers.Mentors’ roles include advising and problem-solving, but also questioning, listening,and prompting reflection(Pitton 2006; Portner 2003; Rudney and Guillaume 2003).Novice teachers thereby participate actively in inquiry and critical thinking, thusdeveloping a secure foundation upon which to build their ongoing professionalpractice and development (Berliner 1986; Ralph 1998; Shulman 1987).

High-quality mentor programs fully train mentors for their respective roles, pairnovice teachers with mentors in similar grades and subject areas, and provide releasetime and common planning time for mentors and novices (Center for TeacherQuality 2006). An assumption in this conceptualization is that mentoring alwaysoccurs face-to-face between a novice and a mentor teacher. However, the field’sdeepening understanding of mentoring and the onset of innovations in computer-mediated collaboration and communication are testing this assumption.

3 Online Mentoring

Computer-mediated conversation (CMC) is a term inclusive of other technology-based communication forms such as e-mail, discussion boards, chat rooms, andblogs, all of which have the potential to change the way mentoring support isconceptualized, designed, and offered to beginning teachers (DeWert et al. 2003).Similarly, computer-mediated mentoring is known by a number of different names,including telementoring and e-mentoring (Foster 1999; Zeeb 2000). We have electedto call it online mentoring. By whatever name, using technology-based tools for suchpurposes is not new. For well over a decade, various computer-mediated forumshave been used to connect students, peers, instructors, student teachers, practicingteachers, mentors, and others for differing purposes and in a variety of ways (Bonkand Kim 1998; Ensher et al. 2003).

An attractive characteristic of online mentoring is its potential to overcome someof the limitations of face-to-face mentoring. For example, online mentoring expandstraditional new-teacher support by bringing novice and expert educators together inWeb-based professional learning communities. Trained, online mentors can bedrawn from much larger pools of seasoned teachers than those typically available to

1 Induction refers to comprehensive programs or services intended to address the needs of beginningteachers. Induction programs vary in their particular design, but an essential element of induction is highquality mentoring (Center for Teacher Quality 2006). Over the last twenty years, teacher mentoring hasbecome a prominent form of teacher induction, so much so that the terms mentoring and induction oftenare used interchangeably (Ingersoll and Kralik 2004).

J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246 231

Page 6: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

local schools. Online support can be structured to encourage frequent, focusedinteractions among participants, while “providing for temporal and spatialindependence” (Rourke et al. 2001, p. 10). Using asynchronous formats (i.e., notcommunicating in real-time), virtual environments make it easy for new teachers tocommunicate in both group and private discussion venues (McMullen et al. 1988).Online mentors and novices often develop open, honest relationships due in part tothe fact that the mentor is not a member of the teacher’s immediate school context,creating a perceived sense of anonymity (Levin and Cross 2002). Online mentorsmay also have the advantage of time to develop responses that are more thoughtfuland reflective as opposed to those communicated “on demand” in face-to-facementoring situations (Berry and Nussbaum-Beach 2006). When designed as a groupforum, with multiple new and veteran teachers participating, online mentoring canprovide more opportunities to network with others and to draw on the support andexpertise of a virtual community.

Online mentoring can effectively contribute to the aims of improving teacherperformance and reducing teacher attrition. Networked technology can provide anopportunity for novices to have continued and frequent contact with mentors andeach other, thereby creating a sense of community and shared learning (Bruffee1993). Virtual mentoring can help to combat new teachers’ isolation by means of anetworked community of peers and mentors (Hawkes and Rosmiszowski 2001;Naidu and Olson 1996). Through online collaboration, novice teachers may developstrong professional voices with which to express their views (Jervis 1996), discovernew teaching roles and leadership opportunities (Hammerman 1997), and findinspiration in being members of a collaborative community (Selwyn 2000). Theprocess of articulating thoughts, beliefs, or qualms can help novices closely examinewhat they believe and why (Koschman et al. 1997). Online mentoring, therefore,holds considerable promise as a means of addressing the needs of novice teachers,reducing attrition, and improving teacher effectiveness. The ENDAPT online groupmentoring forum was initiated with just such aims in mind.

4 ENDAPT Online Group Mentoring

The group online mentoring project (hereafter referred to as “ENDAPT”) originatedas part of an instructional technology course for pre-service teachers, taught by anadjunct faculty member at the College of William and Mary who is also a SeniorTeacher Leader Fellow at the Teacher Leaders Network. The original intent was toenable pre-service teachers to interact virtually with recognized teacher leaders fromacross the country, as a complement to their more conventional, face-to-faceinteractions with their cooperating teachers and university professors during earlyfield experiences and student teaching. The potential to extend the online mentoringcommunity into the critical first year of teaching was soon apparent; thus, ENDAPTwas developed.

The online group mentoring pilot program for novice teachers, which is the focusof the present study, took place over a 10-month period that coincided with theacademic school year. In September, ENDAPT staffers recruited participants,conducted online orientations to the virtual environment, and trained mentors.

232 J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246

Page 7: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

Novice teachers were recruited from 80 recent graduates of an initial teacherpreparation program. A letter explaining the project goals was sent in both hard copyand electronic forms; however, difficulties with forwarding addresses resulted innearly half of the invitations being undeliverable. A total of 13 novice teachers(roughly one-third of those successfully contacted) joined the forum, five of whomtaught elementary, two taught middle school, and four taught high school. Theremaining two participants were first-year reading specialists. Eleven of these 13beginning teachers were teaching in Virginia (the state in which they completed theirteacher preparation program), one was teaching in Florida, and one in Arizona. Tenof the teachers were female and three were male; all of the teachers were Caucasian.Novice teachers were oriented to the online forum and encouraged to participate asfrequently and in whatever way felt most useful to them. Novice teachers who hadelected to join the ENDAPT forum were not compelled or required to participate inany way, although they were offered a nominal $25 honorarium intended to offsetany incidental expenses of participating. The intent of the ENDAPT model is toappeal to intrinsic rather than extrinsic motivations for participation (Klecka et al.2004); therefore, the frequency of participation was, ultimately, the decision of thenovice teachers.

Eleven veteran teachers—selected from a national group of accomplishedprofessional teachers—served as the online mentors. Six were elementary teachers,three were middle school teachers, and two were high school teachers. At the time,the mentors taught in seven different states, including Alabama, California, Florida,Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, and Virginia. They ranged in teachingexperience from 5 to 31 years, with an average of 20 years experience in theprofession. All but one of the mentors were National Board certified. Among thementors were Teachers of the Year at the school, district, state, and national levels; aDanforth fellow; officers of state professional associations; members of state andnational education commissions; department chairs; team and grade-level leaders;and award recipients from a variety of professional associations. All of the mentorswere practicing classroom teachers. The use of current classroom teachers who arerecognized for their professional excellence and their teacher leadership is central tothe conceptual framework of the ENDAPT group mentoring forum.

Mentor training for the project focused primarily on clarifying the intended aimsof mentoring (i.e., reducing attrition and improving teacher effectiveness), explain-ing the logistics of using the online forum (e.g., how to log in and how to postcomments), and providing general guidance for effectively communicating in anonline group forum (e.g., posting regularly, limiting the length of posts, and keepinglocal contexts of the novices in mind). The training provided by ENDAPT focusedon these topics and complemented the mentors’ previous training and experiences.Specifically, all of the mentors had previously served as face-to-face mentors in theirlocalities, through which most had been trained as mentors, and all had previouslytrained and served as participants in online collaborative environments.

The conceptual framework of mentoring that guides the ENDAPT online groupforum posits that mentors can serve novice teachers by providing (1) vocationalsupport that directly enhances or contributes to beginning teachers’ professionalpractice, (2) psychosocial support that fulfills affective, inter-relational, andmotivational needs of novices, and (3) role modeling, through which professional

J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246 233

Page 8: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

practice can be both explicitly and implicitly demonstrated by veteran teachers andpotentially emulated by novices (Ensher et al. 2003). In addition, the ENDAPTconceptual model of mentoring holds that mentoring is an ongoing process, duringwhich supportive, trusting professional relationships are simultaneously constructed,reinforced, and relied upon through reciprocal causation. Mentor teachers can servenovice teachers as coaches, counselors, friends, and fellow learners (Ensher et al.2003; Pitton 2006; Portner 2003; Rudney and Guillaume 2003). Further, theENDAPT forum is premised on the viability of group mentoring as eithercomplementary to (Nielson et al. 2006) or an alternative to (Ensher et al. 2003)face-to-face mentoring. Given the fact that novices may or may not have face-to-facementors provided to them during their first year teaching, the ENDAPT conceptualmodel of online group mentoring allowed for either possibility.

The online mentorship project took place in a customized group mentoringenvironment constructed in a virtual learning community called Tapped In (http://www.tappedin.org). Inside the virtual “room” core discussions took place in acommon area, among all mentors and novice teachers, in an asynchronous manner.The discussions were facilitated by one of the researchers, who also served as thevirtual community organizer. The conceptual model of the ENDAPT online groupmentoring forum places the facilitator at the center of the organization of thecommunity. However, ENDAPT is designed such that the interactivity occurs amongthe novice teachers and veterans, with the facilitator helping to establish sharednorms among the community and prompting interaction (Nussbaum-Beach 2007),but not serving as another mentoring voice. It was her role, for example, to stimulatediscussion when needed through posting various threads related to the needs ofbeginning teachers or drawing from an idea or experience raised by a participant.She occasionally provided direction to mentors, redirected messages, and created anawareness of unanswered posts. Recognizing the need for the online forum to besupportive and constructive, the forum facilitator was prepared to moderate amongparticipants should the tone of online conversations become negative (Klecka et al.2004), but no such instances occurred. Over the course of the project, theparticipants (both mentors and novices) continued to respond to the facilitator’soccasional prompts, but they also created their own threads. As the projectprogressed, mentors and novices initiated most topics of discussion. The onlineforum opened in late September and concluded in early June of the same schoolyear. This article reports on results from the first year of the project.

5 Purpose and Design of the Study

The purpose of our study was to identify, analyze, and describe the nature ofprofessional conversations among mentor and novice teachers in an asynchronous,group-based, online mentoring environment. To that end, we pursued the followingthree foci and respective research questions:

& Direction: What is the direction and frequency of the posts among mentor andnovice teachers?

& Function: What is the function (i.e., purpose) and frequency of the posts amongmentor and novice teachers?

234 J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246

Page 9: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

& Content: What is the content (i.e., topics) and frequency of the posts amongmentor and novice teachers?

In other words, we set out to learn who was communicating with whom (i.e.,direction), why they were communicating (i.e., function), and what they werecommunicating about (i.e., content). Notably, the research questions we identifiedfocused on process variables associated with mentoring. While the aim of mentoringprograms is to retain and professionally develop novice teachers (see Pitton 2006;Portner 2003; Rudney and Guillaume 2003, for example), our focus during the firstyear of the project was on determining the nature of the interactions and thesubstantiveness of the conversations within this relatively novel venue—namely, anonline forum. Describing and understanding the process of online mentoring wouldserve, then, as a means toward the future evaluation of intended program outcomes(Stufflebeam and Shinkfield 2007).

Methodology Content analysis provided the methodology for the study. Contentanalysis is “the systematic, objective, quantitative analysis of message character-istics" (Neuendorf 2002, p. 1) and is often used as a technique to release theinformation captured in the transcripts of asynchronous discussion groups (Rourke etal. 2001). While sometimes considered a qualitative methodology, content analysisrelies on “objectivity-intersubjectivity, a priori design, reliability, validity, general-izability, replicability, and hypothesis testing” (Neuendorf 2002, p. 10) to collect andanalyze the frequency of specific message characteristics under scrutiny. As such,content analysis served as an appropriate methodology for the descriptive study ofonline mentoring as a potential means to teacher retention and professionaldevelopment.

Units of Data Collection and Analysis The unit of data collection in a contentanalysis is the form in which the content to be analyzed is collected (Neuendorf2002). The ENDAPT forum created within Tapped-In organized postings bydiscussion threads; therefore, discussion threads were used as the unit of datacollection. In content analysis, however, the unit of data collection is not necessarilythe chunk of communication content that is ultimately analyzed. In other words, theunit of data collection may be different from the unit of data analysis (Neuendorf2002). Because discussion threads are often quite lengthy and because discussionthread titles do not always accurately represent the content of individual postings, weidentified participants’ individual postings to the forum as the unit of analysis. Withthe exception of introductory posts during the launch of the online forum andfacilitative posts by the forum moderator, all of the postings among the 24participants in ENDAPT were analyzed and coded.

Grounded Categories A critical step in the use of content analysis is operationallydefining the content criteria by means of which the analysis will occur (Henri 1992;Neuendorf 2002). We created four major sets of criteria. First, in order to address theresearch question regarding direction, we identified six possible pairings ofcommunication: (1) mentor to novice, (2) mentor to broadcast (i.e., directed to thewhole group, with no specific intended receiver), (3) mentor to mentor, (4) novice to

J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246 235

Page 10: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

mentor, (5) novice to broadcast, and (6) novice to novice. Next, adapting Bonk andKim’s (1998) 12 forms of mentoring communication, we developed two a priori setsof functions, one set characteristic of mentor postings and the other characteristic ofnovice postings. The two sets of criteria for the function of posts were designed to beparallel in order to allow for comparison, and each was operationalized usingdefinitions and examples. (See Table 1.) Similarly, a fourth set of operationalizedcriteria was developed to identify and categorize the content of postings. The contentcriteria derived from the teacher competencies of the William and Mary teacherpreparation program, which are aligned with national professional standards forteacher evaluation (Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium

Table 1 Content analysis criteria for the functions of mentor and novice postings

Functions Details

Mentor functionsSupport/confirmation The mentor makes a supportive statement and/or confirms the actions of a

novice teacher or another mentor: “You’re doing great…”; “Don’t doubtyourself…”; “That was a good decision…”

Guided advice The mentor provides specific direction, instruction, or advice to the noviceteacher or another mentor: “You may want to try…”; “I suggest using…”

Modeling The mentor describes his or her own experience or thinking but does notgive direct advice, answers, or interpretations of a given situation: “The wayI’ve handled that situation is to…”; “Once I…”; “In my classroom…”

Seeking clarification/direct questioning

The mentor poses a direct question or makes a statement inviting explanationor clarification: “How are you currently grading homework?”; “Tell memore about…”

Prompting reflection The mentor prompts or otherwise creates an opportunity for a novice tothink about, share, and evaluate his or her own thinking: “What do you thinkyour actions resulted in?”; “How might your students have taken what yousaid to them?”

Professional growth The mentor makes an explicit statement about his or her own professionalgrowth, new understanding, or change in practice resulting from online forum:“I feel more confident about…”; “I used to think…but now…”

Novice functionsAcknowledgement/thanks

The novice acknowledges his or her understanding someone else’s ideas, orindicates acceptance of new ideas, or expresses thanks for someone else’sthought: “I see what you’re saying…”; “That’s good advice…”

Guided advice The novice provides specific direction, instruction, or advice to another noviceteacher or mentor: “You may want to try…”; “I suggest using…”

Sharing experience,no problem

The novice describes an experience, but there is no indication that theexperience is problematic: “Today was great! I had my class doing…”;“I had my first parent conference yesterday and it went really well.”

Specific question/seeking specificinformation

The novice teacher poses a question or invites others to provide him or herspecific information: “How do you use manipulatives in middle school math?”;“What reading series do you use?”; “What should I expect during my firstobservation?”; “I need to know more about…”

Explicit issue/problem The novice specifically describes a situation that he or she is confronting orhas confronted in his or her practice, but does not pose a question orspecifically seek a response: “I’m having trouble with…”; “Yesterday wasawful. I had a student…”

Reflection/professionalgrowth

The novice teacher makes an explicit statement about his or her ownprofessional growth, new understanding, or change in practice, eitherresulting from the online forum or not: “I’m starting to see…”; “I feelmore confident…”; “I used to think…but now…”

236 J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246

Page 11: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

1992; Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation 1988). (SeeTable 2.)

Inter-Rater Reliability A total of 526 postings were analyzed using the criteriadescribed above. (Postings by the facilitator and initial introductory postings wereexcluded.) Six coders were trained, and inter-rater reliability among all six coders atthe end of training and measured against a sample set of codings ranked 0.82, 0.83,0.89, 0.90, 0.90, and 0.93, respectively. Within each category of analysis, theaverage inter-rater reliability coefficients were 0.97 for identifying direction of posts,0.88 for identifying mentor function, 0.87 for identifying novice function, and 0.84for identifying content. Each coder was assigned a series of threads to code, totalingapproximately 90 individual posts each. Coders collaborated with the researcherswhen questions in procedures or coding occurred. After all posts were coded by thesix coders, the researchers spot-coded a random sample of approximately 10% ofeach coder’s assigned threads to ensure consistency.

6 Results

Communication within the forum occurred during the period of one academic year.Figure 1 depicts the total number of posts per month and clearly suggests a 5-monthperiod of high activity from October through February, with an expected dip during

Table 2 Content analysis criteria for the content of mentor and novice postings

Criteria Details

Planning for instruction Plans lessons that align with local, state, and national standardsSelects appropriate instructional strategies/activitiesSelects appropriate materials/resources

Instructional delivery Teaches based on planned lessonsProvides for individual differencesUses motivational strategies to promote learningEngages students actively in learningUses a variety of effective teaching strategiesHelps students develop thinking skills that promote learningMonitors student learning

Assessment for learning Creates and selects appropriate assessments for learningImplements assessments for learningInterprets/uses assessment results to make instructional decisions

Classroom management Builds positive rapport with and among studentsOrganizes for effective teachingDemonstrates use of effective routines and proceduresDemonstrates efficient and effective use of timeMaintains a safe learning environmentResponds appropriately to inappropriate behavior

Professionalism Demonstrates professional demeanor and ethical behaviorParticipates in and applies professional developmentDemonstrates effective oral and written communicationCooperates, collaborates, and fosters relationships with members of theschool community

J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246 237

Page 12: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

the winter break in December. Participation began to drop in March, with very littleactivity occurring during the final months of the school year.

Of the 526 posts in the online mentoring forum, 71% were made by mentors and29% were written by novices. Out of a grand total of 580 posts, less than 10% weremade by the forum facilitator and included logistical and introductory information.Again, the facilitator’s posts were not included in the present analysis in order toconcentrate on investigating the nature of the conversations among mentors andnovices. On average, each mentor posted 34 times and each novice teacher madeapproximately 12 posts. (See Table 3.) Elementary-level novice teachers postedmore frequently than secondary novices (58% compared to 42% of the total numberof novice posts). Mentors tended to be somewhat more verbose than novices, withan average word count of 201 words per post, compared to an average of 134 wordsper post for novices.

The range of postings provides further insight into the involvement of individualmembers in the forum. (See Fig. 2.) Notably, among mentors and also amongnovices, participants appeared to be distinguishable from one another based on thenumber of posts. Participants could be categorized as high-frequency, occasional,and low-frequency participants. Of particular note is that among the novice teachersthere were four lurkers, which is a term that refers to members of an onlinecommunity who do not actively participate by communicating, but who visit andpresumably read and may benefit from the postings in the forum. A lurker canlikened to a “quiet student” in the classroom: One does not know if such a student’sreticence is indicative of a lack of interest or of an introverted mode of learning.

Of particular interest is the direction of posts among participants, since such ananalysis provides insight into who is communicating with whom in the groupmentoring forum. Data were disaggregated by mentors and novices, and the resultssuggest very similar patterns of posts between these two groups. (See Figs. 3 and 4.)The majority of posts among mentors (46%) and among novices (56%) were posts

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Septe

mbe

r

Octobe

r

Novem

ber

Decem

ber

Janu

ary

Febru

ary

Mar

chApr

ilM

ayJu

ne

Fig. 1 Number of posts permonth

Table 3 Frequency of mentor and novice posts

Mean Median Mode Range Standard Deviation

Mentors 33.81 35 25, 35 1–71 23.37Novices 11.77 5 20 0–40 13.71

238 J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246

Page 13: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

that were broadcast, that is, posted with no specific intended receiver and, therefore,open to the entire community. Mentors, however, posted responses to specific noviceteachers nearly as often as they made broadcast posts (41% to 46%, respectively).Novice teachers posted to specific mentors less frequently (33%); however, it is aninteresting observation that in an online group forum, novice teachers developedrelationships with mentors to the extent that one-third of their postings were madedirectly to individual mentors. Finally, a rather unexpected finding was that mentorscommunicated directly with other mentors, constituting 13% of the total number ofposts by mentors. Similarly, novice teachers communicated with each other withnearly the same frequency (11%). The flow of communication among and betweenmentors and novices highlights an important feature of the ENDAPT model, whichis that the group forum provided a multiplicity of interactions and relationships notcharacteristic of conventional one-to-one mentoring relationships.

We next looked at the function or purpose of the posts to the online forum inorder to ascertain reasons why mentors and novices posted to the online forum.Using separate, but parallel, sets of function categories for mentors and novices(see Table 1 again), the content analysis revealed clear patterns of use. (See Figs. 5and 6.) For example, three-quarters (76%) of the posts by novice teachers eitherposed direct questions (37%) or described a problem that novice teachers wereexperiencing, about which they were seeking guidance (39%). Thus, novice teachersclearly used the online forum to solicit the support and assistance of others. It is alsointeresting to note the function of mentor posts, specifically the means by whichmentors provided guidance to the novice teachers. Modeling—which we defined as

01020304050607080

Individual Mentors & Novices

Number of Posts

Mentors Novices

Fig. 2 Number of posts byindividual novices and mentors

mentor to

broadcast

46%

mentor to

novice

41%

mentor to

mentor

13%

Fig. 3 Direction of mentor posts

J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246 239

Page 14: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

a mentor describing his or her own experience or thinking but not giving directadvice, answers, or interpretations of a given situation—proved to be the mostfrequent purpose of mentor posts (63%), far exceeding the second most frequentfunction of mentor posts, which was offering guided advice (38%). This is aninteresting finding, as it suggests the mentors’ capacity to prompt reflection amongnovice teachers by providing examples rather than dictating novices’ thinking anddecisions through prescriptive advice. This observation becomes even morepowerful when considering that mentors also asked questions of novice teachers(12%) and prompted reflection among novice teachers (11%), representing nearlyone-quarter of the posts.

Novices most frequently posted to share experiences that were not necessarilyconsidered problems (42% of posts), to describe issues or problems about whichthey implicitly sought advice (39%), and to ask questions (37%). However, we weresurprised to find the relative frequency with which novice teachers posted to offerguided advice to others (11% of posts). Having experienced online forums before,we were encouraged to find that mentors and novices alike contributed to a sense ofcommunity and collegiality by frequently posting to provide support or confirmation(41% of mentor posts) or to express acknowledgement or thanks to someone else(30%) for their ideas.

The third focus of our analysis addressed the content of posts by mentor andnovice teachers to the ENDAPT online forum. In other words, our purpose here was

novice to

broadcast

56%

novice to

mentor

33%

novice to

novice

11%

Fig. 4 Direction of novice posts

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Percentage* 41% 38% 63% 12% 11% 3%

Support/ Confirmation

Guided Advice

Modeling QuestionsPrompt

ReflectionProfessional

Growth

Fig. 5 Percentage of mentor posts including each mentor function. * Total percentage exceeds 100%because posts may have multiple functions

240 J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246

Page 15: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

to determine what was discussed among participants. Did mentor and noviceteachers use the forum to talk about topics directly related to the responsibilities ofclassroom teachers? To investigate this question, we employed five domains ofteacher responsibilities. (See Table 2 again.) These domains were identified basedupon the William and Mary student teacher competencies, which are aligned withprofessional standards (including the Interstate New Teacher Assessment andSupport Consortium and subject-area professional associations). Three key findingsare evident from the analysis. (See Fig. 7.) First, in terms of the content of onlineposts, all five domains of teacher responsibilities were evident. Veteran and noviceteachers alike discussed topics related to planning for instruction, deliveringinstruction, assessing student learning, managing the classroom, and meetingresponsibilities of professionalism. Second, four of the five content areas wereevident with near-equal frequency. Members of the forum most frequently discussedtopics related to planning, delivery, management, and professionalism. The topic ofassessment of student learning was discussed least frequently; in fact, assessmentwas discussed with roughly half the frequency of any other topic. Third, we were

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Percentage* 30% 11% 42% 37% 39% 12%

Acknowledge/ Thanks

Guided Advice

Sharing Experience

QuestionsIssue/

ProblemReflection/

Growth

Fig. 6 Percentage of novice posts including each novice function. *Total percentage exceeds 100%because posts may have multiple functions

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Mentors 26% 35% 15% 36% 30%

Novices 41% 36% 17% 36% 26%

Planning forInstruction

InstructionalDelivery

AssessmentClassroom

ManagementProfessionalism

Fig. 7 Comparison of percentage of posts containing each content category by mentors andnovices

J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246 241

Page 16: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

encouraged to see the evident parity between mentor and novice teachers in thefrequency of discussion of each of the five content areas. A visual scan of Fig. 7shows plainly that discussion of topics was closely balanced between mentor andnovice teachers, with the only notable exception being planning for instruction, inwhich novices tended to post more frequently than mentors. Nonetheless, the relativebalance suggests the two-way, conversational nature of the dialogue within theonline forum.

7 Discussion

The purpose of our study was to identify and describe the nature of professionalconversations among mentor and novice teachers in an asynchronous, group-based,online forum. To that end, we set out to learn who was communicating with whom(which we termed direction), why they were communicating (which we calledfunction), and what they were communicating about (which we identified ascontent). Through content analysis, each of the three lines of analysis revealedinsight into the nature of communication within a group-based online mentoringforum.

Our analysis of the direction of posts suggests that participants communicated in anetworked fashion rather than a linear fashion. Online discussions in the study werenot typified by one-to-one dialogues. Instead, mentors and novices alike discussedtopics with each other individual-to-individual, as well as using broadcast posts tothe entire group. The near-equal frequency of broadcast posts to the group and postsbetween individuals suggests that such a forum can serve as both a complement andan alternative to conventional one-to-one mentoring (Ensher et al. 2003). Discussionwithin the forum also moved beyond a conventional mentor-to-novice exchange,evident in the fact that novices addressed other novices and mentors addressed othermentors. The network-like exchange of ideas is suggestive of a community oflearners—a group of professionals constructively and collectively engaging witheach other to identify and address areas in which the professional practice ofindividuals in the group and of the group as a whole may be improved (DuFour andEaker 1992). Of course, many schools may be characterized as learningcommunities, and we do not suggest that an online forum is the only means ofcreating such a community. Indeed, there are exemplary face-to-face mentoringprograms that employ group mentoring practices also (Nielson et al. 2006; Gareis2005). However, the online forum may provide a venue that is complementary to theschool environment in which a novice teacher may find him- or herself in the firstyear of teaching. For the novice teacher in a school with a less enriching schoolclimate, such as a hard-to-staff school that is typically populated by novice andearly-career teachers, the online group mentoring forum may be his or her onlysource for consistent, constructive engagement with other professionals. Further-more, characteristic of the ENDAPT conceptual model of mentoring, the network ofsupport was sustained throughout the duration of the novices’ first-year experiences.

When we consider the function or purposes of mentors’ and novices’ posts to theforum, the nature of the communication within the forum becomes evident. Forexample, the intent of ENDAPT is to complement—not replace—face-to-face

242 J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246

Page 17: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

mentoring. Notably, all of the novices in the project also had formal face-to-facementors assigned to them by their schools. While the scope of our study did notexpand to investigating differences between or complementary aspects of the twomodes of mentoring, we were encouraged to find that several of the aspects ofquality face-to-face mentoring were evident in online mentoring. We found, forinstance, that mentors posted to the forum for a variety of reasons, includingmodeling, questioning, and prompting reflection. A core aim in face-to-facementoring is to promote reflective practice among novice teachers so that theyhabitually self-assess, problem-solve, and, ultimately, improve their professionalpractice (Pitton 2006; Portner 2003; Schon 1987). The mentors’ use of modeling,questioning, and prompting reflection within the online forum suggests thepromotion of reflective practice among novice teachers. Similarly, the onlinementoring venue shows evidence of another fundamental aim of mentoring, which isthe development of supportive, professional relationships. There may be someconcern that an online environment is less personal and, therefore, less apt to enablesupportive, professional relationships to develop. However, our analysis of thefunctions of posts indicates that communications were often characterized assupportive, confirming, and appreciated by novice and mentor teachers alike. Thesefindings from our analysis of the purposes of mentor and novice communications inthe forum reflect the conceptual framework of ENDAPT, which posits that mentorscan serve to provide vocational, psychosocial, and role modeling support to novices(Ensher et al. 2003).

Consistent with the understanding that mentoring should aim to improveprofessional practice (Pitton 2006), our analysis of the content of postings withinENDAPT demonstrated that the communication among mentor teachers and noviceteachers was substantively related to professional competencies. Teachers talkedabout the things for which teachers are responsible: planning for teaching, deliveringinstruction, assessing student learning, managing the classroom, and performing asprofessionals. While mentoring, whether face-to-face or online, aims to provideemotional support and encouragement to beginning teachers, mentoring should alsoaim to improve professional practice (DeWert et al. 2003; Pitton 2006; Portner 2003;Rudney and Guillaume 2003). The online mentoring forum provided for noviceteachers a venue to discuss and address issues related to professional practice as theyoccurred in the lives of these beginning teachers. Interestingly, the domain ofprofessional practice characterized by the lowest frequency of discussion was that ofassessment. This finding may reflect conclusions drawn from previous studies(Tucker et al. 2003; Stiggins and Conklin 1992) that assessment is a area of relativeweakness among many teachers. If so, the importance of substantive mentoringconversations is even more evident.

As the ENDAPT project continues and as other school districts, educationalorganizations, and colleges, schools, and departments of education develop anduse online forums for mentoring, key questions warrant attention. As analyzedin our present study, the direction, function, and content of online mentoringcommunications continues to be important to understand the nature of computer-mediated conversations. Our intent is to replicate this study to see if patterns con-tinue among different participants. Also, a delimitation of the present study is theabsence of perceptual data that would allow us to investigate participants’ self-

J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246 243

Page 18: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

reported impressions of the online mentoring experience itself and also of the viewof novice teachers in particular regarding the respective roles, advantages, andlimits of online and face-to-face mentoring. Such inquiries provide direction forfuture research.

Moving beyond the focus of the present study, it would also be instructive tocompare the nature of online mentoring conversations to mentoring conversationsthat occur in face-to-face mentoring arrangements. A qualitative research method-ology could, for instance, investigate the tone of such conversations and alsoilluminate the phenomenon of lurkers in an online forum. Also, a future andespecially important focus of research is an investigation of the longer-termoutcomes of mentoring, specifically with regard to reducing attrition among noviceteachers, improving teacher practice, and increasing K-12 student learning. Inaddition, future projects and research should begin to address the comparativeeffectiveness of different models of online mentoring, such as differences betweenone-on-one and group forums and differences between asynchronous and synchro-nous communication modes. For example, does the pattern of high-frequency,occasional, and low-frequency participants persist in the absence of extrinsicincentives, as others (Klecka et al. 2004) observed? Relatedly, it would be instructiveto investigate differences among the roles that moderators can serve in facilitatingand sustaining online mentoring forums. Future research should also giveconsideration to the role that serving as a mentor plays in the professional growthof experienced teachers. Indeed, a quotation from one of the online mentors in theENDAPT project alludes to the potentially powerful effect of participating in avirtual community of learners:

Like Alice in Teacher Wonderland virtual communities allow my teacher worldto grow larger and smaller at the same time!

SusanFriday, June 9, 2006

The present study provides insights into the process of online mentoring and thenature of communication that can occur within virtual communities. Morespecifically, it suggests that an online mentoring can provide a viable venue inwhich teacher mentoring can occur. These are affirming findings in the earlyimplementation of this program and point toward continuing implementation of apromising practice. However, longer-term program goals—for instance, professionalgrowth, teacher retention, and improved student achievement—remain the intendedprogram outcomes by which the efficacy of the ENDAPT model of online mentoringcan ultimately be evaluated.

References

Abbott, L. (2003). Novice teachers’ experiences with telementoring as learner-centered professionaldevelopment. Retrieved June 20, 2005, from http://teachnet.edb.utexas.edu/~lynda_abbott/ABBOTT-DISSERTATION.pdf

Alvarado, A. (2006). New directions in teacher education: Emerging strategies from the Teachers for a NewEra initiative. A paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

244 J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246

Page 19: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

Berliner, D. (1986). In pursuit of the expert pedagogue. Educational Researcher, 15(7), 5–13.Berry, B., & Nussbaum-Beach, S. (2006). Center for Teaching Quality, personal communication with

Teachers for a New Era.Bonk, C. J., & Kim, K. A. (1998). Extending sociocultural theory to adult learning. In M. C. Smith, & T.

Pourchot (Eds.) Adult learning & development: Perspectives from educational psychology. Mahwah,NJ, USA: Erlbaum Associates.

Bruffee, K. A. (1993). Collaborative learning: Higher education, interdependence, and the authority ofknowledge. London: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Carroll, D. (2005). Learning through interactive talk: A school-based mentor teacher study group as acontext for professional learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(5), 457–473.

Center for Teaching Quality Web site (2006). Mentoring and induction. http://www.teachingquality.org/relatedtqissues/mentoring.htm

Chubbock, S. M., Clift, R. T., Allard, J., & Quinlan, J. (2001). Playing it safe as a novice teacher:Implications for programs for new teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(5), 365–376.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). Doing what matters most: Investing in quality teaching. New York:National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.

DeWert, M. H., Babinski, L. M., & Jones, B. D. (2003). Safe passages: Providing online support tobeginning teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4), 311–320.

DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1992). Creating the new American school: A principal’s guide to schoolimprovement. Bloomington, IN, USA: National Educational Service.

Ensher, E. A., Heum, C., & Blanchard, A. (2003). Online mentoring and computer-mediatedcommunication: New directions in research. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63(2), 264–288.

Foster, A. (1999). Telementoring: One way to reach America’s students. NASSP Bulletin, 77–80,September.

Ganser, T. (2002). The new teacher mentors: Four trends that are changing the look of mentoring programsfor new teachers. American School Board Journal, 189(12), 25–27.

Gareis, C. R. (2005). Fighting the “rising tide” of the de-professionalization of teaching: The ClinicalFaculty Program at The College of William and Mary. Presented at the annual conference of theConsortium for Research in Education and Teacher Evaluation, Memphis, TN, July.

Hammerman, J. K. (1997). Leadership in collaborative teacher inquiry groups. Paper presented at theannual conference of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, March.

Hammerness, K. (2003). Learning to hope, or hoping to learn. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(1), 43–56.Hawkes, M., & Rosmiszowski, A. (2001). Examining the reflective outcomes of asynchronous computer-

mediated communication on inservice teacher development. Journal of Technology and TeacherEducation, 9(2), 285–308.

Heider, K. L. (2005). Teacher isolation: How mentoring programs can help. Current Issues in Education[On-line], 8(14). Available: http://cie.ed.asu.edu/volume8/number14/June 23/

Henri, F. (1992). Computer conferencing and content analysis. In A. R. Kaye (Ed.) Collaborative learningthrough computer conferencing. Najadan Papers (pp. 117–136). London: Springer.

Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. AmericanEducational Research Journal, 38(3), 499–534.

Ingersoll, R. (2002). The teacher shortage: A case of wrong diagnosis and wrong prescription. NASSPBulletin, 86, 16–31.

Ingersoll, R. & Kralik, J. M. (2004). The impact of mentoring on teacher retention: What the researchsays. Denver: Education Commission of the States. Retrieved February 2006 from http://www.ecs.org/clearninghouse/50/36/5036.htm

Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium. (1992). Model standards for beginningteacher licensing and development: A resource for state dialogue. Washington, DC, USA: Author.

Jervis, K. (1996). Eyes on the child: Three portfolio stories. New York: National Center for RestructuringEducation, Schools and Teaching.

Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (1988). The personnel evaluation standards.Newbury Park, CA, USA: Corwin.

Klecka, C. L., Cheng, Y., & Clift, R. T. (2004). Exploring the potential of electronic mentoring. Action inTeacher Education, 26(3), 2–9.

Koschman, T. D., Kelson, A. C., Feltovich, P. J., & Barrows, H. S. (1997). Computer supported problem-based learning: Principled approach to the use of computers in collaborative learning. In T. D.Koschmann (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and Practice of an Emerging Paradigm (pp. 110–131).

Levin, D. B., & Cross, B. (2002). The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role of trust ineffective knowledge transfe. Management Science, 4–7.

J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246 245

Page 20: Electronically Mentoring to Develop Accomplished Professional Teachers

McMullen, D. W., Goldbaum, H., Wolffe, R. J., & Sattler, J. L. (1988). Using asynchronous learningtechnology to make connections among faculty, students, and teachers. Paper presented at the AnnualMeeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, New Orleans, LA.

Naidu, S., & Olson, P. (1996). Making the most of practical experience in teacher education withcomputer-supported collaborative learning. International Journal of Educational Telecommunica-tions, 2, 265–278.

Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage.Nussbaum-Beach, S. (2007). Virtual communities as a canvas of educational reform. Techlearning.

Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.techlearning.com/blog/2007/07/virtual_communities_as_a_canva_1.php, ¶ 6–8.

Nielson, D. C., Barry, A. L., & Addison, A. B. (2006). A model of a new-teacher induction program andteacher perceptions of beneficial components. Action in Teacher Education, 28(4), 14–24.

Pitton, D. E. (2006). Mentoring novice teachers: Fostering a dialogue process. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,CA, USA: Corwin.

Portner, H. (2003). Mentoring new teachers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Ralph, E. (1994). Enhancing the supervision of beginning teachers: A Canadian initiative. Teaching &

Teacher Education, 10(27), 185–203.Ralph, E. (1998). Developing practitioners: A handbook of contextual supervision. Stillwater, OK, USA:

New Forums.Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Methodological issues in the content

analysis of computer conference transcripts. International journal of artificial intelligence ineducation, 12. Retrieved July 14, 2007, from http://www.communitiesofinquiry.com/documents/2Rourke_et_al_Content_Analysis.pdf

Rudney, G. L., & Guillaume, A. M. (2003). Maximum mentoring: An action guide for teacher trainersand cooperating teachers. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Corwin.

Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learningin the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Selwyn, N. (2000). Creating a “connected” community? Teachers’ use of an electronic discussion group.The Teachers College Record, 102(4), 750–778.

Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard EducationalReview, 57(1), 1–22.

Smith, T., & Ingersoll, R. (2004). What are the effects of induction and mentoring on beginning teacherturnover? Americian Educational Research Journal, 41(2).

Southern Regional Education Board. (2001). Reduce your losses: Help new teachers become veteranteachers. Atlanta, GA, USA: Author.

Spuhler, L., & Zetler, A. (1994). Montana teacher support program: Research report for year two (1993–94). East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Learning. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 390 802).

Stansbury, K., & Zimmerman, J. (2000). Lifelines to the classroom: Designing support for beginningteachers. A WestEd Knowledge Brief. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.

Stiggins, R. J., & Conklin, N. F. (1992). In teachers’ hands: Investigating the practices of classroomassessments. New York: State University of New York Press.

Stufflebeam, D. L., & Shinkfield, A. J. (2007). Evaluation theory, models, and applications. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.

Thomsen, S. R., & Gustafson, R. L. (1997). Turning practitioners into professors: Exploring effectivementoring. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 52(2), 24–32.

Tucker, P. D., Stronge, J. H., Gareis, C. R., & Beers, C. S. (2003). The efficacy of portfolios for teacherevaluation and professional development: Do they make a difference? Educational AdministrationQuarterly, 39(5), 572–602.

Wilson, B., Ireton, E., & Wood, J. (1997). Beginning teacher fears. Education, 117(3), 380 396–400.Zeeb, P. (2000). Mentoring distance learners. Distance Education, 4(7), 6–7.

246 J Pers Eval Educ (2007) 20:227–246