Fifty Massachusetts Novice Teachers

In “Lost at sea”: New teachers’ experiences with curriculum and assessment" by D. Kauffman, S. M. Johnson, S. M. Kardos, E. Liu, & H. G. Peske (Teachers College Record, Vol. 104 No. 2, March 2002), we describe how curriculum and assessment are important determinants of new teachers’ experiences and sense of accomplishment. Overall, the new teachers we interviewed received little or no guidance about what to teach or how to teach. Left to their own devices, they struggled day to day to prepare content and materials. Many said that they would prefer greater specification of their curriculum, rather than greater autonomy, although they reserved the right to modify what is provided. The standards and accountability environment created a sense of urgency for these teachers, as state officials made it clear that teachers were publicly accountable for teaching their students the prescribed content and skills. However, state and local standards and testing objectives, which served as a surrogate for curriculum in many schools, offered neither strategies nor materials for teachers. Thus they did not constitute a curriculum, though they were all new teachers received. The absence of a coherent curriculum has implications for student achievement and teacher retention, in that students may learn less from improvised curricula, while new teachers who might have succeeded with more support may leave teaching in frustration. This suggests an urgent need to carefully orient new teachers to the curriculum, rather than simply turning unprepared teachers loose in schools. Greater specification of what to teach and how to teach it can occur without scripting lessons for new teachers, however. New models for professional culture in schools may engage new and experienced teachers in collaborative, ongoing efforts to develop curriculum and improve teaching practice.

In "Counting on colleagues: New teachers encounter the professional cultures of their schools" by S. M. Kardos, S. M. Johnson, H. G. Peske, D. Kauffman, & E. Liu (Educational Administration Quarterly, April 2001), we use new entrants’ accounts to characterize three types of professional cultures or subcultures within schools: veteran-oriented cultures, novice-oriented cultures, and integrated cultures. In veteran-oriented cultures, new teachers described norms of professional interaction determined, in large part, by the veterans, with little attention to the particular needs of beginning teachers. Such schools, or sub-units within schools, typically had a high proportion of senior teachers who worked independently and whose patterns of professional practice were well established. There were few meaningful structural mechanisms in place to orient, induct, and provide ongoing support for new teachers. In contrast, novice-oriented professional cultures typically existed in schools with high proportions of new recruits. Professional interactions in these settings were ongoing and intense, although generally uninformed by the expertise and wisdom of veteran teachers. Thus, new teachers received little professional guidance about how to teach. However, in integrated professional cultures, new teachers described being provided with sustained support and having frequent exchanges with colleagues across experience levels. In these cultures, there were no separate camps of veterans and novices. Expert teachers mentored and collaborated with their novice colleagues and often found that they, themselves, benefited from the exchange. Principals proved to be important in developing and maintaining integrated professional cultures. Teachers in schools with such cultures said that the principals were present and responsive, focused teachers’ efforts on improving teaching and learning, and used the teaching schedule and meeting times to promote peer observations, collaboration and teamwork among teachers. These principals were particularly attentive to the needs of new teachers. In contrast, principals in veteran-oriented and novice-oriented cultures were said to be preoccupied with bureaucratic responsibilities or fund-raising, and rarely observed teachers at work. They focused attention on discipline and paperwork rather than instruction, and seldom created opportunities for novice and veteran teachers to collaborate.

In "The next generation of teachers, changing conceptions of a career in teaching" by H. G. Peske, E. Liu, S. M. Johnson, D. Kauffman, & S. M. Kardos (Phi Delta Kappan, December 2001), we explore our respondents’ career options and choices. Our findings suggest that, rather than approaching teaching as a calling and lifelong commitment, many new teachers—both those who complete teacher preparation programs and those who do not—approach teaching tentatively or conditionally. While there were respondents who planned to make teaching a lifelong career, they were surprisingly few in number. These findings suggest that retaining the next generation of teachers may be more difficult than retaining the previous generation. Teachers’ decisions to stay in the profession depend a great deal on their conceptions of career, their specific interests, and the day-to-day experiences they have in their schools. For those respondents who will pursue teaching for the long-term, the possibility for differentiated roles and the possibility of redesigned work holds promise, while for those who envision short-term careers, well-designed alternative routes to teaching and support at the school site might ensure that they enter and remain in teaching and do their work well.

In “'Barely breaking even': Incentives, rewards, and the high costs of choosing to teach" by E. Liu, S. M. Kardos, D. Kauffman, H. G. Peske, & S. M. Johnson, we consider the role of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards in teachers’ career decisions. Although the new teachers we interviewed entered teaching in search of intrinsic rewards, they were by no means unconcerned about money and financial rewards. Many were very dissatisfied with their pay, especially given the importance and difficulty of their work. While they stressed that they did not enter teaching “for the money,” they worried about whether they could “afford to teach” over the long term. Respondents also talked about the high costs of choosing to teach. These included the opportunity costs of choosing teaching over higher-paying occupations, and the costs—both opportunity and out-of-pocket—of teacher preparation and master’s degree programs that were required for certification. While some respondents reported that they could afford to teach and live comfortably, the majority described tight financial circumstances. They suggested that pay would significantly affect whether they would stay in teaching. It is important to note that these individuals had already chosen teaching despite the low pay, and might thus be expected to be less concerned with financial rewards than the average individual. Our study suggests that if public education is to attract, support, and retain quality teachers, it must increase the financial rewards of teaching, reduce the costs of entry, or implement a combination of both strategies.