ESL 600
December 19, 1996
FIRST YEAR TEACHER ASSISTANCE
When I first considered the topic of professional development, I thought to write about my experiences as an EFL instructor in Japan. In particular, I wanted to address the issue of the "new teacher" first entering the classroom, and the types of support networks that may or may not be available as the novice assimilates into the culture of teaching. My original argument was to be that native English speakers in Japan find a ready-made, reliable support network among other foreign teachers in Japan. Such a connection arises spontaneously from the common bond of being gaijin in Japan, and from the fact that they must cope with the stress of living in a foreign culture as well as with work-related pressure. My hypothesis was based on my own experience as a member of the JET (Japanese Exchange and Teaching) Programme in Kawasaki City from 1993 to 1996. I assumed that other EFL teachers in Japan would have had similar experiences to myself. I set out to interview several members of our department who had taught English in Japan, determined to find out why successful teacher networks occur abroad, and how that information might be useful here in the United States.
As I conducted my interviews, however, I discovered that my original hypothesis was quite misguided. I spoke with nine individuals: three are currently members of the JET Programme, three are previous JET participants, and three taught independent of JET at language schools or universities in Japan. Contrary to my expectations, most of these teachers did not find a ready network of colleagues in Japan to turn to for personal and especially professional support. I then expanded my interviews to include two ESL teachers here in the U.S., and one JTE (Japanese Teacher of English) in Japan. By the time I completed all the interviews, I had drawn two conclusions. One was that first-year teachers often encounter the same types of problems regardless of what country or at what level they might be working. This was also found to be true by Tisher (1984, cited in Hitz & Roper, 1986). My second observation was that the degree of support new teachers receive from their colleagues is extremely varied, depending on a number of factors that I will explore at some length in this paper. In general, however, most of my interviewees said that assistance from their fellow teachers was insufficient, despite an obvious need for help and even, at times, direct requests for it. Thus the topic of my paper shifted to a discussion of the unique needs of beginning teacher, and how the profession might meet those needs.
This topic is, of course, a well-documented area. Many education specialists have written about the needs of beginning teachers, including -- but by no means limited to -- Grant and Zeichner (1981), Fox and Singletary (1986), Hitz and Roper (1986), Varah, Theune, and Parker (1986), Huling-Austin (1989), Sorcinelli (1992), and Numrich (1996). Not surprisingly, researchers have yet to agree on the best way to assist new teachers. In discussing induction programs, for example, Rauth (1986) observes that "the questions raised about what form these programs should take out-number specific recommendations." It is beyond the scope of this paper as well as my own expertise to propose a formal, workable induction program for beginning teachers. But based on my own experiences as well as those of my interviewees, I argue that in the absence of sufficient institutional support, teachers are capable of creating an active and productive environment that will cultivate the development of new and experienced teachers alike.
Experiences of First-Year Teachers
I was certainly surprised by the similarities among my interviewees as they described their first-year experiences in a variety of settings. I had expected different responses from the EFL teachers, many of whom begin working in Japan without any prior teacher training or experience. In the JET Programme, for example, participants need only be native English speakers with a B.A. degree from an accredited University (the B.A. can be in any subject area, not necessarily related to language or teaching.) This fact is reflected in the pool of interviewees: of the nine with Japan-based experience, only one was a qualified teacher at the time. Such a lack of qualifications, I speculated, must render a new EFL teacher especially vulnerable and insecure. Degreed teachers can at least drawn on their educational background for theory and methodology, and may be more at ease in the classroom. While this is probably true to some extent, the interviews revealed no striking differences between qualified and unqualified teachers. Many of their initial reactions to their first jobs were similar, regardless of their background.
A new teacher must rely on skills that cannot be learned in college, and handle situations that rarely come up in the average practicum. Huling-Austin (1989) describes the first year of teaching as "a sink-or-swim experience." She notes that unlike most other professions, new teachers are expected to take on full job responsibilities from the very first day. In fact, they are likely to have an even heavier workload than their more experienced colleagues due to "convenience and/or ... a priority system that places seniority and rank above competency match factors when designing individual job assignments" (Erly & Greenberg, 1985, cited in Greenberg & Erly, 1989). Teachers need more than just competency in their subject area; they also need flexibility and self-evaluative skills, a realistic attitude, and the confidence to confront any number of problems that are likely to develop in the classroom (Fox&Singletary, 1986). Training programs fail to prepare teachers for the "reality shock" of the classroom (Veenman, 1984, cited in Fox & Singletary, 1986). Worst of all, just when they need it most, novices may find they have no one to turn to for either personal or professional support. Research in education consistently cites "feelings of isolation" as an inherent corollary to the new teacher experience (Varah et al., 1986, Fox & Singletary, 1986, Hitz & Roper, 1986, among others.) Teachers work alone in their classrooms everyday, often unable to find the time or opportunity (or perhaps a sympathetic listener) to discuss their situation with their colleagues. This situation is so frequently described in research journals that it almost seems to be taken for granted, a consequence of the profession that individuals must learn to accept if they choose to become teachers.
Reality Shock
I found that the experiences of my interviewees often matched the circumstances described above. Gayle went to Japan as a certified ESL teacher and taught at a private language school in Tokyo for two years. Although she felt her 10-week certification course had been a useful program, she admitted it did not prepare her for the reality of the classroom: "[The course] trained us in the basics of the Situational Method, which was good, but it never told us how to vary the lessons or keep it interesting for the students.... By the third day I already felt like I was out of ideas!" Gayle found her greatest challenge to be determining the needs of her students, and then directing her lessons to target those needs. She also worried that her lessons weren't interesting, and felt self-conscious when her students seemed bored. She claims that it took at least three months to adjust to the "way things worked" at the language school, and to feel comfortable in the classroom.
Compared to other teachers, Gayle's adjustment period was relatively quick. A more extreme situation is found in the case of Kim, an ESL teacher in Hawaii who began her career as a high school English teacher. Kim had a B.A. in secondary education when she began her first teaching assignment. Nevertheless, she was not expecting the conditions she encountered at this particular public high school in Hawaii. She was given the lowest-ability English class, as senior teachers were allowed to choose their classes first, leaving Kim with "the students nobody else wanted." She taught six classes a day with no prep periods, and had 30 students in each class. In addition, she was required to advise an extracurricular activity, help out with school yard duty, and chaperone at school dances. Kim felt completely overwhelmed: "I cried everyday on my way home, out of sheer frustration." The other teachers in the school had little sympathy for her situation. As Kim explains, "There was this attitude there [among the senior teachers] like, `It was rough for me when I started, you'll have to struggle too.'" Without guidance from her co-workers, Kim went through a year-long process of trial-and-error before she learned "how to work the system."
For the teachers who began their jobs without previous training, the period of "reality shock" included learning successful teaching methods entirely on their own. "Nobody ever told me how to teach," says Patrick of his first job at an English conversation school in Miyazaki, Japan. "They just handed me a textbook, pointed to the door, said "Here's your class, go and teach.' No explanation, no help." Patrick read published materials and resources about English teaching in Japan, but learned the most from sheer experience. The same was true for David, whose first job was in an English school in Nagoya: "[The school] gave me some books but no training. I had no idea what I was doing. I mostly guessed, and taught myself. Also when the students complained, I knew I was doing something wrong." David says it took him about 6 months to get comfortable in his role as a teacher, and longer to become a good teacher.
The Need for Induction
All beginning teachers, whatever their background and job situation might be, will find the first year to be a uniquely challenging experience. In fact, the first year can potentially affect the resulting career of the novice teacher, and the teaching profession as a whole. Gray and Gray (1985, cited in Odell & Ferraro, 1992) found that reactions to the first year include:
complaining about the teaching work load, changing one's teaching in a manner that is contrary to one's beliefs about teaching, manifesting
changes in attitudes and personality, and even suddenly leaving the
teaching profession altogether.
Researchers have documented shocking attrition rates among new teachers, and even claim that the most "academically able" teachers are the first to go (Varah et al., 1986). First-year stress can cause new teachers to abandon the progressive teaching methods they learned in college, falling back instead on safer but less effective approaches (Cogan, 1975, Huling-Austin,1990, both cited in Odell & Ferraro, 1992).
In any case, it is clear that some form of induction would be beneficial to even the most well-trained young teacher. The term "induction" is used somewhat ambiguously by different authors, but is perhaps best defined as "the sophisticated and systematic efforts to initiate, shape, and sustain the first work experiences of prospective career teachers" (Mager, 1992). It is difficult to assess just how widespread induction programs are in the United States today. In the 1989 publication of the Association of Teacher Educators, Huling-Austin presented an overview of the situation at the time and found that "at least 31 states have either implemented or are piloting or planning some type of teacher induction program." In the past seven years, this number has undoubtedly increased. Still, one state's idea of teacher assistance may be quite different from another. Huling-Austin lists 13 components that might be found in various programs, a few of which I will include here:
1. Printed materials of employment conditions and school regulations
...
3. Seminars on curriculum and effective teaching practices
...
7. Support (helping/buddy/mentor) teachers
...
10. Group meetings of beginners (for emotional support)
...
13. Beginning teacher newsletters and other publications designed to provide helpful tips for the novice teacher
The point is that some elements are far more innovative and comprehensive than others. Still, some assistance is better than none at all, and overall the programs result in positive benefits for their participants (Huling-Austin, 1989, Ishler & Edelfelt, 1989, Kilgore & Kozisek, 1989, Odell & Ferraro, 1992).
As for the EFL situation, it seems that few formal programs exist to support foreign teachers working in Japan (or, at least, literature regarding this topic is not readily available.) The term "induction" has yet to work its way into the culture of teachers abroad, although some of the components listed by Huling-Austin do exist in different situations. Whether at home or abroad, support programs must be carefully designed so that the specific needs of the teachers are taken into consideration. When parties other than the teachers themselves decide what form the assistance will take, there is a greater chance that the attention will be misdirected and resources wasted.
The JET Programme and Induction
The complaint of "wasted resources" is frequently voiced by members of the JET Programme. JET is the largest and best known teacher exchange program in Japan. Each year it brings thousands of native speakers into the country to work as translators and English teachers in public and private schools, Boards of Education, community centers, and various other settings. It is common knowledge among Japanese educators that JET participants are well-paid, and that in general Mombusho and local governments invest a tremendous amount of money in the scheme. There are at least three formally organized conferences that all JETs must attend each year (some prefectures may organize more on a case-by-case basis.) The first is a 3-day orientation that takes place at an expensive hotel in Shinjuku, Tokyo upon the JETs' arrival in Japan; the second is a 2-day Mid-Year Block Conference; the third is a 3-day Renewer's Conference for all JETs who stay on another year. All three are entirely funded by the Japanese government, mandatory for all JET participants, and potential opportunities to provide the information beginning teachers need. Typical workshops presented at these conferences sound quite professional: Methodology in the EFL Classroom; Motivating Your Students; Incorporating the Communicative Approach; Effective Use of the Textbook. Unfortunately, the gap between the impressive appearance of the conferences and their actual usefulness to JETs is considerable.
As a former JET participant myself, I can clearly recall the air of impatience and disappointment that pervaded these conferences on every occasion. While the teachers often enjoyed meeting other foreigners and socializing casually, the workshops themselves were unproductive. There were a number of pr[[currency]]oblems in the nature of these workshops, but the main flaw was their tendency generalize and gloss over issues in order to include all the possible teaching situations JETs might find themselves in -- as a result of which the workshops applied to no one's situation. While the presentation itself might be interesting (though often they were not), the listener constantly found himself asking, "Yes, but how does that apply to me?" While an open exchange of ideas between the presenter and audience might have been fruitful in this respect, poor organization and time constraints prevented such dialogue.
Similar impressions were repeated without exception by the six ex- and current members of the JET Programme whom I interviewed for this paper. Their comments are recorded below:
Andy: "Institutional support structures do help us to get some idea of what our roles, as ALTs [Assistant Language Teachers] should be, however they don't really address specific problems effectively .... There is no designated professional help."
Shannan: "Problems are case by case. They [the conference seminars] don't really know our situation so they can't really help."
Trevor: "They don't seem very helpful because they generalize situations, and in reality, each individual is faced with very different circumstances."
Dawn: "The conferences were well-intended but very rarely applicable to my situation. The mantra was always, `It depends, it depends!' Basically they were useless except as social events and to show us small aspects of the culture."
Jim: "Those conferences did not even attempt to address our problems as teachers. They were there for stress release for the gaijin, and because they look good on paper. The professional issues they addressed were way off base; what we got in those seminars was not reality."
Susan: "I enjoyed them at first, but eventually I felt like they kept repeating the same things over and over. I started to realize it was just a waste of my time."
One might be tempted to conclude that this type of situation occurs only in Japan, not in the U.S. Jim's comment in reference to the conferences, "They look good on paper," is characteristic of the way many events are organized in Japan -- it is not uncommon for more attention to be focused on the appearance of an event rather than its actual substance or effectiveness. Education is no exception. Jiro was a Japanese teacher of English in Japan for 7 years, before quitting and coming to the University of Hawaii to pursue a linguistics degree. He described his frustrating experiences at prefectural English teacher meetings in terms that sound identical to the JETs'. These meetings occurred several times a year and were touted by the prefectural government as evidence that their schools were "progressive" and interested in communicative English, international exchange, and other popular catch-words of the day. Jiro, however, found them at best "interesting but impossible to mimic in a real classroom," or at worst "a chore, a duty, ... a waste of my time." Schools had to send at least one representative to such meetings; it would often be the youngest, newest teacher.
Such well-intended but misguided teacher meetings are not a Japanese phenomenon alone. Kim confirms that it happens in the U.S. as well. After four years at her initial teaching assignment, she changed to a another high school in Hawaii that appeared far more attuned to teachers' needs. In fact, this school had an induction program in the form of workshops geared specifically for beginning teachers. By this time Kim had four years of experience, which may have colored her perspective, but she found the workshops to be "a good idea in theory, but a waste of time in reality." She felt that the topics did not reflect the information new teachers truly needed to know. Workshop titles included "Getting to Know One Another" and "How to Arrange your Classroom;" in other words, "short on content, very contrived, even childish ... I thought it was very unprofessional." The workshops were mandatory for all new teachers at this particular high school. Kim would often spend the time doing her other work.
Teacher-generated Induction
My intention in this paper is not to argue that all teacher workshops are useless and ought to be done away with. As mentioned earlier, some assistance is usually better than none at all, and for the most part induction programs in the U.S. are bringing about positive results. My point is merely to emphasize that effective programs must be relevant to the teacher. Grant and Zeichner (1981) recognized this 15 years ago when induction programs were first starting to gain attention: "the most useful thing that can be done with regard to induction is to personalize and individualize this support and gear it to the needs of the specific beginning teachers." I would even argue that since only the teachers themselves can know their needs, the best form of induction is the kind generated by the teachers. At the very least, in the absence of "top-down" assistance, teachers can step in to fill the gap. Teachers turning to other teachers for help is a natural activity in our profession; for example, it is a rich source of emotional and psychological support. All my interviewees had stories to tell about bonding over coffee in the staff room, or stress release "sessions" in the local gaijin bar on Friday nights. With a little more organization and planning, these relationships can be parlayed into solid professional development networks, for new and experienced teachers alike. I know of at least two successful examples: my own experience in Japan, and the experiences of Audrey, an ESL teacher at a private language school in Indiana.
Creating an Induction Program in Kawasaki City, Japan
Though Kawasaki is a large city of over a million people, it has a small number of ALTs -- just four of us in my first year -- to go around to its 60-odd junior and senior high schools. I arrived in August 1993 with two other new JETs. None of us had teaching experience, and while we enjoyed the Tokyo orientation, we were not told any specifics about our future job assignments there. We spent our first three weeks in Kawasaki being entertained by our employers (the city Education Center) and sight-seeing around Japan. In September, with no instruction of any kind, we were split up, sent to different schools, and told to start teaching. Suffice it to say, we all suffered a great deal of "reality shock" in those early months. Like many other JETs, we had to guess our way through the lessons, learning how to teach by way of trial and error. In my case, I felt that I finished the year with a sound understanding of what worked and what didn't work in the classroom, but only as a result of many dissatisfying, poorly planned, and sometimes embarrassing lessons. In the case of the two other new JETs, the situation proved to be unacceptable, and they decided to return to their home countries. The one older JET also decided at that time to return to the U.S. That left me as the only veteran in Kawasaki City, with a crop of four new teachers arriving in 1994 from America, England, New Zealand, and Australia. While I still felt like a beginner myself, I knew there were several things I could do to help the new JETs adjust to working in Japan. Although I was not familiar with the term and its implications at the time, I essentially set out to design an informal induction program.
The first step was convincing my supervisor that the three-week period in August could be better spent preparing the new teachers for their jobs, as opposed to engaging in drinking parties, visits to local shrines, and other "cultural" activities. This original "orientation" schedule had been arranged by high-level administrators who never even met the JET teachers, nor were familiar with the details of their job responsibilities. With some effort my supervisor received permission to curtail the sight-seeing to one week, which left me with two to use as I deemed necessary. I began with what I called "reality talks," which meant describing in detail exactly what the ALTs would be expected to do in the classroom. These expectations varied from school to school, so I included a brief written description of all the schools I had visited. I also tried to prepare the new teachers for some of the frustration and awkwardness they might encounter in the beginning. I wanted them to know these feelings had less to do with their own competence than with the dynamics of our particular teaching situation -- with 60 schools and only 5 ALTs, Kawasaki's schedule was unusually demanding. I also gave them examples of some successful lessons from my first year, with copies of the activities that worked, and warnings against those that failed or were difficult to carry out. Finally, I took them in person to some of their scheduled schools, so at least the logistics of transportation would not be a concern on their first day.
These efforts were modest ones that did not require extra money, resources, or time on my part. They came as a natural result of my wanting the first-year teachers to enjoy their experience. All four of them renewed for a second year, and I for a third in 1995. They also began implementing their own ideas: one colleague initiated a descriptive journal and rating system of each of Kawasaki's schools. We used monthly meetings at the Education Center (on payday) to share ideas for lesson plans; these ideas are kept on file at the Center for future use. We also worked together as a group to solve problems of a professional nature. When we felt that we were not getting sufficient leave time as promised in our contracts, for example, we met as a group with our Division Supervisor to address the issue. We also drafted a joint letter to the Board of Education and the mayor of Kawasaki City criticizing what we considered to be unacceptable teaching conditions for ALTs in Kawasaki. By the time I left Japan in 1996, the frustration and disempowerment I had experienced in my first year had been converted into a far more satisfying energy.
Teacher Support in an Indiana Language Academy
Audrey began her first teaching assignment at a private language academy in Indiana with some experience: her undergraduate minor had been ESL and included a 10-week practicum. Still, she felt totally unprepared for the job and found the "go in there and do it" attitude of the first few months "extremely nerve-racking." There was no formal induction program organized at her school. In fact, the Indiana branch of this national language academy received very little support of any kind from the Central Office in Washington, D.C. Audrey described how many of the teachers at her school felt ignored and undervalued by the administration: "They [the Washington management] had nothing to do with us at all. There were bad benefits, no policies to help the teachers .... We were the program but we got no recognition for it. Basically we were seen as slave labor." Employees received low salaries even as the for-profit organization deliberately geared its policies to attract more students and student tuition. Constant policy changes took place "from above" without consulting even the most experienced instructors at the school. In such an environment, Audrey could hardly expect any special orientation programs to meet her needs as a new teacher.
Instead, Audrey found that the informal support network created by her colleagues more than compensated for the administration's neglect. Two women in particular stood out: one was the school's Director of Curriculum, also a teacher at the school, who became Audrey's "unofficial mentor." Many educators caution against mandated mentorship programs since it can be difficult to arrange compatible matches, and because the fear of assessment frequently mars the relationship (Boice, 1992). In Audrey's case, however, the relationship with her mentor was "invaluable." Besides being a reliable source of classroom advice and technical information -- "she was never too busy to answer my questions" -- Audrey's mentor provided emotional and psychological support. "She always told me, `Don't worry, I went through this when I was in your position,'" Audrey explains. "It was so important for me to hear that in the beginning."
The other dynamic figure at the language academy was the Branch Supervisor, who decided to offset the negative treatment of higher administration with some independent projects of her own. In Audrey's first year, the Branch Supervisor began organizing teacher workshops every ten weeks. The workshops focused on teacher issues and were so successful that they eventually became weekly meetings. Participants were able to voice any work-related concerns, as well as share ideas and work on communication strategies. Unity of the school and cooperation among colleagues were constant underlying themes. Here Audrey found "a place to reflect and release frustrations. I was the only new teacher, but [the others] never made me feel like a peon, or the lowly `new person.' They always encouraged me, and were ready to explain things to me." Audrey also found a useful forum for checking ideas or techniques she was using for the first time -- "I had my own ideas, but didn't know how to implement them." These weekly workshops were popular with all the teachers at the school, but had a particularly strong impression on Audrey as a beginning instructor: "I think starting to teach is always scary and hard for everyone. I don't know if there's any other way to do it. I was very insecure about what I was doing, but I was supported by [colleagues] who cared about teaching. The camaraderie among teachers there was far and away the best part of my experience."
Creating the Circumstances for Success
Many people might argue that my and Audrey's experiences are the exception, not the rule; that it is naive to suggest that bonds between teachers just naturally occur; that in many environments, circumstances simply do not allow the formation of efficacious support networks. I refer back to the story of Gayle, the certified ESL instructor who worked at a private language in Tokyo. Aspects of her work situation were quite similar to Audrey's: her branch school was also essentially ignored by the head administration, which was more concerned with recruiting new students and money-making endeavors than with the needs of its teachers. Instructors were given little guidance in their individual classrooms, and almost no evaluation or feedback. Gayle explains, "Teachers definitely felt that the company didn't support them. They might come to Japan full of ideas and enthusiasm, but that didn't last long.... People start to think, why should I put out for a company that doesn't care about me?" Unlike Audrey's school, however, teachers meetings did not succeed in creating a harmonious atmosphere. On the contrary, support sessions turned into "complaint sessions, with no solutions." Employees engaged in "negative bickering" and even starting "hoarding their original [teaching] ideas." Gayle feels that the teachers were victims of a poorly-run, unprofessional administration: "The policies made teachers competitive. They lost sight of why they had come to teach. It was very disillusioning."
Why exactly did a support network flourish in Audrey's school and fail in Gayle's? When cooperation between teachers is such an obvious and rewarding resource, why doesn't it just happen naturally, all the time? There doesn't seem to be an easy answer to this question. I asked all my interviewees their opinion, and the answers were varied. One EFL teacher in Japan blamed it on professional rivalry, and competition for good jobs and high salaries. There is some support in the literature for this argument (Hargreaves, 1982, cited in Kainan, 1992; Melendez & deGuzman, 1983, Seldin, 1987, both cited in Sorcinelli, 1992). More often, however, the circumstances of the job itself -- circumstances beyond the teachers' control -- prevent teachers from working together. Six of my eleven interviewees mentioned lack of time as a constant obstacle to their professional development, including attempts to build relationships with other teachers. One instructor commented, "When you finally have five minutes to talk to your colleagues, the last thing you want to talk about is work!" Another said, "The only free time I had was at lunch time. I didn't want to go work with other teachers, I wanted a break."
In some cases time is just one of many scarce resources. This was true for Kim, the high school teacher in Hawaii. At her first school, under-funding and over-enrollment resulted in a lack of such basic materials as textbooks and writing paper. Teachers fought over what was available and sometimes "pulled rank" to claim the better classrooms or newer textbooks. Kim did not expect to build good relations with other teachers under such conditions, and this was "the system's fault, not the teachers." It seems then that "the system" must allow some space for teachers to create a professional environment. While teachers cannot always rely on their administrators to provide all the answers, at the same time they cannot be expected to overcome insurmountable circumstances on their own. The ideal case would be a situation in which
school districts, university educators, regional service centers, and
state agencies must work together to provide the information and
support, both instructionally and financially, to create a successful
and ongoing [induction] program (Fox & Singletary, 1986).
Finally, teachers need to accept and admit their own need for induction and support. A repeated theme throughout the interviews was the way embarrassment and self-consciousness prevented new teachers from seeking aid: "I was very sensitive about asking questions -- I didn't want to admit my lack of expertise to the other teachers;" "I felt stupid asking for help all the time so I just figured it out by myself;" "I wasn't comfortable asking for help;" "The older teachers were too intimidating;" "I was reluctant to ask for help because I didn't want to get a reputation for not being able to handle my class. [Asking for help] was seen as `losing face.'" Researchers have found this concept of "losing face" to be a common experience among beginning teachers (Newberry, 1977, cited in Grant & Zeichner, 1981). Yet there is no reason for this reaction to occur, at least not to the extent that it hinders the growth of new teachers, or experienced ones for that matter. Rauth (1986) argues that "real professionals need not frighten or be frightened by each other." This is absolutely true -- as teachers we should be able to share criticism and advice freely and without repercussion. All of us, especially those just beginning their careers, should be able to ask for help without feeling incompetent in front of our colleagues. If new teachers are assisted in the beginning, they are less likely to turn into the ungenerous senior with the "it-was-tough-for-me-you'll-have-to-suffer-too" attitude. On the contrary, a teacher who was supported and assisted as a novice will in turn want to aid his or her juniors. The supportive environment becomes, as in Audrey's case, "a self-fulfilling prophecy.... Those teachers who didn't share our vision [of teacher unity] didn't fit in, and they wouldn't come back the next year." The teachers who stayed on in Audrey's school were the caring professionals who guided her through her first year, and provided the type of environment she now realizes every beginning teacher needs. In her second year, when another novice teacher came to her school, Audrey naturally extended the same support she had herself received. It is in this way that our best new teachers are retained and allowed to develop to their full potential, and a doctrine of mutual support spread among all professionals.
REFERENCES
Boice, R. (1992) Lessons Learned about Mentoring. In Sorcinelli, M. D. & Austin, A.E. (Eds.), Developing New and Junior Faculty (pp. 51-60). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.
Fox, S. M. & Singletary, T. J. (1986) Deductions about Supportive Induction. Journal of Teacher Education, 37 (1), 12-15.
Grant, C. A. & Zeichner, K. (1981) Inservice Support for First Year Teachers: The State of the Scene. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 14 (2), 99-111.
Greenberg, J.D. & Erly, M.C. (1989) School-Building-Level Variables and the Induction of New Teachers. In Reinhartz, J. (Ed.), Teacher Induction (pp. 34-41). Washington, D.C.: National Education Association.
Hitz, R., & Roper, S. (1986) The Teacher's First Year: Implications for Teacher Educators. Action in Teacher Education, 8 (3), 65-71.
Hoffman, J. V., Edwards, S. A., O'Neal, S., Barnes, S., & Paulissen, M. (1986) A Study of State-Mandated Beginning Teacher Programs. Journal of Teacher Education, 37 (1), 16-21.
Huling-Austin, L. (1989) Beginning Teacher Assistance Programs: An Overview. In Assisting the Beginning Teacher (pp. 5-15). Reston, VA: Association of Teacher Educators.
Ishler, P. & Edelfelt, R.A. (1989) Impact of Beginning Teacher Assistance Programs. In Assisting the Beginning Teacher (pp. 57-76). Reston, VA: Association of Teacher Educators.
Kainan, A. (1992) Themes of Individualism, Competition, and Cooperation in Teachers' Stories. Teaching & Teacher Education, 8 (5/6), 441-449.
Kilgore, A.M. & Kozisek, J.A. (1989) The Effects of a Planned Induction Program on First-Year Teachers: A Research Report. In Reinhartz, J. (Ed.), Teacher Induction (pp. 93-112). Washington, D.C.: National Education Association.
Mager, G.M. (1992) The Place of Induction in Becoming a Teacher. In DeBolt, G. P. (Ed.), Teacher Induction and Mentoring: School-Based Collaborative Programs (pp. 3-27). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Numrich, C. (1996) On Becoming a Language Teacher: Insights from Diary Studies. TESOL Quarterly, 30 (1), 131-149.
Odell, S.J., & Ferraro, D.P. (1992) Collaborative Teacher Induction. In DeBolt, G. P. (Ed.), Teacher Induction and Mentoring: School-Based Collaborative Programs (pp. 51-71). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Rauth, M. (1986) Reactions to Induction Articles. Journal of Teacher Education, 37 (1), 38-40.
Sorcinelli, M. D. (1992) New and Junior Faculty Stress: Research and Responses. In Sorcinelli, M. D. & Austin, A.E. (Eds.), Developing New and Junior Faculty (pp. 27-36). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.
Varah, L. J., Theune, W. S., & Parker, L. (1986) Beginning Teachers: Sink or Swim? Journal of Teacher Education, 37 (1), 30-33.