 

.3
5a
s

«max

«an: .. .‘..
fﬁwﬁﬂ

4x

"My,
h? ,.
, afﬁx? s
.. ll .xs‘!diu) . r
.J .tnnm.) ”unﬁt.
has... . . ixﬂein
, 3.1.x

31% . 9. _

....

 

 

U 1

D 0C2

 

.
! z'gfgp LFY
I “v
,.,...3L.f3 ll U 1

Vi ’z:,'\:“;:.'"_..”"l" o+"\§
i'.’;'|,_;} ;‘ ;_,lii ut’LLt‘se

1 ~~ !

a ' a. ‘ _.\ b‘l‘. n+1“
' ' l q . ‘ . A \ .

' I . . ' '~ ‘ I “ E ‘

‘ . I I - Kn ‘1 l S ’

I
L“.-- w-‘ ,

 

 

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

An Exploratory Study of the Dyadic Relationship of the
Beginning Teacher and the Administrator

presented by

Audra Aileen Melton

has been accepted towards fulﬁllment
of the requirements for the

Ph.D. degree in Educational Administration

 

 

f)

 

MaTori5ro’feésor’s Signature
41"":(2 Ari/113.. ‘% 265;]

Date

MSU is an aﬁinnative—action, equal-opportunity employer

no-u-o—-----.---v-:-—-—--‘---------u-.-

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/07 p:IC|RC/DateDue.indd-p.1

 

 

 

 

AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF THE DYADIC RELATIONSHIP OF THE
BEGINNING TEACHER AND THE ADMINISTRATOR

By

Audra Aileen Melton

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulﬁllment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Educational Administration

2007

‘l

ABSTRACT

AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF THE DYADIC RELATIONSHIP OF THE
BEGINNING TEACHER AND THE ADMINISTRATOR

By

Audra Aileen Melton

This study explores the relationship between beginning teachers and their
administrators and the inﬂuence of this relationship on the beginning teachers’
persistence in the profession. A phenomenological study was conducted to discover the
nuances of the interactions between the participants and the inﬂuence of these
interactions on the relationship. Data was collected through a variety of methods
including interviews, a focus group, artifacts, and documents. Analysis of the data
produce three important themes: (1) A new teacher’s disposition and professional
preparation affects the nature of the administrator-teacher relationship, (2) a new
teacher’s perception of (a) her own value alignment with the administrator, (b) the
character of leadership exhibited by the principal, and (c) the clarity of her own teaching
responsibilities and her administrator’s role and responsibilities, impede or enhance the
teacher/administrator relationship, and (3) organizational structures and politics/policies

often complicate the character of the teacher/administrator relationship.

Dedicated to my parents Earl and Margrethe Melton

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank my dissertation chair, Dr. Maenette Benham, for her guidance and

support in my research and writing.

iv

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................. viii
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................. ix
CHAPTER I ....................................................................................................................... iii
Introduction to the Study ................................................................................................ 1
Purpose of the Study ....................................................................................................... 2
The Problem and Its Signiﬁcance ................................................................................... 4
Exploratory Questions .................................................................................................. 12
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................ 13
Organization of the Review .......................................................................................... 13
The Role of the Beginning Teacher .............................................................................. 13
Beginning Teacher Attrition ..................................................................................... 13
Implications of Teacher Attrition ............................................................................. 15
Teacher Retention ......................................................................................................... 17
Self-Efﬁcacy ............................................................................................................. 17
Role of the Administrator Through The Instructional Supervision Lens ..................... 24
Interventions ................................................................................................................. 27
Analytical Theories ....................................................................................................... 29
Leader-Member Exchange Theory ........................................................................... 29
Evolution of LMX Theory ........................................................................................ 30
Summary ....................................................................................................................... 34
CHAPTER III : METHODOLOGY ................................................................................ 37
Introduction to a Phenomenological Study ................................................................... 37
Research Design: A Phenomenological Study ............................................................. 37
Qualitative Approach to Research ............................................................................ 37
Deﬁning a Phenomenological Approach to This Study ........................................... 38
Preparation, Data Collection, Analysis, and Conclusions ............................................ 39
Participant Selection ................................................................................................. 40
Developing Guiding Questions and Collecting Data ................................................ 42
Organizing, Analyzing, and Synthesizing the Data .................................................. 46
Summarizing: Implications and Outcomes .............................................................. 49
Trustworthiness ............................................................................................................. 50
Ethical Considerations .................................................................................................. 50
Limitations .................................................................................................................... 51
CHAPTER FOUR: TRIAD AT CALVIN HIGH SCHOOL ........................................... 53
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 53
Calvin High School Context ......................................................................................... 55
Ellen Roth: In Need of a Matriarch ............................................................................. 57
Background: Personal and Professional .................................................................. 57

Needs: Desired and Realized ................................................................................... 59

Organizational Complications .................................................................................. 64
Complexities of the Relationship .............................................................................. 66
Summary ................................................................................................................... 68
Brent Bosworth: Pride and Professionalism ................................................................ 69
Expectations: Desired and Realized ........................................................................ 72
Organizational Complications .................................................................................. 75
Complexities of the Relationship .............................................................................. 79
Summary ................................................................................................................... 81
Karen Summers: Building Family Ties ....................................................................... 81
Background: Personal and Professional Background .............................................. 81
Expectations of Teachers: Desired and Realized ..................................................... 83
Organizational Considerations .................................................................................. 86
Complexities of Building a Relationship .................................................................. 88
Summary ................................................................................................................... 89
CHAPTER FIVE: TRIAD AT LAREDO HIGH SCHOOL ........................................... 91
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 9]
Penny Pallance: Philosophy vs. Facility ...................................................................... 94
Background: Personal and Professional .................................................................. 94
Expectations: Desired and Realized ........................................................................ 98
Organizational Complications ................................................................................ 102
Complexities of the Relationship ............................................................................ 105
Summary ................................................................................................................. 106
Brandon Billings: In Search of an Advocate and Guide ............................................ 108
Background: Personal and Professional ................................................................ 108
Expectations: Desired and Realized ...................................................................... 111
Complexities of the Relationship ............................................................................ 117
Summary ................................................................................................................. 118
Chad Holden: Leading a Legacy ............................................................................... 119
Background: Personal and Professional ................................................................ 119
Expectations of Teachers: Desired and Realized ................................................... 122
Organizational Considerations ................................................................................ 124
Complexities of Building a Relationship ................................................................ 127
Summary ................................................................................................................. 1 29
CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION ........................................................................................ 130
Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 30
Emergent Themes ....................................................................................................... 131
Disposition and Professional Preparation Affects the Nature of the Relationships 132
Alignment of Expectations and Clarity of Roles and Responsibilities ....................... 138
Inﬂuence of Organizational Structures, Politics/Policies, and Traditions .................. 147
CHAPTER SEVEN: CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS .................................. 153
Overview of Important Findings ................................................................................ 158
Important Finding at the Individual Level .................................................................. 158

vi

Important Findings at the Relational Level ................................................................ 160

Important Finding at the Organizational Level ........................................................... 163
Limitations of the Study and Recommendations for Further Research ...................... 165
Implications for Practice ............................................................................................. 166
Reﬂections .................................................................................................................. 1 69
APPENDICES ................................................................................................................ 170
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 1 88

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1
Summary of Case Studies .......................................................................... 17
Table 3.1
Summary of Methodology ......................................................................... 40
Table 3.2
Administrator and Teacher Descriptors .......................................................... 42
Table 3.3
Summary of Data Collection Instruments ........................................................ 45
Table 3.4
Summary of Data Collection Time Frame ....................................................... 46
Table 3.5
Coding Scheme ...................................................................................... 46
Table 4.1
Calvin High School Demographic Summary ................................................... 54
Table 4.2
Calvin High School Participant Professional Experience ..................................... 56
Table 5.1
Laredo High School ................................................................................. 91
Table 5.2
Laredo High School Participants Professional Experience .................................... 92

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1
A Visual Presentation of the Conceptual Model ................................................ l 1
Figure 7.1
A Preliminary Conceptual Model ................................................................ 155
Figure 7.2
A Visual Presentation of the Conceptual Model .............................................. 156

ix

CHAPTER I

Introduction to the Study

 

Teacher attrition, according to (Ingersoll, 2001) is when “teachers depart their
jobs for reasons other than retirement” (p.3). While attrition across professional
occupations, both voluntary and involuntary, is commonplace (Labor, 2006), it is at its
highest among teachers (Ingersoll, 2003; Mumane, 1991). In fact, Ingersoll (2003)
estimates that 50% of beginning teachers leave within the ﬁrst ﬁve years of entry into the
profession. Unlike other professional ﬁelds, e. g. business, industry, and health care,
teaching appears to be the most fragile (Ingersoll, 2001; Labor, 2006).

Such a loss of teachers so early in their careers, must necessarily come at a high
cost (in human resources as well as ﬁscal expense) to school districts, schools, and in
particular, to students. While many school related factors such as ﬁmding, family and
community involvement, curriculum, and class size (Cawelti, 1999) contribute to school
improvement and student achievement, the single most inﬂuential school related factor in
student achievement is the teacher (Stronge, 2000). In fact, Ingersoll (2004) argues that
the lack of a stable teaching staff ultimately has a negative impact on school
performance, “inhibiting the maintenance of a learning community; in turn, lack of
community in a school may have a negative impact on teacher retention, thus creating a
vicious cycle” (p.687). Conversely, beneﬁts of a stable teaching staff include higher
student achievement and test scores, higher quality teaching, and increased teacher
effectiveness (Andrews, 2003). It makes sense then that reducing new teacher attrition

would be a compulsory goal for school districts.

 

Currently, a number of studies have examined teacher satisfaction and
dissatisfaction, attrition and retention, and problems and needs of beginning teachers (see
Ch. 2, Review of Related Literature). Many studies list administrative support as one of
several factors that has an inﬂuence on attrition and retention. Support is oﬁen deﬁned as
the provision of materials, resources, and mentoring (Brown, 2002; Colley, 2002; Dyal,
2002). What the literature fails to explore are meaningful practices that prepare, support,
and sustain beginning teachers (Billingsley, 1993). At the same time, an overview of
teacher-focused literature reveals studies that document the importance of self-efﬁcacy
for teachers during the ﬁrst year of their teaching (Bullough, 1989; Corcoran, 1981).
However, absent from the literature is an in-depth study examining the relationship
between the beginning teacher and her administrator, and in particular, how that
relationship might enhance and/or inhibit the beginning teachers’ efﬁcacy and in turn,

persistence.

Purpose of the Study

The characterization of the school principal has signiﬁcantly shifted over the last
twenty years (Fullan, 2002; Lambert, 1998; Sergiovanni, 1993; Sergiovanni, 1995) from
one of supervision, to one of developers, promoting teacher development and the building
of learning communities. Sergiovanni (1993) offers the following deﬁnition of
community: “Collections of individuals who are bonded together by natural will and who
are together binded to a set of shared ideas and ideals” (p. 8). Changing the way schools
are viewed from that of an organization with bureaucratic systems to that of a learning
community causes changes in how we organize and run schools, how teachers and

students are motivated, and what leadership is and how it should be practiced

(Sergiovanni, 1993). Lambert (1998) deﬁnes leadership as “the reciprocal learning
processes that enable participants in a community to construct meaning toward a shared
purpose” (p.1). In learning communities, leadership is about learning that leads to a
constructive change wherein everyone has the potential to work as a leader (Lambert,
1998). There is a redistribution of power and authority so that leadership becomes the
work of all the members of a school community and no longer relies on charismatic
qualities or the use of authority by one person. The work of the leader then becomes the
ability to facilitate dialogue, ask questions, coach, mentor new teachers, and engage
others in new ideas (Lambert, 1998, p.2). Fullan (2002) describes the role of a leader
within a learning community in the following way: “At the heart of school capacity are
principals focused on the development of teachers’ knowledge and skills, professional
community, program coherence, and technical resources” (p. 1).

While every facet of the school principal’s role is important, one may argue that
the task of building capacity among the teaching core, so that it becomes key in the work
of teaching and learning, is vital. Indeed, the school administrator’s work with beginning
teachers, who have unique and challenging experiences, can be seen as chief among her
responsibilities. Maslow’s (1968) hierarchy of needs would tell us that a positive
professional relationship between the school administrator and the beginning teacher is
integral to the teacher’s feeling a sense of belonging, success, and increased self-efﬁcacy
in the classroom. Furthermore, Maslow would argue that a new teacher cannot meet all
of these needs independently, and therefore the relationships that they form in the school
community and the events that occur within those relationships, are vital in fulﬁlling

some of these needs.

 

 

Given this supposition, the question, then, is: what are the form and the substance
of the relationship, in particular the school administrator-teacher relationship, which can
make a difference in a new teachers’ efficacy and commitment to the profession?
Consequently, the purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between the
beginning teacher (in year one, two, or three) and the building-level administrator (a
seasoned educator and administrator) to better understand what elements/interactions of
that relationship may enhance and/or inhibit the beginning teacher’s efﬁcacy and

persistence in the profession.

The Problem and Its Signiﬁcance

Talk of teacher shortages around the country may falsely lead people to believe
there is a shortage of teachers entering the profession. As a result, the dominant policy
response has been to attempt to increase the quantity of teachers through a variety of
recruitment strategies (Ingersoll, 2001). Programs such as “Teach for America” and
“Troops-to-Teachers” have been designed to lure bright professionals into teaching
careers. Alternative certiﬁcation programs have been developed to allow college
graduates to delay formal educational training, obtain an emergency teaching license, and
begin teaching with no prior experience in a classroom (Feistritzer, 1997). The common
perception is that the large number of retiring teachers and an increase in student
enrollment has caused this teacher shortage. However, Ingersoll (2001) found the
following:

The data show that while it is true that teacher retirements are increasing, the

overall amount of turnover accounted for by retirement is relatively minor when

compared to that resulting from other causes such as teacher job dissatisfaction

and teachers pursuing better jobs or other careers. The data show that, in

particular, low salaries, inadequate support from the school administration,

student discipline problems, and limited faculty input into school decision-making
all contribute to higher rates of turnover, after controlling for the characteristics of

both teachers and schools. (p.5)

Data from the 1993-94 Schools and Stafﬁng Survey (SASS), presented by
Ingersoll (2001) illustrate that 192,550 teachers entered the profession, but in the
following twelve months, 212,908 left the profession. This does not include retirements,
which accounted for an additional 50,242. It is obvious that such a cycling of teachers
would alone create a teacher shortage, made worse by the smaller number of retirements
and increased enrollment. Ingersoll’s (2001) analysis of the SASS data on teacher
turnover (those leaving the profession) showed consistent patterns of people entering and
exiting the teaching profession since the availability of the data in the mid-19803.

This compounding yearly exodus of teachers is creating a crisis in the stafﬁng of
US. schools. This cycle has consequences for schools in terms of building a community
as well as student learning. Ingersoll’s (2001) review of employee turnover literature
found a common premise: employee turnover is important because of its link to the
effectiveness and performance of the organization. “A central ﬁnding in this literature is
that high levels of employee turnover are both cause and effect of dysﬁrnction and low
performance in organizations” (Ingersoll, 2001 , p. 7). The type of organization and the
ﬁmction of the employee make a difference on the impact to the organization as a whole.
Organizations that have non-routine jobs and high levels of interaction between

participants are more effected by turnover because they depend on cormnitment and

cohesion between employees and management (Ingersoll, 1993). Schools have
traditionally been viewed as organizations characterized by uncertain and non-routine
technology with a need for commitment and cohesion among members (Ingersoll, 1993).
This commitment and cohesion among members is what builds a sense of community in a
school. Ingersoll (2001) reports that, “The presence of a sense of community among
families, teachers, and students has long been held by education researchers to be one of
the most important indicators and aspects of successful schools” (p.5).

It makes sense then, that a high turnover of teachers is not only a concern because
it creates stafﬁng problems, but because of its link to school performance as well. In
schools with high turnover rates, a number of negative effects such as reduction in time
teachers spent with their own students because of time involved to train new teachers,
disruption and repetition of curriculum planning and implementation, repetition of
professional development experiences, and drain on the energy of the remaining staff,
were observed (Guin, 2004). The same study discusses the positive attributes of a stable
staff: Capacity for planning over an extended period of time, cohesive curriculum
planning and implementation, capacity for strong teamwork and collaboration, and a
stable support system.

School districts invest in the process of hiring, which includes the ﬁscal outlay of
advertising, recruiting, processing applications and resumes, background checks,
interviewing, various administrative tasks, and potential bonuses for qualiﬁed applicants.
Once a teacher is hired, the cost of orientation and professional development is added. A
study of the cost of teacher turnover in Texas estimates that between $36 and $216

million is spent annually in the state due to beginning teacher attrition, an average of

 

 

 

$8,000 per teacher that terminates (Benner, 2000). Similarly, ASCD estimates the cost
of teacher attrition to be 20% of each leaving teacher’s salary (ASCD, 2003). In addition
to the ﬁscal outlay involved in teachers leaving, the hiring process itself is exceptionally
time consuming for the participants involved. The stafﬁng process involves reading
applications, selection of candidates for interviews, the interviews themselves (of which
there may be several rounds of interviews that involve many stakeholders), and working
with the personnel department. All of these activities take time away from meaningful
work within the school. Stable, well prepared, capable teachers have the largest impact
on student learning (Darling-Hammond, 2003). Needless to say, a chronic “revolving
door” of teachers in and out of schools inhibits the opportunity for schools to become
stable learning communities.

Teacher attrition is a signiﬁcant impairment to building a stable learning
community. The ﬁrst years for a teacher play an important role in the development of her
self-efﬁcacy and potential to stay in the teaching profession (Ingersoll, 2001; Woolfolk,
2005). The hiring, orienting, and mentoring that are required for beginning teachers
require time, money, and energy, equating to loss of human and ﬁscal capital. What is
more is the problem of new teacher turnover on the organization and its ability to develop
a stable learning community that ultimately beneﬁts the students. Considering these
problems, it would seem logical to examine the aspects of a new teacher’s experience,
which may shape or develop her efﬁcacy and practices during this fragile time period.
Within the learning community the administrator plays a key role in the building of
relationships (Lambert, 1998). Beginning teachers have special needs that require

involvement from all members of the learning community, including the administrator

(Veenman, 1984). Currently, the relationship between the administrator and the
beginning teacher appears to have little form or substance. This situation is problematic
in light of the information presented and therefore warrants an in-depth examination as

proposed in this study.

A Beginning Analﬂical Lens

To best understand the nature and form of the school administrator-new teacher
relationship, we need to examine it using different lenses that may reveal unique and
compelling nuances. The two theories that were most helpful included Gerstener’s
Leader Member Exchange theory (LMX), which focuses on the dyadic relationship with
the unit of analysis being the relationship itself (Gerstner, 1997) and Bandura’s (1993)
self-efﬁcacy mechanism (SEM), which further examines the effect of dyadic relationship
on the individual. The work of Maslow (1968) and Argyris (1993) are used to add depth
to the analysis, allowing a pathway for additional questions interconnected to the two
main theories of LMX and SEM.

The roots of LMX theory are grounded in business and industry. Studies have
typically been conducted in corporate and industry settings showcasing skilled employees
(Schriesheim, 1999; Wilhelm, 1993). The focus of LMX research is the relational
characteristics between the leaders and the members that promote a desired outcome.
The main contribution the LMX perspective has brought to the understanding of
leadership lies in the ﬁmdamental idea that leaders form different types of exchange
relationships with their subordinates (Sparrowe, 1997). The quality of the exchange
relationship between the member and the leader is pivotal in determining the fate of the

member within the organization (Gerstner, 1997; Sparrowe, 1997).

LMX research can be divided into two bodies of research. The ﬁrst examines the
characteristics of the LMX relationship including the dyadic role making process,
interactive communication patterns, leader-member value agreement, antecedents to
and/or determinants of LMX, upward maintenance tactics and interaction patterns,
subordinate loyalty, decision inﬂuence, inﬂuence tactics, and member affect concerning
the relationship (Graen, 1995). The second examines the difference between the two
different groups in relating to organizational variables such as LMX and performance,
turnover, organizational commitment, performance appraisal, job climate, innovation,
organizational citizenship behavior, empowerment, procedural and distributive justice,
and career progress (Graen, 1995). The theoretical assumption behind LMX is that the
type of relationship formed between the leader and the member will predict the role of
the member in the organization and her potential to stay with that particular organization
(Vecchio, 1985). The better the quality of the relationship, the more likely the member is
to ﬂourish and stay with the organization.

The educational setting provides unique challenges in terms of information and
communication tensions. New teachers must work much of the time independently, yet
they are dependent on information/communication from a variety of sources to which
they must respond including students, parents, colleagues, and administrators. LMX
theory provides a means of examining patterns of communication and information
dissemination within the relationship between the new teacher and the administrator.
Also challenging is the complexity of the task of education and supervision in a school
setting. While previous LMX research has focused on relationships with lower level task

complexity and a greater span of control from supervisors, this research attempts to adapt

this lens to address the relationship where intricacies in the relationship and the job being
performed are high, and the amount of control exercised by the administrator may vary.
How these dyads go about developing and maintaining their relationship is of interest
with LMX theory as a tool to examine strategies of participants in the maintenance of the
relationship.

In addition to LMX theory, the extent to which the administrator/teacher
relationship may affect a beginning teacher’s sense of self-actualization/self-efﬁcacy is
best captured by Bandura’s (1993) work. It is important to note that while Bandura’s
social cognitive theory can stand as the sole theoretical lens for directing this study, I
have selected elements of his self-efﬁcacy mechanism (SEM) to help better illuminate the
affect of the dyadic relationship. In particular, SEM has the potential for broad
explanatory power as it aids in clarifying the ways in which beginning teachers cope with
challenges and stresses brought on by the requirements of teaching and how the teacher
regulates her behavior, achievement, career pursuits, and perceived efﬁcacy.

The key constructs from Bandura’s (1993) work appear to be most important to
this study; (a) teachers’ beliefs in their own efﬁcacy to control their practice and to
master classroom teaching; (b) teachers’ beliefs in their own efﬁcacy to stimulate and
promote “learning” and to create a positive/engaged learning environment that lead to
their students’ academic success; (c) administrators’ belief in their own efﬁcacy to
support and have both a cognitive and affective effect on the health of the school’s
learning community; and ((1) teachers’ and administrators’ beliefs in their collective
instructional efﬁcacy to signiﬁcantly impact student learning, academic achievement, and

positive school climate.

10

The interplay of elements concerning the theoretical lenses helped to tease-out the
nature of the school administrator/new teacher relationship to help better forward an
understanding of the meaning and impact of this relationship on new teacher experiences.

The key elements of this interaction are best presented in Figure 1.1.

Administrator

   
   
   

Organizational
Setting

Disposition

Teacher A W Teacher B

 

Figure 1.1

A Visual Presentation of the Conceptual Model

Beginning at the inner circle is Disposition, which represents the personal and
professional background and life experiences as well as the needs an individual brings to
the relationship. The triangle is representative of the three participants at each school.
The strength and weakness of the line between the administrator and the teacher is greatly
affected by external pressures of the school setting, represented by the larger exterior
circle, as well as the expectations framed by disposition. An element of the model that

rose to the surface during the study, but is not a focus of the study, is the implication that

11

teacher/teacher relationships may also affect the nature of the administrator/teacher
relationship.
Exploratory Questions
The purpose of the study is to examine the relationship between the beginning
teacher (in years one through three) and the building level administrator (a seasoned
educator and administrator) to better understand which elements/interactions of that
relationship may enhance and/or inhibit the beginning teacher’s determination to remain
in the teaching profession. Hence, the key exploratory question is what is the nature and
substance of the administrator-beginning teacher relationship that can make a difference
in a new teacher’s efﬁcacy and hence, determination to stay in the teaching profession?
The following subsidiary probes assist in better clarifying this relationship:
1. What elements of the dyadic relationship play a particularly important role in the
teacher’s and the administrator’s perception of their relationship?
2. Does this dyadic relationship impact the beginning teacher’s capacity to cope with
challenges and stresses brought on by the expectations and requirements of
teaching, and in turn, her efﬁcacy and persistence in the profession?

3. How might organizational elements impact the nature of this dyadic relationship?

12

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW
_O_rg2_1nization of the Review

Since this will be a phenomenological study that examines the relationship
between the beginning teacher and the building level administrator, the literature will
focus on the issues involved in such a relationship. First, it will address the role of the
beginning teacher and special concerns surrounding attrition and retention of these
teachers. Then, it will examine the role of the principal through the instructional
supervision lens, including interventions for beginning teachers. Finally, the review will
examine the use of Leader Member Exchange theory as a beginning lens for the analysis
and understanding of the relationship between the beginning teacher and the

administrator.

The Role of the Beginning Teacher

Beginning Teacher Attrition

Considering attrition and retirement, approximately 2.2 million teachers will be
hired within the next decade (MetLife, 2004-2005). Based on previous research and
surveys ((Bolich, 2001; MetLife, 2004-2005; Schlecty, 1981) it can be estimated that
approximately half of these 2.2 million new teachers will leave the profession within ﬁve
years of their initiation. Teacher attrition itself has many complex facets.

The roots of attrition reach back to initial career commitment and early work
experience (Chapman, 1986). Beginning teachers start their ﬁrst teaching experience
with optimism and enthusiasm (Shea, 1993). They enter the profession with hope for

themselves and their students and with determination to educate all of the children in

13

their charge. One might ask why then, with such high expectations and aspirations, do
these same teachers ﬂee in such large numbers so soon after beginning their careers?
Areas such as inadequate preparation in classroom management and discipline,
conditions of the school and classroom, and support from colleagues and administration
are key factors (Bolich, 2001). Other variables such as academic preparation and talent
are also inﬂuential factors (Schlecty, 1981). One factor cited by beginning teachers
leaving the profession is the lack of administrative support (Billingsley, 1993; Lee, 1994;
MetLife, 2004-2005). It has been found that “teachers themselves report that many times
their administrators ignore their needs and appear not to understand the need for new
teachers to ease into their responsibilities” (Dyal, 2002, p.13).

Veteran teachers, parents, and administrators have high expectations of new
teachers, often expecting them to perform at the level of veterans (Dyal, 2002). As a
result, beginning teachers feel anxious, isolated, and generally overwhelmed by these
expectations, thus becoming discouraged with their situations (Brock, 1998). To
exacerbate the situation, many new teachers are assigned to the most challenging classes
and students (Andrews, 2003). Johnson (2001, as cited in Dyal, 2002), found the
following scenarios to be some of the most challenging and disheartening for beginning
teachers: (a) They are often assigned to the classes veteran teachers do not want; (b) the
most challenging students are often in the classes they are assigned; (0) difficult
assignments and responsibilities outside of the classroom are common; and (d)
administrators do not help them or effectively monitor their progress. The “lack of
support and guidance is the reason why 16% of our nation’s newest teachers abandon the

profession. Thirteen [percent of new teachers] list the primary reason as lack of respect

14

from their administration. Nearly 20% of novice teachers in Texas left due to lack of
professional support. North Carolina teachers report that 63% quit because of lack of
administrative support” (Bolich, 2001, p.3). Based on such data, one must question what
is happening within the relationship between the beginning teacher and the administrator
to produce such responses. This study will focus on the intricacies and inﬂuences
between the beginning teacher and the administrator to examine the intricacies and

inﬂuences of their relationship.

Implications of Teacher Attrition

The loss of beginning teachers has an impact that ranges from the district level,
down to the individual student. As previously described, school districts must invest
large amounts of time and money in the process of hiring, training, and supervising
beginning teachers. At the building level, teacher attrition can have an effect on the
organizational stability, morale, and effectiveness of the school (Smith, 2004).

That cost is especially high in organizations where the production process

requires extensive interaction among participants and, hence, is highly dependent

on continuity, cohesiveness, and coherence. Schools are this kind of organization.

Decades of research have documented that a sense of community and cohesion

among families, teachers, and students is important for the success of schools.

(Smith, 2004)

The continual loss of beginning teachers “can inhibit the development and maintenance
of a learning community; in turn, lack of community in a school may have a negative
impact on teacher retention, thus creating a vicious cycle” (Smith, 2004, p. 687). A

school that suffers from a lack of community and effectiveness is less likely to

15

institutionalize a successful reform effort since this depends critically on the continued
presence of large numbers of teachers who are committed to the change (Fullan, 1991).
Loss of new teachers disrupts the team-based organizational structure and functioning of
a school (Guin, 2004). Lake explains that the team orientation is based on the fact that
organizations contain groups of individuals committed to the mission and goals of the
organization (as cited in Guin, 2004, p.3). Based on this information, it is only logical
then that “Turnover makes teamwork difﬁcult, given the instability of key players.
Because the job of teaching requires a signiﬁcant amount of teamwork, turnover is likely
to disrupt the momentum of the entire group” (Guin, 2004, p.3). Part of the reason
attrition may impact teamwork is erosion of relational trust. Bryk and Schneider explain:
Such intangible costs of turnover are often linked to the concept of trust, which
has been found to inﬂuence organizational functioning and student outcomes. In
schools, relational trust is deﬁned as the social exchanges of schooling as
organized around a distinct set of role relationships: teachers with students,
teachers with other teachers, teachers with parents and with their school principal.
(as cited in Guin, 2004, p.3)
The following table (2.1) is a summary of case studies performed by Guin (2004,

p. 19) that analyzes the impact of teacher turnover on speciﬁc school characteristics.

16

 

Table 2.1 Summary of Case Studies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

School Characteristic Low Turnover High Turnover
Instructional Program Consistent within and Disrupted by constant
across grade levels churning of teaching staff
Professional Development Targeted to meet designated Often repeated when new
school-level goals teachers arrive
Piecemeal approach
Teacher Collaboration Teachers collaborate on Teachers ﬁnd it difﬁcult to
both planning and collaborate when they have
implementation of new co-workers each year
curriculum
Trust High levels of trust among Lack of trust among
staff teachers
Average number of Over 150 Typically 5 or less
applicants per opening

 

 

 

An in-depth examination of the relationship between beginning teachers and

administrators may provide more information on the aspect of trust in the relationship in

addition to inﬂuences of other school characteristics.

Teacher Retention

Self-Efficacy

The theoretical foundation of self-efﬁcacy is found in the social cognitive theory
developed by Albert Bandura (1977). In his initial publication, self-efﬁcacy was deﬁned
as “the belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required
to produce given results” (Bandura, 1977). Bandura’s work since that time has supported
his claim that our beliefs in our abilities have a powerful effect on our behavior,
motivation, and our potential success or failure (Bandura, 1996, 1997). Bandura suggests
that because self-efﬁcacy beliefs are speciﬁcally self-referent in nature and directed

toward perceived abilities regarding speciﬁc tasks, that they are powerﬁrl predictors of

17

behavior. The motivation to pursue a task or challenge (such as teaching) comes from an
individual’s internalized goals, and aspirations and needs, which are dependent on the
concept of self-efﬁcacy (Bandura, 1977). It has also been suggested that self-efﬁcacy
needs deﬁnition within the context of behaviors that are being studied in order to be
useful in research. Therefore, the concept of self-efﬁcacy must be applied to the
behaviors of teachers (speciﬁcally beginning teachers) in an educational setting.
Teaching efﬁcacy identiﬁes beliefs about the results of teaching in general
whereas personal efﬁcacy deals with an individual’s belief about her ability to achieve a
certain result due to her own personal action. The study of teacher efﬁcacy has
characterized two dimensions that represent internal and external orientations (Gusky,
1994). The internal factor represents “perceptions of personal inﬂuence, power, and
impact in teaching and learning situations,” while the external orientation “relates to
perception of the inﬂuence, power, and impact of elements that lie outside the classroom,
and hence, may be beyond the direct control of individual teachers” (Gusky, 1994,
p.639). It is possible that the relationship between the beginning teacher and her
administrator may have elements that lie within both orientations of teacher efﬁcacy.
The supervision and evaluation of the beginning teacher by the administrator may
inﬂuence the teacher’s perception of her own ability to impact learning in addition to her
personal teaching skills. Perhaps external factors such as grade level, subject area, room
scheduling, supplies , and disciplinary support could be considered as elements that lie
outside the classroom, which may or may not be inﬂuenced directly by the beginning

teacher, but are likely to be inﬂuenced by the administrator.

18

Corcoran (1981) documents that teacher’s self-efﬁcacy, in particular beliefs
toward teaching, change over the ﬁrst year of teaching. Attitudes toward teaching
decline during the initial weeks of the induction year and change very little during the
remainder of the school year (Hogben, 1979). Moreover, a link between teachers’ beliefs
in their abilities to teach and the performance of their students has been identiﬁed
(Ashton, 1986). “In fact, over the last 20 years, researchers have established strong
connections between teacher efﬁcacy and teacher behaviors that foster student
achievement” (Goddard, 2000, p.480). While there has been evidence compiled that
links the effects of a teacher’s belief about her capacity to impact student’s motivation
and achievement, less is known about the kinds of context variables linked to a teacher’s
sense of efﬁcacy (Tschannen—Moran, 2002).

The model of teacher efﬁcacy (Tschannen-Moran, 1998) suggests that resources
and constraints in speciﬁc teaching contexts impact the efficacy judgment of a teacher.
The 2002 study by Tschannen-Moran and Wolfolk-Hoy (2002) examines just one aspect
of this model. They explored what kinds of supports seemed to matter most in the
development of teachers’ efﬁcacy. Beginning with their Teacher Sense of Efﬁcacy
Scale, Tschannen-Moran and Wolfolk-Hoy also asked participants to rate the quality of
the support they had received in ﬁve areas: (a) teaching resources, (b) interpersonal
support provided by colleagues, (c) parental support and involvement in their classrooms,
(d) interpersonal support provided by the administration of their school, and (e)
community support provided for their classrooms. The analysis was divided into
Novice Teachers (<ﬁve years experience) and Experienced Teachers (ﬁve years or more

experience). Perceived support of the whole group was moderate but the experienced

19

teachers reported signiﬁcantly higher levels of teaching resources and support from their
administration. When the support variables were analyzed independently, it was found
that neither group showed a relation between teachers’ sense of efﬁcacy and support from
administration. The only variable that made an independent contribution to explaining
the teachers’ sense of efﬁcacy was teaching resources. Tschannen-Moran and Wolfolk-
Hoy (2002) explain this lack of impact on behalf of the administrators (and colleagues)
by stating “because of the traditional isolation of the teaching profession, and the dearth
of meaningful feedback from administrators in traditional supervisory practice, perhaps it
is not surprising that teachers do not look to these as primary sources to inform their
efﬁcacy judgments. Teachers have been forced to cultivate their beliefs of their
capability to impact student learning whether support from colleagues or administrators
was available or not” (p.6). They determined that the career stage did make a difference
in a teacher’s sense of efﬁcacy with the experienced teachers having a higher sense of
efﬁcacy than the novice teachers. This supports the claim that teachers leaving the
profession have a signiﬁcantly lower sense of efﬁcacy than teachers that remain in the
ﬁeld (Glickman, 1995). In conclusion, the study suggests that teachers make their
efﬁcacy judgments independent of the level of support from colleagues and
administration, but also suggests that the organizational structure has the potential to
change that result (Tschannen-Moran, 2002).

While the data in the Tschannen-Moran and Wolfolk Hoy (2002) study shows a
lack of connection between the support of the administrator and the teacher’s sense of
efﬁcacy, it is worthwhile to note that the term “support” was not deﬁned to the

participants and was lumped into a single evaluation where the participant was asked to

20

rate the interpersonal support provided by the administrator of their school. This work
also conﬂicts with other work by Woolfolk (2005) that demonstrates a connection
between the perception of support and the level of the teacher’s efﬁcacy. This particular
study used the same scale as Tschannen-Moran and Wolfolk-Hoy (2002), but also used
three other widely used scales for teacher efﬁcacy. Wolfolk Hoy (2005) concluded that
“changes in efﬁcacy during the ﬁrst year of teaching were related to the level of support
received” (p. 1). Clearly there is a need for further investigation to clarify the role of
“support” within individual leadership behaviors on the part of the administrator to
clarify what differences exist that may or may not impact the teacher’s sense of efﬁcacy.
Considering the impact of efﬁcacy beliefs on teacher motivation and persistence over the
course of a career could potentially lead to reconsidering the experiences of novice
teacher, allowing for greater protection and assistance (Tschannen-Moran, 2001).

An ethnographic study about beginning teachers in urban schools (Chester, 1996)
found that speciﬁc school practices contribute to the quality of new teachers’ work in
their ﬁrst year of teaching. These practices included opportunities to collaborate with
colleagues, work with administrators who attended to instructional issues, and quantity
and availability of resources. It is the new teacher’s work with the administrators that is
of signiﬁcant interest. The National Center for Educational Statistics (1994) as cited in
Chester (1996) identiﬁed inadequate support from administrators as the most frequently
cited reason former teachers gave for leaving the profession (30.2%) or changing districts
(45.9%) in 1988-1989. The 1990-1991 results were similar with 24.9% of the former
teachers and 45.6% of movers identifying lack of administrator support for their

dissatisfaction (Chester, 1996). Administrative support and attention to instructional

21

issues are especially important to beginning teachers. Administrators who do not observe
their new teachers at all, or wait until the end of the school year to do so, send a message
that they do not highly value instructional competence (Chester, 1992). Observation and
feedback are a critical component in assisting new teachers, and without them, new
teachers may feel uncertain, anxious, and neglected (Chester, 1992).
Supervision of new teachers is also linked to teacher efﬁcacy (Chester, 1996).
The number of classroom observations by the immediate supervisor was used as a proxy
to represent the supervisor’s attention to performance. Chester (1996) found that the
number of supervisor observations was related to a change in self-efﬁcacy beliefs.
For both novice teachers and experienced beginning urban teachers who were
observed 5 times during their ﬁrst year, the ﬁgures show upward (positive) shifts
from the baseline in changes in self-efﬁcacy beliefs, while for teachers who were
not observed the shift is downward (negative). In urban schools where
supervisors pay a great deal of attention to teacher performance, all experienced
beginning teachers and most novices, have positive changes in their self-efﬁcacy
beliefs. Only the youngest novices experience declines. In contrast, in schools
where supervisors pay little or no attention to classroom performance, all
experienced new hires, and most novices, experience declines in their self-
efﬁcacy beliefs. (p.246)
These results support the ﬁndings that clear and frequent observation with
evaluation by administrators contribute directly to the teachers’ commitment to school
goals when they believe that they are capable of inﬂuencing the outcomes based on their

own efforts (Rosenholtz, 1989). While the results of Chester’s (1996) study illuminate a

22

signiﬁcant link between new teacher self-efﬁcacy and administrator observation, it is
limited by the role of the administrator. While it is possible that a new teacher may only
encounter her administrator during observations, it is also likely that the relationship
extends beyond that single role. It is important to gain a multi-faceted picture of the role
of the administrator in this relationship.

In addition to the limited scope of the role of the administrator and her inﬂuence
on beginning teacher self-efﬁcacy, other concerns have surfaced in regards to method of
data collection. A discrepancy exists between novice teacher reporting of self-efﬁcacy
when using scales versus oral and written expressions (Onafowora, 2005). Novice
teachers express a lack of conﬁdence in their teaching experiences and portray
themselves as challenged by discipline issues that impact instruction in their written and
oral responses (Onafowora, 2005). However, in their scale responses, the same novice
teachers express conﬁdence in their teaching efﬁcacy, indicating that they are conﬁdent
in reaching even the most difﬁcult student. The discrepancy in Onafowora’s study
indicates a need for further qualitative approach to data collection. The majority of
teacher efﬁcacy studies have concentrated on using a self-efﬁcacy scale (Chester, 1996;
Onafowora, 2005; Tschannen-Moran, 2002; Woolfolk, 2005). The predominant use of
scales and the conﬂicting results collected by Onafowora (2005) in addition to the very
limited use of administrator involvement on teacher self-efﬁcacy scales, lends itself to the
use of qualitative research in the examination of the relationship between the beginning

teacher and the administrator.

23

Role of the Administrator Through The Instructional Supervision Lens

The old model of school leadership which depends on the principal as the sole
instructional leader leaves the talents of teachers untapped and is not easily sustained as
administrators come and go (Lambert, 2002). The principal is no longer characterized as
the supervisor of workers, instead, the principal acts to promote teacher development and
the building of learning communities (Fullan, 2002; Lambert, 1998; Sergiovanni, 1993;
Sergiovanni, 1995). Instead of thinking of leadership as a formal authority, Lambert
(1998) suggests that leadership be thought of as verb, by considering the processes,
activities, and relationships in which people engage rather than as the individual in a
speciﬁc role (p. 1). This view of leadership means that adults learn together in a
community that has shared goals and visions. Lambert (1998, p.1) lists the following
assumptions regarding leadership as a form of learning: (a) leadership is not a trait and
leadership and leader are not the same, as a leader is anyone who engages in the work of
leadership; (b) leadership is about learning that leads to constructive change; (0)
Everyone has the potential and right to work as a leader; (d) leading is a shared
endeavor, the foundation for the democratization of schools; and (e) leadership requires
the redistribution of power and authority.

Building a learning community requires the administration to relinquish authority
and to develop the personal and collective power of the staff (Lambert, 2005). When
leadership becomes the collective work of the staff, formal authority and charismatic
ﬁgures are not required. The role of the principal then becomes one of a dialogue

facilitator, coach, and mentor. Lambert (1998) has developed an interactive framework

24

that identiﬁes schools based on their participation and skillfulness in building leadership
capacity. Schools can be described in the following paradigms (Lambert, 1998, p.2)

School 1: Low Participation, Low Skillfulness. In this type of school, the
principal typically follows a stereotypical autocratic style of leadership. The participation
of parents and community members is limited. Information ﬂows in a top-down direction
with little input from the bottom-up. It is rare that the staff works together or tries new
practices. The staff often attributes problems to the students, parents, and community
rather than instructional practices.

School 2: High Participation, Low Skillfulness. In this type of school the
principal may be unpredictable or disengaged. Information is sparse and may change
depending on the person asking the questions. Staff meetings rarely involve dialogue.
Because there is no school-wide focus on teaching and learning, both poor and excellent
classes may exist. Staff members may work on individual projects, grants, or
partnerships, but remain unconnected from the staff as a whole. Student achievement
remains the same, but with higher achievement for students in particular socioeconomic
and gender groups.

School 3: High Skillfulness, Low Participation. In this type of school, the
principal makes an effort to include some of the staff in efforts to provide skillful
leadership. This group of staff is provided with training and opportunities to develop
leadership skills. The remaining staff may become polarized and resist the efforts set
forth by their colleagues. The group of staff involved in leadership learns to accumulate
and use data to make school decisions, although this may raise objections from other

staff. Some staff feels caught in the middle and are not skilled in conﬂict resolution. The

25

result is pockets of excellence and innovation, but a lack of school-wide focus on student
learning. Student achievement may show slight gains in this type of school.

School 4: High Skillfulness, High Participation. In this school the principal and
other leaders make an effort to involve all staff in leadership development and decision
making. This type of school tends to have high leadership capacity and broad-based
participation. Staff members have the skills to acquire data from sources or research and
tend to base decisions on these data. There is a clear purpose and a focus on both student
and adult learning. Information ﬂows freely between all stakeholders in the community.
The school community shares the responsibility for leadership and learning. Staff
members consider themselves to be part of a professional community where innovation is
standard. Student achievement is high, even within subgroups.

Developing the leadership potential in teachers is a key component to building a
school with both high skillfulness and high participation. So how does a principal go
about the process of developing this kind of school and staff? Lambert (2005) cites
certain characteristics and behaviors (e. g., continual learners, think strategically, are
vision-driven) that leaders of high capacity schools exhibit:

They participate with other members of the community to share concerns, issues,

and decisions; monitor and implement shared vision; engage in reﬂective

practices (reﬂection/inquiry/dialogue/action); monitor norms and take self-
corrective action; think strategically; build a culture of interdependency; self
organize; diversify and blend roles; establish criteria for self-accountability; share
authority and responsibility (dependent on expertise and interest rather than on

role); and plan for enculturation of new staff and successor (Lambert, 2005, p.3)

26

Clearly the role of the administrator has moved away from that of the autocratic
supervisor and into a much more complex, yet humane, developer of people. No longer
can there be the assumption that hierarchy equals expertise. Leaders share their authority
with other experts, the teachers. Leaders work with others to generate compelling ideas,
plan ways to fulﬁll common goals, and generate trust and commitment. Beginning
teachers are a part of the learning community and should be treated as learners and
partners in the process. It is more challenging to bring the beginning teacher into the
community when she has not yet developed trusting relationships, and is new to the
culture, norms, and values of the school. The administrator, as part of the leadership
process, needs to ﬁnd ways to develop the beginning teacher so that she can become a

participatory member of the learning community.

Interventions

Beginning teachers have special needs and concerns. A review of eighty-three
studies of perceived problems of new teachers (Veenman, 1984) found the eight most
frequently cited problems were (in rank order) “classroom discipline, motivating
students, dealing with individual differences, assessing students’ work, relationships with
parents, organization of class work, insufﬁcient materials and supplies, and dealing with
problems of individual students” (p. 160). These difﬁculties associated with the ﬁrst
years of teaching demonstrate the need for specialized attention to new teachers and
programs that will support them in their new challenges. Programs or services that are
designed to aid the new teacher fall under the general term of teacher induction.

Teacher induction can include a wide variety of means of assistance: printed

materials about a district and school, building orientations, release time, group meetings

27

with other beginning teachers, consultations with experienced teachers, mentoring,
conferences and workshops on speciﬁc related topics, reductions in teaching load,
conferences with supervisors, observations of other classrooms, and team teaching
(Veenman, 1984). In order for an induction or mentoring program to be effective, it must
be well designed and supported (Darling-Hammond, 2003). One example of a successﬁrl
induction program according to would be a multiple day seminar before the beginning of
the school year covering areas that new teachers ﬁnd most challenging such as classroom
management and effective instructional techniques (Wong, 2004). The program should
continue with other elements as follows: (a) ongoing professional development designed
for the needs of novice teachers over a period of 2-3 years; (b) group meetings with new
teachers for the development of support within a learning community; (c) inclusion of a
supportive mentor teacher; ((1) a strong sense of administrative support; and (e)
opportunities for observing and modeling effective teaching.

The National Association of State Boards of Education found that well-designed
mentoring programs lower the attrition rates of beginning teachers (Andrews, 2003).
Andrews cites an example from Gold (1999) in which results of a study of new teachers
in New Jersey reported ﬁrst year teacher attrition at 18% for those without mentoring vs.
5% for those that had a mentor. In addition to lowering attrition in new teachers, well-
designed induction programs have been found to increase job satisfaction and efﬁcacy
(Ingersoll, 2004).

Successful mentoring programs create a strong, improvement oriented profession
in schools, professional associations and teacher unions (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2000).

Reaching these objectives requires mentoring to move in the following directions: “from

28

being performed in pairs to becoming an integral part of professional cultures in schools;
from focusing only on classroom work with students to developing the ability to form
strong relationships with colleagues and parents as well; from hierarchical dispensations
of wisdom to shared inquiries into practice; and from being an isolated innovation to
becoming an integrated part of broader improvement efforts to reculture our schools and

school systems” (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2000).

Analytical Theories

 

Leader-Member Exchange Theory

Leader-Member Exchange theory has its roots in business and industrial literature
and has not yet been applied to the educational setting. Leadership research can be
described using domains that consist of the leader, the follower, and the relationship.
Leader-Member Exchange theory (LMX) differs from other leadership theories in its
focus on the dyadic relationship, its unit of analysis being the relationship itself
(Gerstner, 1997). The foci of investigation in this type of research are the relational
characteristics between leaders and members that promote a desired outcome. The main
contribution the LMX perspective has brought to the understanding of leadership lies in
the fundamental idea that leaders form different types of exchange relationships with
their subordinates (Sparrowe, 1997). The quality of the exchange relationship between
the member and the leader is pivotal in determining the fate of the member within the
organization (Gerstner, 1997; Sparrowe, 1997). Research in this domain focuses on
identifying characteristics of dyadic relationships such as trust, respect, mutual
obligation, evaluating reciprocal inﬂuence between leaders and followers, examining

how the dyadic relationships are correlated with outcome variables of interest, and

29

 

researching how effective leadership relationships can be developed, maintained, and

combined into collectivities of leadership structures (Graen, 1995).

Evolution of LMX T heory

The traditional domain of LMX research has been the formal reporting
relationship between the leader and the member and is described as “vertical dyad
linkage” (Sparrowe, 1997). The assumption in this research has been that the exchange
of resources ﬂows down the lines of the formal organization and that the leader, by virtue
of her position, has the power to decide how to distribute resources and opportunities
among the subordinates. The dependence upon leaders for intangible resources such as
loyalty, information, emotional support and respect have also been tied to the relationship
(Dienesch, 1986). Relationships were categorized based on the quality of the exchanges
between the leader and the member. When asked to describe their manager, different
professionals generated very different descriptions of the same person (Graen, 1995). At
one extreme, professionals reported “high-quality” exchanges (also known as “in-
group”), which were characterized by a high degree of mutual trust, respect and
obligation (Graen, 1995). The opposite extreme reported “low-quality” exchanges (also
known as “out-group”), which were characterized by low trust, respect, and obligation.
Workers in high-quality relationships typically acted as trusted assistants to the manager,
going above and beyond the call of duty, whereas the workers with low-quality
relationships acted as helpers that only performed that which was speciﬁcally required of
their jobs (Zalesny, 1987). The central concept of early work examining the relationship
was that these different groups arise out of resource constraints on the manager that

requires her to develop a group of trusted workers to assist her in the functioning of the

30

work (Graen, 1995). It is predicted that because of constraints on a leaders’ time and
other resources, only a limited number of subordinates would eventually become “in-
group” members (Dansereau, 1975).

More recent work in LMX has moved past the “in-groups” and “out-groups” to
focus on development of effective leadership relationships. In this approach, the focus is
not on the differences between the two groups, but rather on how leaders can work with
members on an individual basis to develop a partnership with each one (Graen, 1995). In
this model, the LMX process is accessed by all members through an offer to participate
from the leader. This offer has two effects: (1) the LMX process is perceived as more
equitable and (2) there is a potential for a larger number of high-quality relationships
which would in turn, increase the potential for more effective leadership and improve the
organization’s capacity (Graen, 1995). Followers that accept the offer of the leader to
develop a high quality LMX relationship improve their performance dramatically (Graen,
1982). Expansion of this model of LMX theory may be useful in the examination of the
relationship between the novice teacher and the administrator.

To understand the application of the LMX model, it is necessary to describe its
process. It begins with a “stranger phase” in which the “individuals ﬁrst come together
as strangers occupying interdependent organizational roles. In this phase, interactions
between the members occur on a more formal basis — in essence, it can be characterized
as a “cash and carry” economic exchange. Within this relationship, exchanges are purely
contractual: leaders provide followers only with what they need to perform, and
followers behave only as required and do only their prescribed job” (Graen, 1995, p.230).

A beginning teacher would logically start in this phase, being new to the profession and

31

the school. It is possible that the teacher would have limited exchanges with the
administrator surrounding issues pertinent to instruction. In this case, the purely
contractual exchanges could be interpreted as the mandatory observations and evaluations
of the beginning teacher.

The second phase of the LMX model is the “acquaintance” phase which begins
when either party makes an offer to improve the relationship. In this stage, “increased
social exchanges occur between the members, and not all exchanges are contractual.
They begin to share greater information and resources, both on a personal and work level.
These exchanges are still limited, however, and are part of a testing stage. There is still
an equitable return of favors, and these exchanges occur within a limited time period”
(Graen, 1995, p.230). It is questionable as to whether or not a beginning teacher will
reach this stage in her ﬁrst year of teaching, or even in the following years. Research
must be conducted to measure the progress of the relationship and also to identify
variables that may impact the progress of moving from one stage to the next. It is
important to examine both personal variables and organizational variables that may
impact the progression of the relationship. It would be of interest to examine at what
point in the relationship an offer is made to extend the relationship and by which party
the offer is made. F urtherrnore, an attempt to investigate whether the failure to progress
in the relationship has any impact on the beginning teacher’s sense of efﬁcacy or her
intent to leave the profession would be a potential area of research interest.

The third and last level of the LMX model is classiﬁed as “mature partnership”
exchange. At this point, “exchanges between the members are highly developed: they

are “in kind” and may have a long time span of reciprocation. The individuals can count

32

on each other for loyalty and support. Moreover, the exchanges are not only behavioral
but also emotional—mutual respect, trust, and obligation grow throughout the process. It
is at this stage that the degree of incremental inﬂuence and, hence, leadership between the
members is extremely high” (Graen, 1995, p.231).

The rate at which the dyad progresses varies, and as previously stated, would
likely be slow during the beginning teacher’s ﬁrst year. Based on the model, the
progress for the beginning teacher to the move from the stranger phase to the
acquaintance phase is critical since most dyads that do not develop to the mature stage
drop back to the initial “stranger phase” (Graen, 1995). It would be of interest to study a
variety of teacher/administrator relationships to gain insight into factors that may enhance
or impede the progression of the relationship from one stage to the next. A group of
beginning teachers working with the same administrator would be of signiﬁcant value
because the organizational variables impacting the relationship would be similar, whereas
the personal variables would vary across the group of beginning teachers. Questions for
further examination would be: Does the administration offer the LMX process to all the
new teachers? What is the current type of leader/member relationship occurring between
staff? Does the administrator rely on a small trusted group of teachers, or does the
administrator offer the opportunity to develop high-quality relationships with all
members of the teaching staff?

Contextual variables and their inﬂuences on the LMX model are still under
development in business and industry (Dienesch, 1986; Gerstner, 1997) and have limited
use in the ﬁeld of education. In developing a model for use in education, it is imperative

to take into consideration that leader-member exchanges may (a) develop in a number of

33

different ways; (b) differ in character based on which dimensions are more prominent in
educational settings (e. g., loyalty, affect, contribution); and (c) lead to different outcomes
depending on the nature of the developmental process and the characteristics of the
relationship (Dienesch, 1986). Based on the need for a highly descriptive context in
which to understand the operation of the LMX model in an educational setting, a
qualitative approach would lend itself to a collection of rich data on the relationship
between the beginning teacher and the administrator. Without such initial data, it would
prove difficult to develop appropriate scales by which LMX could be measured in a

larger educational study with any degree of certainty.

Summag

Looking at the research that has been conducted on beginning teacher attrition,
the results indicate an unacceptable situation. The educational communities in the US.
cannot afford to continue losing new teachers at such alarming rates. Not only does the
constant cycling of new teachers in and out of the profession cost schools in terms of
human and ﬁscal capital, but more importantly, it impacts the ability of the schools to
develop highly functioning learning communities (Ingersoll, 2004).

Current research on effective leadership stresses the movement away from the
leader as manager, to the leader as a developer of many leaders (Lambert, 1998, 2002,
2005; Sergiovanni, 1993, 1999, 2005). Building a learning community involves building
relationships based on trust, commitment, common vision, and support of all of its
members. New teachers require extra assistance in becoming encultured to their new
working environment. They need time and assistance in order to learn the myths,

symbols, culture, and norms of their new workplace. As the instructional leader, it is the

34

 

responsibility of the administrator to offer the opportunity for leadership to all teachers.
Realizing that beginning teachers cannot believe in what is not known to them, it is
important for the administrator and the beginning teacher to have a relationship that
inform and supports. So, the answer to beginning teacher attrition does not lie with
simply recruiting larger numbers of new teachers, but rather in working with beginning
teachers in meaningful ways that will keep them in the profession (Ingersoll, 2001).

Recognizing the need for new teacher assistance, many states and schools have
mandated some form of new teacher induction program (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2000).
Assistance comes in a variety of forms including summer orientations, professional
development throughout the school year, mentoring, and support groups (Wong, 2004).
Proper and timely support is especially important during the ﬁrst years of a new teacher’s
practice, especially considering the research that has shown that beginning teachers’ self-
efﬁcacy typically declines in the ﬁrst year and does not improve afterward (Corcoran,
1981). The connection between the support of the administrator and the beginning
teacher’s self—efﬁcacy has been studied on a limited basis (Tschannen-Moran, 2002;
Woolfolk, 2005). The majority of the studies have been conducted using a teacher
efﬁcacy scale, some of which have addressed the issue of administrative support
generally, but failed to reveal any in-depth information regarding the substance of the
“support” (Onafowora, 2005; Tschannen-Moran, 2001; Tschannen-Moran, 2002;
Woolfolk, 2005).

Conﬂicting data was gathered by Onafowora (2005) using scale responses and
oral/written responses regarding beginning teachers’ self-efﬁcacy. It was found that new

teachers reported a higher level of self-efﬁcacy based on the efﬁcacy scale responses, but

35

 

Fl

 

the same new teachers expressed a lack of conﬁdence in their teaching efﬁcacy with
regards to their oral and written responses. This discrepancy in results, in addition to the
limited use of administrator involvement on teacher self-efﬁcacy scales, leaves a gap in
the data that lends itself to the use of qualitative research in the examination of the
relationship between the beginning teacher and the administrator.

The use of the LMX theory as an exploratory lens, through which to view the
relationship between the beginning teacher and administrator, may develop new ways of
thinking about the process of teacher induction and more importantly for this study,
teacher retention. Variables that impact leader/member relationships in business and
industrial settings may offer insight into factors impacting relationships in educational
settings as well. The in-depth examination of the relationship between beginning
teachers and administrators is a missing link that has potential to impact policy, practice,

and the growth of stable learning communities.

36

 

 

 

CHAPTER III : METHODOLOGY

Introduction to a Phenomenological Study

This study explored the relationship between the beginning teacher and their
building level administrator to better understand what elements and interactions may
enhance and/or inhibit the beginning teacher/administrator relationship and in turn,
inﬂuence the beginning teacher’s persistence in the teaching profession. The study
examines the dyadic relationship to determine what elements of the interaction play a
particular role in a teacher’s persistence, how this relationship does or does not fulﬁll the
needs of the beginning teacher, and the extent to which this relationship is impacted by

organizational elements.

Research Design: A Phenomenological Study

Qualitative Approach to Research

Qualitative methods of research involve an inquiry process that relies on speciﬁc
methodological traditions to examine social or human problems with a holistic approach
(Creswell, 1998). The qualitative researcher conducts her studies in the natural setting,
where the researcher gathers data in the form of words or pictures, uses inductive analysis
and focuses on the meaning of the participants (Creswell, 1998). This type of research
centers on the process rather than just the outcome of the process, and requires the
researcher to be open to new ideas and theories that may emerge from the participants
and their experiences (Marshall, 1999). Qualitative research focuses on a small number

of individuals in order to generate rich data, and while it is possible to apply data

37

collected to other situations by analogy, it cannot be generalized to larger populations

because of its limited scope (Patton, 1990).

Defining a Phenomenological Approach to This Study

The phenomenological approach is a search for the essence or the central meaning
of an experience that emphasizes the “intentionality of consciousness where experiences
contain both the outward appearance and inward consciousness based on memory, image,
and meaning” (Creswell, 1998, p.52). Phenomenological data analysis involves a
reduction in the data, an analysis of statements and themes, and a search for all possible
meanings.

In the search for all possible meanings, a researcher must suspend her own
personal preconceived notions as well as her own personal experiences in order to allow
the data to show the true meaning of an experience. This process is known as bracketing,
or epoche. The psychological approach to the phenomenological study provides central
tenets that function to (a) determine the meaning of the participants lived experience and

provide a rich description of that experience and (b) extract the essences of the lived
experiences through the examination of individual descriptions and their general or
universal meanings (Moustakas, 1994).

Creswell (1998) has summarized the major procedural issues in using
phenomenology as follows: First the researcher must understand the philosophical
perspectives of the approach, with the idea of bracketing being central to the process.
Second, the researcher develops questions that explore the meaning of the lived
experience for the individual in the study. Third, the researcher collects data from

individuals who have experienced the phenomenon. This is typically accomplished

38

 

 

 

J‘ 3“.
q ---‘.i u

I.
"'4'

Remain. mi’aﬁ‘aim,’ﬁl’¥~ﬂr”vw ~ -

‘.c.'; '5‘]: . ‘ .
'_- UN

 

through in-depth interviews. Lastly, the researcher conducts her data analysis,
transforming the data into clusters of meaning and textural and structural descriptions,
thus resulting in a report of the essence of the experience.

This study uses the phenomenological approach to capture the essence of the
relationship between the beginning teacher and the administrator. It is necessary to use
this method in order to explore the possible tensions and connections that may or may not
exist in the relationship. Current research has provided acknowledgement of an
importance to this relationship, but has failed to deeply examine the intricacies of the
relationship itself. This study brings to light the various dimensions of the relationship
and their possible inﬂuences on the beginning teacher.

When reviewing the literature on the topic of beginning teachers and the
relationships they have with their administrators, there appeared to be few studies that
sought to describe behaviors, nuances, and descriptions from the members of the
relationship from their own perspectives. Such a study would allow an opportunity for
the application of a phenomenological study when investigating this type of relationship.
Phenomenological inquiry allows the reader to share in the experiences of the participants

as well as the interpretation of their meanings.

Preparation, Data Collection, Analysis, and Conclusions

The phenomenological method is not predictable and requires a researcher to be
ﬂexible, open to new ideas, and able to see things from an unbiased perspective. The
researcher must attempt to discover and express the experiences of the participants and
the context in which they occurred. Moustakas (1994) describes a structured approach

that includes the phases of epoche, identiﬁcation of signiﬁcant statements, clustering of

39

 

themes, synthesis of themes into textual and structural description, and ﬁnally, a rich
description of the essence and meanings of the participants’ experience (Moustakas,
1994)

The phenomenological model used in the study is outlined in Table 3.1. The

actual description of the process will begin with the selection of the participants.

Table 3.1 Summary of Methodology

 

Preparing to Collect Data
0 Formulate Question
0 Conduct Literature Review
0 Develop Criteria for Participant Selection
0 Develop Instruction/Guiding Questions

 

Collecting Data
0 Engage in Epoche
o Bracket the Question
0 Conduct the Interview

 

Organize, Analyze, Synthesize Data
0 Horizontalization
Reduction and Elimination
Clustering and Thematizing
Final Identiﬁcation of Themes
Construct Textural Description
Construct Structural Description
Construct Synthesis of Textural-Structural Description (Essence of Experiences)

 

 

Summary, Implications, and Outcomes

Summarize Study

Relate Findings to Literature Review

Relate to Possible Further Research

Relate Study to Personal Outcomes

Relate Study to Professional Outcomes

Relate Study to Social Meanings and Relevance
0 Closinggimments

 

(Moustakas, 1994, pp. 180-182)

Participant Selection

Because of the nature of phenomenological research, the primary data are the

participants being interviewed in the study. Participants for this study were comprised of

40

 

secondary school administrators and the beginning teachers under their supervision.
Secondary schools (grades 7-12) were chosen for this study because of the expertise of
the researchers’ work within the secondary school setting as well as the higher rates of
teacher attrition in secondary schools as compared to elementary schools.

The study consists of an examination of dyads at two schools. In order to obtain
optimum variability within such a small sample, each school dyad consists of one
building level administrator and two beginning teachers that she/he supervises.
Administrators selected for the study ﬁt particular criteria to include: (a) seasoned
educators (20+ years in the schooling); (b) experienced building level administrators with
classroom teaching experience, (c) other supervisory experiences in roles such as
department chair, vice principal, committee chair; and (d) experience in the supervision
of beginning teachers. In addition, due to my own limitations, the participating
administrator needed to be geographically close to me as I could not travel very far. The
administrator from Calvin High School was recommended by my dissertation advisor.
The administrator from Laredo High School was recommended by a trusted colleague. A
third administrator was recommended and was to participate, however, moved suddenly
from the area. Administrative descriptors include the years of experience at the school,
description of responsibilities, number of new teachers supervised, and professional and
educational background.

In light of the literature (Ingersoll, 2001, 2003, 2004), beginning teachers should
be within their ﬁrst three years of teaching or the beginning of their fourth year. The
selection of the new teacher participants was based on lists of suggested participants

provided by the participating administrators. The administrators were asked to provide

41

the names of teachers within their ﬁrst three years of teaching. The list also asked the

administrator to included the subject area of the beginning teacher. From this list the

researcher purposefully selected male and female teachers from varying subject areas to

invite. Not all participants initially contacted were willing to participate so the researcher

selected another teacher from the list until two beginning teachers from each school were

identiﬁed as participants. This purposeful sampling attempted to include male and

female participants from varying subject areas. Unfortunately, ethnic diversity was not

met, hence, a limitation to this study. Table 3.2 displays the dyads at each school.

Table 3.2 Administrator and Teacher Descriptors

 

 

 

 

School & Administrator School & Teacher Teaching Load Other Activities

Administrator Descriptors Teacher Descriptors

Calvin HS. 6 yrs.teaching Calvin H.S.

Karen Summers 7 yrs. admin. Ellen Roth 3 yrs. teaching 4 preps Extracun'iculuars
Brent Bosworth 3 yrs. teaching 3 preps Coaching

Laredo HS. 9 yrs. Teaching Laredo H.S.

Chad Holden 7yrs. admin. Penny Pallance 1 yr. teaching 3 preps Competitions
Brandon Billings 1 yr. teaching 3 preps Coaching

 

 

 

 

 

 

Developing Guiding Questions and Collecting Data

In phenomenological research, the primary sources of data are long, in-depth

interviews that use open—ended questions (Creswell, 1998). In developing guides for this

study, I reviewed previous protocols from other researchers’ work and read various

guides for developing appropriate protocol. Data collection included two in-depth

interviews with each participant, approximately sixty minutes in length. These

interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed by the researcher. The interviews were

conducted in the administrators’ ofﬁces and in the classrooms of the teachers, allowing

42

 

for maximum privacy. Participants were not identiﬁed by their name, building, or school
district.

The ﬁrst one-on-one teacher and administrator interview gathered information
regarding their educational training and experience, self-expectations, perceived
expectations of others(e. g. the teacher’s expectation of the principal, the principal’s
expectation of a new teacher), and interactions with others (professional and personal)
that have impacted their professional teaching. The interview protocols for all interviews
and the teacher focus group can be found in appendix D. At the end of the ﬁrst interview,
both the teachers and the administrators were asked to keep a communications log for the
following two weeks that would document the time and nature of the communication
between the teacher and the administrator.

The communication log served as a way to track the frequency, types of
communications, and the interactions between the new teachers and the administrators.
All teachers in the study kept detailed communications logs regarding the nature and
substance of their communication with his/her administrator. The communication log
can be found in appendix E. A time frame of two weeks was chosen for the
communications log as to not overwhelm the participants with the task of record keeping
but still give a snapshot of the degree to which and the nature of each new teacher and
principal contact. Both administrators in the study provided oral accounts of their
communication with new teachers during the two-week time frame. They reported that
they had little time to write in the log on a daily basis. While this oral accounting was a
retrospective accounting, probing about each contact provided rich detail about the nature

of the contact.

43

 

Each participant was also asked to bring three artifacts to the second interview.
These artifacts served the purpose of providing additional insight into the nature of their
work. These artifacts included one item that showed their perception of how the high
school supported teacher development, in particular “new” teacher development. This is
important because LMX theory has shown a link between job satisfaction and the ability
to develop as a professional. A second item would reveal how the participant may be
working collaboratively with other teachers/administrators in the building. This would be
of interest since working with others that share the same values is considered to have a
positive inﬂuence on relationships (Graen, 1995). The ﬁnal item would illustrate the
teacher or the administrator’s perception of her/his practice. This ﬁnal item gives an
internal perspective that can be used as a point of comparison to interview responses from
both the teachers and the administrators.

The second interview was scheduled at least two weeks after the ﬁrst interview.
The second interview explored the interactions documented by the participants in their
communication logs, probing for content of exchanges, perception of needs, regulation of
behavior, and both individual and collective efﬁcacy. This interview also included an
exploration of the artifacts selected by the participants. The participants brought their
artifacts to the second interview with the exception of one administrator that did not
provide artifacts. In the ﬁnal queries of the second interview, the participants were asked
to deﬁne the meaning of ideas that center around effective teacher/administrator
interactions and persistence of beginning teachers.

At the conclusion of the one-on-one interviews with the teachers, they were asked

to participate in a focus group. The focus group session served as a method to check and

44

 

clarify with the participants the credibility of inferences made from the interviews as well
as to provide an avenue for further discussion of speciﬁc topics.

Administrators were also asked to participate in a focus group but due to
conﬂicting schedules, physical distance between schools, and limited availability, 1 was
unable to schedule a focus group meeting that was acceptable to both administrators.
While this is a limitation to the study, I felt that given the information collected from the r
one-on-one interviews with the administrators and the school-level documents collected,
that I had enough data from which to draw conclusions.

In addition to the in-depth interviews, and teacher focus group, I collected a

 

variety of documents including the communication log that was previously described.
Documents collected included each school’s new teacher orientation handbooks and
summaries of their programs, samples of evaluation tools from Laredo High School,
informational brochures on Laredo High School, a classroom syllabus and personal goals
of one teacher from Calvin High School, and a communication log from each participant.
Table 3.3 summarizes the methods of data collection used in this study while Table 3.4
displays the dates of data collection. The use of these multiple methods of data collection
allowed for triangulation of the data.

Table 3.3 Summary of Data Collection Instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Protocol Administrator Teacher School District
Interview #1 x x

Interview #2 x x

Communication Log Howl) x

Focus Group x

Documents x x x
Artifacts x x

 

 

 

 

45

 

Table 3.4 Summary of Data Collection Time Frame

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Participant Interview Interview Communication Focus Documents Artifacts
#1 #2 Log Group

Karen 1/12/07 1/29/07 1/15/07-1/26/07 n.a. 1/29/07 1/29/07
Ellen 1/10/07 1/29/07 1/11/07—1/24/07 6/ 14/07 n.a. 1/29/07
Brent 1/11/07 2/8/07 1/12/07-1/25/07 6/14/07 2/8/07 2/8/07
Chad 2/27/07 5/29/07 2/28/07-2/13/07 n.a. 2/27/07 n.a.
Penny 3/23/07 4/27/07 3/26/07-4/16/07 6/14/07 4/27/07 4/27/07
Brandon 3/26/07 6/5/07 3/27/07-4/17/07 6/14/07 6/5/07 6/5/07

 

Organizing, Analyzing, and Synthesizing the Data

Perhaps the most signiﬁcant challenge that arises in phenomenological research

concerns the large volume of information such as recordings, transcripts, notes, and

documents. The teacher and administrator interviews and the teacher focus group were

audio-taped, transcribed, and manually coded by the researcher following each of the

interviews or focus group. Transcripts were ﬁrst read in entirety to gain a sense of the

whole conversation and voice for each participant. Table 3.5 presents the coding

schematic that was used.

Table 3.5 Coding Scheme

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Idea
Leader Member Exchange
LMX: CP Need for professional development. Is there a connection to career
progress?
LMX: EV How does the evaluation process inﬂuence the relationship?
LMX: J/F How does the need for justice/fairness inﬂuence the relationship?
LMX: UM How is upward maintenance used in the relationship?
LMX: COMM What types of interactive communication patterns inﬂuence the
relationship?
LMX: L/C What factors in the relationship inﬂuence new teacher loyalty and
commitment to the profession?
LMX: EMP How does empowerment inﬂuence a new teachers’ persistence?

 

46

 

 

Table 3.5 Cont.

 

LMX: VA

How does value agreement between administrators and beginning
teachers inﬂuence the relationship?

 

LMX: ADT

How do antecedents/ determinants of the relationship such as time
impact the relationship?

 

LMX: AFF

How does the need for afﬁrmation and the act of afﬁrmation
inﬂuence a beginning teachers’ persistence?

 

Maslow’s Heirarchy of Needs

 

M: PN

Physical needs: How does the need for factors such as sleep, activity,
and rest impact the relationship?

 

M: SA

Safety: The need for a stable work environment. How do
administrators provide this or not? What impact does it have on the
beginning teachers relationship and their persistence?

 

M: BEL

Need for a sense of belonging and community. How does the feeling
of community or lack of impact the beginning teacher? How does the
administrator go about trying to build a learning community that
supports beginning teachers?

 

M: EST

Esteem needs, respect from others and self. How do new teachers
earn respect from others including their administrators? How is
respect valued in the relationship?

 

M: SEL

Self actualization, desire to be their best. How do administrators
work to develop beginning teachers and what inﬂuence does an
administrator have on a beginning teachers desire to improve their
practice?

 

Self Efﬁcacy Mechanism (SEM)

 

SEM: T

Does the relationship between the beginning teacher and the
administrator inﬂuence the teacher’s self-efﬁcacy? If so, how?

 

SEM: A

How does the administrators own beliefs regarding their ability to
support a beginning teacher inﬂuence the administrators actions and
relationship?

 

 

SEM: S

 

Teachers self-expression of their own efﬁcacy.

 

 

Manual coding, using the above scheme, helped to uncover the invariant

constituents occurred. Coding began by grouping text by the relevant theory to which

they were connected. Relevant text that did not ﬁt within these theories were then

assigned to new categories. Categories were then subdivided and the appropriate text

moved to the relevant sub-category. For example relevant text was coded LMX, and then

sub-coded by speciﬁc aspects of LMX such as communication patterns, value agreement,

47

loyalty, inﬂuence, affect, evaluation, empowerment, justice, upward maintenance, and
career progress. For example, the following texts were color coded by participant and
coded by LMX and then by the sub-category within LMX:

LMX: EV

B: “We have one meeting at the beginning of the year to develop our IDP and our
goals and we kind of collaborate between what our goals are the goals they have
for us. Talk about those so that’s kind of like the launching pad for the
observations that come. So we’ll do the ﬁrst observation and we’ll talk about
meeting those goals we talked about in the very ﬁrst meeting and again in the
second.”

A: “From your observations so far, since you’ve been here, do you ﬁnd that those
are helpful?”

E: “Yes, I do. I think more than anything it’s a good opportunity to show her the
awesome things I’m doing in here. It gives me a time to like show her that I’m
not kicking and punching and stuff that I’m really teaching them curriculum. As
far as helping teaching, I don’t think that any amount of somebody’s advice can
really help you in your teaching. I think that comes from experience and trial and
error” (Interview #2, p.2).

LMX: L/C

A: “What qualities of a school administrator do you think help new teachers to

stay in teaching?”

B: “I think Chads’ enthusiasm is something that wants me to stay here with his

leadership and enthusiasm, he wants to move ahead, he wants to push forward, he

wants new things to happen here, he doesn’t want things to stay the same, I think

that’s exciting for us that we know it’s not just going to stay the same, things are

going to change, things are going to get better and he’s the one that has pushed us

in this direction so I think that’s really good” (Interview #2, p.7).

Emerging themes were clustered and themes that could not be validated were
eliminated. For example, the theme of value agreement was expressed as an important
factor in the stories of all of the new teacher participants with many new teachers

referring to this theme on multiple occasions. Because of the frequency and importance

expressed by the two participants, it became a theme. Altemately, initial coding of

48

 

Maslow’s self-actualization, while gleaned from participants interviews, was not
perceived by the research as a theme because of the lack of data supporting it as such. In
addition, the theme of value alignment arose with some participants in their
communications logs (e. g. Chad’s participation and support of the art show in Penny’s
log) and in the discussions of their artifacts (e. g. Ellen’s rubber cement as she describes
how her school is like a family stuck together).

A textural description of their perceptions and experiences was written for each of
the participants, followed by a structural description of the major themes that emerged
from the data. Both the textural and structural descriptions were used to write the ﬁnal
composite description that captured the essence of the participants’ experiences.
Throughout the process, I debriefed with my dissertation chair and once the ﬁnal
composite descriptions were made, I consulted with a peer to ensure objectivity and

validity.

Summarizing: Implications and Outcomes

Once the data was organized and analyzed, the last procedure in the
phenomenological process is to summarize the entire study and consider its limitations.
This required returning to the review of literature to differentiate current ﬁndings from
prior research in order to suggest future research that would advance knowledge on the
topic and discuss the ﬁndings in terms of social meanings and implications (Moustakas,
1994). For example, prior research indicated the importance of the relationship between
the new teacher and the administrator in a teachers’ persistence in the profession (e. g.

F ullan), but my research indicated that this relationship is often secondary to

relationships the new teacher may have with a mentor or other colleagues. Further

49

research might examine the inﬂuence of these relationships on the efﬁcacy of the new

teacher.

Trustworthiness

The use of in-depth interviewing produces complex processes and interactions
that are so imbedded in the data, that they must be considered valid (Marshall, 1999). As
a researcher, I took a variety of steps to ensure the trustworthiness of the study. The
triangulation of data from administrator and teacher interviews, focus group, and reviews
of documents provides for transferability. Credibility of my data and its interpretation
was examined by a panel including my dissertations chair, an editor, and a colleague. I
followed a logical process of data collection and processing as previously described in
the methodology and documented this process. The documentation of my data analysis
was examined by my dissertation chair at multiple points during the analysis stage. I
have worked to show a clear link between the narrative data presented in chapters four
and ﬁve, and the claims I have made in my analysis. The conclusion provides for the
conﬁrmation of the study, demonstrating how the data helps to conﬁrm implications and

general ﬁndings (Marshall, 1999).

Ethical Considerations

The following steps were taken to ensure that the study was conducted in an

ethical manner:

0 Participants were informed that participation in the study was voluntary and that

they could withdraw from the study at any time

50

 

0 Proper precautions were taken to ensure the conﬁdentiality of data collected and
for protection of the participants’ identities
o Informed consent was collected from all participants in the study
0 Contact numbers were given to participants in case they should have concerns
throughout the duration of the study.
While all of these steps ensured that the study was conducted in an ethical manner, the

participants were counseled that there was no absolute guarantee of their anonymity.

Limitations

This study explores the nature of the experiences within the relationship between
a small sample of beginning teachers and their administrators. Their experiences and
beliefs are contextually embedded and therefore cannot be generalized to other people or
populations. The research is also limited by the inexperience of the researcher and the
difﬁculty of bracketing. Because of my own experiences as a new teacher, I had to be
careful to set aside personal perceptions of participants experiences and focus only on
their perceptions and experiences.

Because the new teachers and the administrators were aware of the purpose of this
study and the research involved self—reporting, there is the potential for the Hawthorne
effect, where participants are inclined to tell the research what they think the researcher
wants to hear. The study was also limited by the fact that the administrators in the study
work with many new teachers besides those in the study and their comments were
directed to new teachers in general and not the speciﬁc teachers in this study. Lastly,

since the list of possible teacher participants was generated by the administrators, there

51

 

was the possibility of excluding teachers that may have reﬂected poorly on the

administrator.

52

 

CHAPTER FOUR: TRIAD AT CALVIN HIGH SCHOOL

Introduction

To best engage in a thoughtful discussion of the complexities of the administrator
and new teacher relation and how it enhances (or does not) the neophyte’s persistence,
chapters four and ﬁve provide contextual information about participants in the study and
the school community in which they work. The purpose of both chapters is to synthesize
as well as to explore the relationships between two beginning teachers and their
administrator at Calvin High School (Chapter Four) and Laredo High School (Chapter
Five). The rationale for presenting these two situations in separate chapters was a choice
of readability given the wealth of data presented. After an overview of the school
context, the complexities of the relationship are revealed through the participants’
experience and words collected through one-on-one interviews, communication logs,
documents, and a focus group.

Similar to microethnography that focuses on uncovering the intimate behaviors of
people, the presentation of data in chapters four and ﬁve attempt to explore the
perceptions and experiences of new teachers and their administrators within a high school
setting. To do this, the conceptual framework was applied to the data that at ﬁrst
revealed obvious and appropriate categories and then raised questions that helped to
frame the presentation of data. The teachers’ views are offered under four headings: (1)
Background: Personal and Professional, (2) Needs: Desired and Realized, (3)
Organizational Complications, and (4) Complexities of the Relationship. The school

administrators’ views are offered under four headings: (1) Background: Personal and

53

 

Professional, (2) Expectations of Teachers: Desired and Realized, (3) Organizational
Considerations, and (4) Complexities of Building a Relationship.

The background of each participant will include personal information such his/her
own secondary schooling, and childhood context. A brief description of his/her post-
secondary education will be provided as well as any other experiences that may have
impacted his/her current role as teacher or administrator. The needs and desires of the
beginning teachers will be discussed and will include issues such as expectations,
challenges, and their work with other individuals including their mentors and
administrators. Similarly, the administrators describe their expectations of their teachers,
and particularly, their new teachers.

The role of the organization will be presented from the beginning teachers’
perspectives of tensions that arise as they experience conﬂict in the attempt to fulﬁll their
needs and desires. The administrators also address the impact of the organization through
the discussion of myriad roles and responsibilities they must balance. Finally, the
complexities of the beginning teachers’ relationships will be discussed, including the
tensions that arise and how the participants work to build and maintain their relationships.

While the presentation of the data may appear somewhat formal, it does provide
the necessary content required to puzzle over the tensions in the relationship. Some
wonderment may appear within the writing of chapters four and ﬁve, however, the work
of stating a claim, drawing on trustworthy evidence to support that claim, coming to some
particular end, and response to the exploratory question, is more fully presented in

chapter six.

54

Calvin High School Context

Though I grew up just seventy—ﬁve miles from Calvin, I had no previous
knowledge of the community and had only heard of it by name. The principal at the high
school is a doctoral student at the University I attend and was referred to me as a
potential participant for my study. I was excited at the prospect of involving a school
with a very different setting than my suburban high school and was pleased that both the r
principal and two beginning teachers were willing to participate in the study.

Calvin High School is a small school with approximately 770 students located in

an agricultural area of the Midwest. Approximately forty teachers are employed at the

 

high school. Table 4.1 provides a summary of some general demographic information
about Calvin. The school houses grades nine through twelve with the middle school
across the street holding grades six through eight. The high school itself is very close to
the downtown area. The importance of the high school in the community is evident with
school banners hanging from the lampposts on the main street and pep-posters in the
store windows wishing luck to the high school athletes in their next game. It was clear
where some of the athletes lived in the town since the lawn of the home held a big sign
with the students’ names and jersey numbers. The drive through town left me with a very
quaint feeling.

Table 4.1 Calvin High School Demographic Summary

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Size of Student # of Teachers Location Racial Make-up Economy

Body

Approximately Approximately Rural Mid-West Majority Agricultural

770 students 40 teachers (18 Caucasian Based
non-tenured)

 

55

The school has a reputation for quality education and a safe environment, which
the principal believes is the reason that approximately 100 of the 770 students are school
of choice students. These students live in neighboring communities but choose to leave
their own school in order to attend the high school in Calvin.

The teaching staff at Calvin high school has changed signiﬁcantly over the past
three years. An early retirement incentive three years ago brought in eighteen new 7
teachers to the building, replacing about half the seasoned staff. In addition, the principal
at the high school retired and was replaced two years ago. The two assistant principals in

the building have also changed within this three year time span. The school faculty is

 

now comprised of approximately half untenured teachers and half veteran tenured
teachers. The administrative staff is relatively new to the building and not all have
previous administrative experience.

The staff in the building is busy adjusting to procedural upgrades and preparing
for changes to come. Currently, the high school is in its ﬁrst year of using a new web-
based attendance system. There is a learning curve with use of the new system and
dealing with technology glitches. The school is also preparing to move from a seven
hour schedule to a four by four block schedule. Many members of the faculty have spent
a large amount of time researching various scheduling options and how they might be
implemented at Calvin. The participants in the study looked at the changes in a positive
manner yet admitted that there were, and will likely be, some initial frustrations that are
to be expected when making major changes. The district is also promoting the passage of
a bond that would allow the construction of a new performing arts center for the district.

As a way of promoting the bond, the staff of the entire district is producing and acting in

56

a play, The Wizard of Oz, in hopes of demonstrating the importance of the arts and the
need for better facilities. All members of the study are actively involved in the
production.

Table 4.2 provides a summary of the participants’ roles at the high school as well
as their experience at Calvin and in education in general. Both Ellen and Brent are in
their third years of teaching, although Brent has only been at Calvin for two years. Ellen
is a member of the Career and Technical Education Department and teaches several
different courses in family studies. Brent is the chair of the History Department and
currently teaches history and has previously taught Spanish. Currently in her third year
as principal at Calvin, Karen worked as a teacher at the elementary level for six years
before moving into an elementary administrative position.

Table 4.2 Calvin High School Participant Professional Experience

 

 

 

 

 

Participants Position at Calvin Years at Calvin H.S. Total Years in
HS. Education

Ellen Roth Teacher of Family 3 years 3 years
Studies

Brent Bosworth Teacher of History 2 years (1 year 3 years

elsewhere)
Karen Summers Principal 3 years 6 years Teaching
7 years Admin.

 

 

 

 

I

Ellen Roth: In Need of a Matriarch

Background: Personal and Professional

I met Ellen in her classroom at Calvin at the end of the school day. She has a
large well organized classroom and it is clear from the rows of infant car seats lined up

against the wall that she is a family studies teacher. Ellen is very upbeat and enthusiastic,

57

 

eager to talk about her job and experiences at Calvin. We initially talk about the paths
that lead her to Calvin. Ellen is a Latina native of a small ﬁshing and logging town in
California. Her home town and the town of Calvin are similar in size and also similar in
the type of educational experience provided. She describes her own high school
experience as being turbulent. She had to work to help pay for household expenses and
was the primary caregiver to her two younger siblings. She often missed school, but was F
able to pass with the assistance of a few caring teachers.

Ellen attended college in the Midwest, ﬁrst attending a community college and

later transferring to a larger university on a full scholarship. If she had not received the

 

scholarships, she would most likely not have been able to attend college. While she was
in college she connected with her advisor/professor. He encouraged her to go into
teaching, and to this day, still supports Ellen in her academic and professional endeavors.
Ellen recently started a Master’s degree program in Family Studies at a large
university. Her student teaching took place at a middle school in the same state in which
she currently teaches. In preparing for her ﬁrst teaching experience, Ellen describes her
teaching methods courses as having been particularly helpful because she was actually
able to practice using the methods before she actually did her student teaching. Her
student teaching experience gave her insight into what it would be like to be a teacher and
at that point she knew it would become her profession. However, despite helpful
methods courses, she expressed that her student teaching did not prepare her for her
biggest challenges as a ﬁrst year teacher such as classroom management and working

with parents.

58

Ellen was hired at Calvin High School three years ago. She is a part of the Career
and Technical Education Department and teaches life skills courses. She is also the
director for the pre-school program that runs out of the high school. She has four preps
and teaches from her own classroom. She is well equipped with material for her courses
and states that she has been able to acquire most supplies and equipment that she has
required for her courses.

Ellen chose teaching as her profession mainly because of her desire to work with
teenagers in a meaningful way. She would like to be a person in their lives that will help
them achieve their goals despite their various experience and backgrounds. She is
enthusiastic about her subject area and is grateful that she can work with kids and make
money in her area of expertise. Many of her students do not go on to attend college and
are from troubled homes. She believes that she is able to make a valuable impact with
her students because she is teaching life skills. Ellen believes that she makes the largest
impact with these academically challenged students but has indicated that there are some

that she is unable to reach.

Needs: Desired and Realized

Ellen ﬁnds that there is just not enough time in a day to complete all of the tasks
she must perform as a teacher. When I asked her what she thought would be the most
common reason a new teacher would give for leaving the profession she stated, “I think
the level of stress, stress level as far as work load, expectations. . .unrealistic expectations
of what a teacher should be” (Interview 1). She has doubts about her ability to keep up
the pace and wonders about the feasibility of balancing her work with a family some day.

“Me and some of the new teachers talk about how there is no way that we could raise

59

 

kids at this point. There’s no way we could put a child into what we do everyday; there’s
just not enough time, we’re exhausted” (Interview 2). Her student teaching placement
did not prepare her for the type of workload she has experienced. Lesson planning,
instructing, grading papers, returning emails and phone calls, tutoring, and sponsoring
extracurricular activities dominate nearly all of Ellen’s time, including evenings and
weekends. The amount of time spent on tasks outside of direct instruction was a surprise
to Ellen: “I think that new teachers come into it and they don’t realize that 90% of their
after school time is sucked up with grading, email, phone calls, and god forbid you have
to eat dinner and go to sleep” (Interview 2). She wishes that she did not have the extra
responsibilities, such as extra-curricular activities, that make her feel so overwhelmed.
She explained, “They deﬁnitely expect the new teachers to do more. To do more for no
pay. Especially tutoring, doing extra-curricular activities that are. . .on schedule B (not
paid). That takes up all your free time” (Interview 1).

Ellen believes that her principal has provided her with support at key moments,
thus positively impacted her work as an effective teacher and learner. An example of the
conﬁdence her principal has in Ellen’s capacity and ability to learn is in her being given
charge to run the school’s pre-school program as a ﬁrst year teacher. This was not a part
of her formal schooling so she was very intimidated by the task. According to Ellen, her
principal (Karen) was instrumental in helping her get the program up and running. “She
helped me so much with ﬁguring out a timeline for what I needed to do and all the
paperwork things I needed to take care of even though she didn’t know what to do either.
We just kind of looked through previous teacher’s work and kind of pieced together what

to do. . .she was there for me. . .and I can’t thank her enough for that” (Interview 1). Ellen

60

also explained that her principal has defended her decisions regarding student issues and
classroom policies, even when Ellen was not conﬁdent in her own judgment. Ellen
explained that “obviously teachers make mistakes and the good thing about my
administrators is that they understand that there may be mistakes made” (Interview 2).

On the other hand, Ellen has felt a great deal of stress related to dealing with
classroom management and student/parent issues at times during her career. She expects
her administration to assist her in dealing with a variety of issues that may arise and
require expertise and authority beyond her own. Some of her most challenging
experiences as a new teacher are “deﬁnitely classroom management as well as how to
deal with parents when they aren’t supportive of what I’m doing in my classroom and
they’re kind of blaming me for their kids’ not passing” (Interview 1). In situations such
as these, Ellen emphasizes the need for “backing up the teacher if there is an issue with a
student or parent, administration has to back the teacher up” (Interview 2).

Because of Ellen’s need to thoroughly discuss school and teaching issues, she
seeks guidance from a variety of sources beyond the school principal, such as, other
administrators, colleagues, and her mentor. She considers the desire to discuss her issues
and her feelings as a necessary “outlet” for her stress (Focus group transcript). Her
mentor was assigned to her by Karen when she was a ﬁrst year teacher. By the end of her
ﬁrst year of teaching, Ellen felt that her mentor was not a “good ﬁt”. While she likes her
assigned mentor as a person, she does not feel a connection with her and believes that she
does not know what goes on in her classroom and does not always listen to her concerns:

Our personalities just don’t mesh well and I knew that after the ﬁrst year. So, I

asked for another master teacher with over 30 years of teaching and I was told

61

“no” that I couldn’t choose. This lady [she wanted for a mentor] happened to be
in my department and I was told no even though I go to her and I don’t go to my
mentor because I don’t feel like I can trust her. So it’s weird being in. . .your own
little galaxy and [not] having enough support. . .that’s been really tough for me.
Not having anybody that really knows what I teach, helping me ﬁgure out what
I’m supposed to be doing, it’s hard. (Focus group transcript)
Ellen has found that she gets better assistance and attention from other veteran staff
members within her CTE Department and now rarely discusses pertinent issues with her
mentor.
When Ellen has a problem, or just needs to talk, she expects her administrators to
be available for an open and honest discussion. She explained,
I need them to be available if I need something, and. . .not just brush me off if I’m
really having a problem like [if] I need to get something taken care of. . .I need
somebody to talk to. . .I don’t want to feel like I need an appointment. It’s almost
like a parent child relationship, like you want to be able to talk to them when you
need to. Like an open door policy. I need them to tell me the way I’m feeling
and the things I’m doing are normal, or expected, and if I’m not doing what is
expected that they tell me that. That they are honest with me and they don’t wait
until an evaluation to say “oh well by the way last Sept. when you did such and
such.” That it’s out on the table, that there are no secrets, that they’re telling you
when you need to improve on something. (Interview 1)
As Ellen clearly points out, communication with her school principal is very

important to her and she loves that her principal stops by her classroom in the morning

62

whenever possible. Often this is the only time during the day that she has personal
contact with Karen. The bulk of contact with administration in Ellen’s communication
log consists of emails regarding student issues such as attendance or sending a student to
the office. She said that it is unusual to have any in-depth or meaningful conversation
with her administrators unless she initiates one in a meeting or during an evaluation
conference. She realizes that with her schedule, and Karen’s busy schedule, that often
the time is just not available, but wonders why so much time was made when she was a
ﬁrst year teacher versus now, in her third year.

While Ellen understands the pressures of a principal’s role, she admits that over
the past three years, the frequency of communication between her and Karen has
decreased and that she is troubled by it. She still longs for the same level of contact and
attention that she received as a ﬁrst year teacher and is confused as to why it has changed.
She elaborates,

as far as emotional development ...in my ﬁrst year of teaching it was a lot

different, in my third year I’m not getting as much from them. That ﬁrst year was

totally opposite. They were always in contact with me. I was always in Karen’s
ofﬁce at least once a week talking about what I was doing or how I was feeling
and what my struggles were and how could she help me. It’s hard to say whether
it’s because I’m in my third year and they just trust me more. I just don’t feel like
they care as much about my mental well-being or how I’m doing as much as they
used to. In some ways that makes me feel good because they trust me and what

I’m doing in order to survive, but on the other hand, maybe they just don’tcare. I

don’t know. (Interview 2)

63

 

Connected to her desire for dialogue, Ellen also has a strong desire for afﬁrmation
from her administration, “I need them to care about me as a person and that what I’m
doing is valuable, it’s a service I’m providing, it’s valuable” (Interview 2). She wants to
be recognized for extra effort and hard work that she puts into her teaching. She hopes
that they will understand the challenges of classroom instruction and validate the positive
contributions that she is making to the students and the school. She currently does not
feel that she receives this type of validation and it leaves her feeling like she is not valued
as a teacher and a person and that her administrators are possibly out of touch with the
challenges of the classroom. When I asked Ellen how she would deﬁne effective
administrator and teacher interactions, she responded in part, “I don’t think that they
really understand what it’s like to be a teacher. . .they have been teachers before, but it’s
like they forgot what it’s like. I guess just understanding and validating [my efforts]”

(Interview 2).

Organizational Complications

Ellen teaches in her own well-equipped classroom. As a Career and Technical
Education teacher, her program receives separate funding from the state. She has been
able to request and receive most items that she needs for her classroom without question.
She did exhibit frustration during our focus group interview over lack of communication
regarding her program’s budget. For example, she had recently requested to purchase
materials for her classroom and was told by Karen that there was no money left for her
items. Ellen was upset because she felt that the money speciﬁcally designated for her
program had been spent elsewhere. She was frustrated because she had never been given

a budget that showed how much state funding her program received so it was difficult for

64

her to plan her purchases. This lack of disclosure has recently caused an erosion of trust
in her principal and other administrators. She does not want to push the issue with Karen
because she is afraid that if she does, she might be disciplined or ﬁred. In our ﬁrst
interview, prior to this budget incident, Ellen had praised the funding of her program.
She described the issue of supplies as, “I do feel supported in that. . .ifI need something I
could go to them and ask them and they would give it to me. If I needed textbooks,
supplies, a couple new chairs, or a desk. That stuff will get done” (Interview 1).

Ellen believes that she is improving as a teacher from year to year and that most
of her improvement comes from experience. She does seek the assistance and advice of
other colleagues and her administrators, but believes that ultimately, it is up to her to
improve her teaching practices (Interview 2). When asked in our second interview if she
found her observations and evaluations helpful she explained, “Yes, I do. I think more
than anything it’s a good opportunity to show [Karen] the awesome things I’m doing in
here. It gives me a time to show her that I’m. . .really teaching them curriculum. As far
as helping teaching, I don’t think that any amount of somebody’si advice can really help
you in your teaching. I think that comes from trial and error.” Evaluations are an
opportunity for Ellen to have time to talk with Karen about her classroom goals and a
chance for her to showcase her hard work in the classroom.

Ellen says that she initially struggled with issues like classroom management and
balancing classroom workloads, but over time has come to ﬁnd methods that work for
her. However, she did state that classroom management is still an area in which she
desires more learning (Interview 1). She admits that there are some students she just

cannot reach. In the focus group conversation regarding difﬁcult students and classes,

65

she told another teacher that was dealing with difﬁcult students, “I think everybody’s had
a class like that, where there’s nothing that you can do. There’s nothing that you can do.
There really is nothing that you can do to make it better, even if you’re a veteran

teacher.”

Complexities of the Relationship

Both Ellen and Karen share a strong desire to work with all types of children,
especially those with academic challenges. When asked why she chose teaching as a
career, Ellen explained “There’s a variety of reasons why I chose teaching. I absolutely
love the age group and I wanted to be a person in their lives that can. . .help them achieve
their goals, and [I] realize that not everyone has the same experience (referring to the
experiences of academically challenged students)” (Interview 1). Karen described her
career path similarly, “I always thought I had something to offer students, especially
those who struggle. So that’s one of the reasons I went into teaching. I found my career
path because I’m passionate about kids and learning and doing what’s right for all kids”
(Interview 1). Ellen says that she works hard and does make a difference to her students,

I think. . .I make a huge impact because I’m teaching life skills. A lot of the stuff

that we do in this class, a lot of the [students] I get in my classes, students are

from backgrounds where they’re not going to go to college, or they’re from a

broken home, or they’ve had a lot of abuse in their past and that’s why they’ve

chosen this human services career path that I teach in. I think I make the biggest
impact on those kids because they bring to the classroom something that they
can’t bring to their math class or to their biology class or physics class, they can

bring their real life experiences and they feel successful. (Interview 1)

66

The value of education for all children, especially those most challenged
academically, serves to strengthen Ellen’s commitment to her profession. She explains
this commitment to the other teachers in the focus group in the following terms, “really
what it comes down to, and why I stay doing what I do, is because it’s for the kids.” A
complexity that develops with shared values such as those between Ellen and Karen is the
dilemma of individual interpretations of decisions that seemingly go against that shared
value. This is an issue between Ellen and Karen that will be explored in Chapter 6.

Ellen has gained conﬁdence over the past three years that Karen will provide her
support for the variety of challenges she faces. Ellen has learned from experience that
Karen will back her decisions in regards to students, curriculum, and in dealing with
parents. When asked if Karen has always supported her decisions, she replied “Yes,
absolutely” (Interview 2). Ellen has experienced Karen’s willingness to help with
curriculum design and implementation issues (as previously described with the pre-
school) and believes that this has been a vital part of her success with her program.

Ellen’s trust in Karen has grown over the past three years but has recently been
hindered because of the budget issue previously discussed and a contract issue involving
another beginning teacher in which Ellen has no involvement. As the situation was
described in the focus group, a non-tenured beginning teacher at Calvin had signed a
contract for extra pay for supervision of an extracurricular activity. When the teacher
was to be paid at the end of the school year for the contract there was disagreement over
pay for the position. The teacher was not paid and was supposedly told not to pursue the

issue. Ellen felt that the trust that had been building over the past three years had been

67

seriously damaged. Ellen, as she typically does when she has a concern, went to her
principal to have a conversation that she described,
I told my administrator that I was scared, that I couldn’t trust anybody in that
building , that I couldn’t trust her, that I couldn’t trust my A.P.’s, I felt like I
couldn’t trust the other teachers, the union. . .I just wanted to get it out on the
table. This is how I’m feeling and this is really bothering me, and the response
was ‘well, you know I’m always going to tell you the truth’ when just a few
weeks ago was the contract issue. (Focus Group)
I did not have an opportunity to discuss the budget and contract issues with Karen so her
side of the story is not represented in the data. The budget and contract issues both bring
to light the complexity of disclosure and transparency of decision making by the
administration and how the ability (or inability) to disclose certain information and
decisions inﬂuence the relationship (particularly trust) between the beginning teacher and

the administrator. This complication will be discussed at greater length in Chapter 6.

Summary

Ellen’s relationship with Karen has helped her deal with the stress and challenge
of being a beginning teacher, especially in her ﬁrst year of teaching. Ellen found that
Karen provided her with the “outlet” she needed, being able to discuss any problems or
concerns with her at anytime. As Ellen progressed into her second and third years of
teaching, the amount of time and attention from Karen decreased as did Ellen’s
satisfaction with her job. She still faces many of the same challenges that she did her ﬁrst
year of teaching, but feels that her support network has become smaller. Ellen ﬁnds that

working with her students is very fulﬁlling and feels a great sense of loyalty toward them

68

and her program. She is unsure that her administrators realize the extent of the positive
things she is doing for her students and wishes that they would recognize her efforts. She
has increasingly relied on her colleagues for support and feels a strong connection to
many of them and often refers to them as her family. Ellen struggles to maintain a

trusting relationship with Karen because of what she interprets as a lack of disclosure.

Brent Bosworth: Pride and Professionalism

Background: Personal and Professional

I met Brent on a cold winter day, very early in the morning before the start of
school. He was accustomed to such early hours because on most days, he was coaching
the girls’ junior varsity swim team at 5:00am. We went to his classroom for our ﬁrst of
two interviews. Brent had his own classroom and it was evident that he was a well
organized teacher. The desks were neatly arranged in a horseshoe fashion, conducive to
the classroom discussions that Brent considers to be an integral part of his teaching
methodology. His own desk had neatly stacked paperwork and the walls displayed
posters, student work, and various informative postings for students. Hanging on one
wall was a “smart board,” a hybrid technology between a computer and a chalkboard.
Brent was especially proud of this piece of equipment as he had solely secured a grant for
the purchase of the smart board. We sat down at two student desks to begin our
interview.

Brent grew up in a small town about the same size as Calvin, in the same state.
While the size of the school was similar to that of Calvin, the demographics were not.
Brent’s home town was almost exclusively Caucasian. Calvin is an agricultural based

community while his town was more based in business and industry. He felt that the

69

expectations at his school were higher than at Calvin. Even so, Brent explained that he
coasted through school and did very well with minimal effort. He was involved in many
school activities and sports and continues to be involved in a wide array of activities such
as running marathons and playing a variety of musical instruments. Continuing on to
college was expected at the high school he attended and he explained that most of the
students did go on to attend college.

After graduating from high school, Brent went on to attend a large university in
his home state where he majored in history and secondary education with a minor in
Spanish. When I asked him why he chose teaching as a career, he explained that he had
an excellent social studies teacher in high school. This teacher had played an important
role in Brent’s development as a person. He “opened up my mind to my ability to think
independently and it was really powerful for me.” The power of independent thinking
came up several times in our conversations about Brent’s own teaching and his inﬂuence
on his students. It was clearly a critical awakening in Brent’s intellectual development.
Brent also described his commitment to teaching in terms of community involvement. It
makes him feel good that he is doing something good for the community instead of “just
sitting in a cubicle making money for someone” (Interview 1).

I asked Brent to discuss his teacher preparation program and its inﬂuence on his
teaching practice. He stated that at the undergraduate level his coursework really did not
help at all. He believes that his professors were well intentioned, but when it came down
to it, “maybe 1% of my ability to be prepared” came from his college experience
(Interview 1). While his coursework, for the most part, seemed irrelevant, Brent feels

that his student teaching experience was “incredibly crucial.” Brent was placed with a

70

very experienced history teacher that had been awarded “history teacher of the year”.
When I asked Brent to explain what his cooperating teacher had done that made it such a
valuable experience he said,

I think he took full responsibility for his role with a student teacher. I know a
number of times a mentor teacher takes in a student teacher to. . .substitute teach
and I think that’s a major moral dilemma for the teaching profession. You’ll
never see improvement in teaching practice with that. So he took that
responsibility very seriously, and he made sure that I was improving on a day to
day basis. That was the bottom line. He followed the [university’s] program to a
T. He was...everything he was supposed to be. He didn’t let me crash and burn.
(Interview 1)

Brent found work right out of college teaching history in a small school district in
the state. After one year, he resigned to take his current position at Calvin High School.
He felt that it was an upward move in terms of professional opportunities. In his second
year at Calvin High School, Brent has already been appointed to the position of
Department Head for the Social Studies Department, is involved as a member of several
committees, and coaches the JV girls swimming team. During his ﬁrst two years of
teaching, he also completed a master’s degree in Educational Administration. He
completed his master’s degree in an overseas program over the course of three summers.
Brent told me that at some point he would consider going into administration, but he is
enjoying teaching and would like to have more time in the classroom before considering

an administrative role.

71

Expectations: Desired and Realized

Brent has a strong desire to break out of the “new teacher mold.” He is very
conﬁdent in his abilities to work with students, parents, and colleagues. He describes his
challenge of breaking the new teacher stereotype:

I think that I do what comes with my own personality, and being grouped up with

other new teachers at the very beginning, I wanted to step out of that mold as fast

as I could. I didn’t want to be categorized in that respect. I was the only person
from [my college] that had a full year of student teaching, the rest all had their

short little experience, so for me it really was my second year of teaching. So I

wanted to break out of that mold. I guess my own higher expectations for myself

[caused me] to do things that they could see. The administration could see right

away that I’m not in that mold. I did things like write a grant for the smart board,

something I might not have done, but wanted to set myself apart from the group
of new teachers. (Interview 1)
In his ﬁrst year at Calvin, Brent took on many extra responsibilities (coaching and
committees) as a way to prove to the administration that he was a very capable teacher,
beyond what might typically be expected of a beginning teacher (Interview 1). He was
pleased when Karen responded by offering him the History Department Chair position
for the following school year. Brent is happy with his administrations’ willingness to
allow him to explore various leadership positions. He sees this as one form of
recognition of his hard work and trust in his capabilities.

Brent has also been pleased with the support he has received from his

administrators in regards to his classroom policies and dealings with students and parents.

72

He explains, “I need someone that backs up my policy 100%. I do come down rather
hard on some students and some classes as a whole for lack of responsibility.” He goes
on to say that his principal has always demonstrated a high level of support (Interview 1).
Brent feels that his principal tries to serve as a buffer between conﬂict and the teachers
whenever possible and Brent appreciates this form of protection:

Karen as a principal does a great job of sticking up for what goes on in this

school. If there’s any major issue, she’ll try to keep it out of the teachers’ hands

and she’ll take care of it. She can really put her foot down. I’ve seen her put her
foot down and I wouldn’t want to be on the receiving end of her putting her foot
down. She does a great job of protecting us anytime the community comes in

being unreasonable. (Interview 1)

Learning is important to Brent in more than just the traditional way of teachers
assisting students in the learning process. He recognizes his own desire for continuing
his education and very quickly completed his master’s degree in administration after
ﬁnishing his BA. He believes that the need for adult learning a key factor in teacher
retention:

1 would say ﬁrst and foremost for any teacher to stay in the profession, you have

to have good classroom management. [Lack of management] is what drives

people out of the classroom. I also think allowing teachers to develop
professionally as well. Teachers come out of college where they have learned for
the past sixteen years and now it’s about spitting everything out. You do need to
respect the growth of the adult and support them in professional development and

to continue to learn. I think teachers are in the profession because they enjoyed

73

learning at some point in their lives and I don’t think we can expect them to just
stop learning in their lives and just be spitting information. I think teachers want
to learn to say fresh and current on what they teach. (Interview 2)
Brent still desires to learn and is very enthusiastic about the willingness of his
administration to support continuing education of teachers through attending seminars,
workshops, and the use of in-service days and release time for teachers. He explains,
That’s one of the great things about working in the district is that we have a
number of opportunities for professional development. Just at the department
level we. . .had a full day of it. We have had a lot of time to do that and
independently our administration has been great about supporting us going to
conferences or observing other teachers in other schools, they’ve been great about
helping us out there. (Interview 1)
His artifact on how his school supports teacher development was his personal goal
document which indicates his desire to learn more about the implementation of
technology into his classroom. He has taken advantage of these opportunities and has
found teacher/administrator organized release time for various topics to be very
beneﬁcial for his own instruction and for the general improvement of the school.
Brent feels that his administration has a high level of involvement with the staff
and students and gives praise to his principal in this respect:
Our administration is incredibly collaborative with the staff. It has been awesome
working with the current administration. We have a staff meeting every month,
we have all these committee meetings we’re involved in so it’s not an autocratic

method of administration, it’s much more so that it’s very, very diverse and it’s

74

 

 

not a top down approach. Everyone has some ownership in what is going on.
The administration has been awesome in working with us, their hands are in it just
as much as the teachers’. (Interview 1)
While the bulk of contact in Brent’s communication log consists of emails from his
principal, he also recorded her ritual of visiting classrooms. He described this ritual in
our ﬁrst interview:
One interaction that our principal has with us is that she comes into our classroom
on a daily basis and she says hello to the teacher and the class every morning. It’s
something goofy, but at the same time it’s awesome for the students and awesome
for me that our principal actually cares enough to say hello, it’s typically
something you don’t get. The students see it and she chats with them for two
seconds. . .it interrupts your teaching but ﬁrst hour it’s nice to have a fresh face in
there to say hi. Just to see your principal lets you know that they’re not just in that
office, that they are alive and do concern themselves with what’s going on in the

classroom. So that’s really nice. (Interview 1)

Organizational Complications

Brent stated that his biggest challenge as a beginning teacher at Calvin was
breaking out of the “new teacher mold.” Because of his “amazing” student teaching
experience, previous teaching experience, and overall self-conﬁdence, Brent felt that he
was prepared to take on much larger responsibilities and leadership positions but had to
prove to the administration that he was capable (Interview 1). However, he encountered

a stumbling block during his ﬁrst evaluation at Calvin.

75

Brent’s evaluating administrator at that time was a ﬁrst year assistant principal
that has since moved on to become the principal of the middle school in Calvin. He tells
the story of the dilemma that he experienced with this administrator:

I set very high expectations for myself and I always try to meet them. I feel like

I’m working to get better and if someone doesn’t see that, then it’s their own fault

they’re not seeing it. [When] they make comments on it, what they think they’re

seeing, that really, really bothers me. He had made comments to my mentor
teacher, (we met the ﬁrst month that school had started), and he was having some
concerns about my teaching. I had invited other administrators and other teachers
in to see my class. I love it when people come in and he hadn’t. So he hadn’t
seen what was going on and he brought up these concerns to my mentor.

Obviously he’s the one that writes my evaluation and if this is what he thinks,

that’s terrible. I feel like I’m doing a good job and I know I am. So for him to

say those things he told my mentor. . .my mentor talked to me about it and it was a

huge hit to me. It made me not want to be here, it made me not want him as my

administrator, and it made me want to go talk to my principal about him. About a

week later, my principal came to me and talked to me about what he had said and

he got himself into trouble for it, for not being intentional about being in my
classroom and seeing what was going. She had seen a much wider array of what
was going on in my classroom. But that was just huge. That made me not want

to be here, that administrator made me not want to be here. I don’t want to be a

teacher if that’s the way the profession’s going to go. (Interview 1)

76

Brent went on to explain that the assistant principal that had made the comments had
realized his error and went on to become what Brent considered a good administrator and
good man. He praised Karen for her support in the situation. Brent now sees the episode
as a learning experience for a new administrator, but at the time was very distraught over
the incident. Brent considers the process of teacher evaluation to be one of trust and
accountability for all parties involved. In our focus group conversation he commented on
Brandon’s (a teacher in the study) evaluation:
There’s a lot of assessment without accountability I think is what you’re saying.
They’re willing to show you where you’re doing things wrong and where you’re
doing things positive but in those instances where you’re doing things that aren’t
up to their standards, they’re not doing their half of the issue which is to help you
become a better teacher. So, accountability on their part they need to be held
accountable for helping him in his position there. So when administrators have a
snapshot of what your classroom looks like, and they say this is how you’re
doing, well that’s an ineffective administrator... they haven’t supported you in
any way shape or form so it seems like there’s a total lack of trust there. Perhaps
in that situation it’s the administrator because they’re not doing their half. . .that
evaluation doesn’t necessarily just reﬂect you it reﬂects their inability or their
lack of support for the teacher. Evaluations go both ways. If you haven’t seen
that administrator in you room you can hand back that evaluation and say this
reﬂects on you just as much as me (Focus Group)
Both Brent and Brandon experience an evaluation based on a limited amount of data.

Chester (1996) reports that increased observations with clear feedback promote

77

 

commitment to school goals and increased self-efﬁcacy. Brent appears to be advocating
for this type of observation through the story of his own experience and his response to
Brandon’s evaluation.

Brent considers himself to be an organized, highly capable teacher. He holds
himself accountable for his own actions and expects others to do the same. He expresses
concerns regarding the policy that Karen has for all ﬁrst year teachers at Calvin in which
they are required to submit lesson plans to her on a weekly basis. Brent considered this
task to be the “bane of his existence” his ﬁrst year at Calvin (Focus Group). The
frustration was apparent as Brent explained his concern over the issue:

If I’m handing you this document that’s taken me three hours to do, I expect to

see your rear in my classroom holding me accountable for the work you’re

requiring of me. If you’re going to ask me to toss these lesson plans out to you, I

want to make sure that there’s a professional in there making sure I’m executing

these things well, giving me strengths and weaknesses, and that didn’t happen at
all. So what is this lesson plan really worth to me? It did help me think about my
teaching and think about things more, but at the same time, why did I have to
hand it in to an administrator? Why did they have to see it? Was it just to see that

I was doing it? Was that the real purpose behind it or was it to make me a better

teacher as a ﬁrst year teacher? (Focus Group)

His comments appear to reveal that the frustration stems from his desire for instructional
independence, trust as a professional, and for accountability on the part of all involved.

Brent is ﬁustrated by the lack of recognition for the many committees, extra-

curricular activities, and coaching positions he holds. He gives the example of an

78

incident where he was chastised by one of the assistant principals for not attending a
homecoming football game, “My ﬁrst year of coaching girls’ swimming and middle
school swimming. . .I thought was a ton of involvement. I didn’t go to the homecoming
football game and I got blacklisted by the administration they said ‘where were you, what
is your participation in the school?’ and I said have you ever been to a swim meet?”
(Focus Group). He was angry that he was not recognized for the many things that he
does, but rather singled out for one event that he did not attend. This brings up the

question of what counts as “participation” in the eyes of the administration?

 

Complexities of the Relationship

The complexities that exist in Brent’s relationship with his principal seem to
center around the values of professionalism and trust. When asked to deﬁne effective
administrator/teacher interactions, Brent offers the following response:

Teachers and administrators have to support each other. I think you [need] that

support network. Students know that. . .what the teachers says goes because the

administrator will say the same thing. I think it’s a very powerful tool in
disciplinary actions and in instruction. Teachers have to trust that administration
is going to back them up to any degree barring some extreme circumstance. They
have to be able to respect each other as well, even if that respect is a professional
obligation. It’s not that they respect each other as people off the street, but as
professionals, they do have to respect each other. I’d say relationships built

around respect and trust. (Interview 2)

Linked to the concept of trust is the value of accountability. Brent expects high levels of

accountability from his students, administrators, and other teachers (Interview 2,

79

Artifact). If he were an administrator, he “would hold other teachers much more
accountable for their teaching” (Interview 1). Complexities arose when Brent disagreed
with the means for documenting accountability such as collecting lesson plans and
conducting classroom observations. These tensions between Brent’s values and the
administrator’s obligations will be discussed in Chapter 6.

Brent’s desire for professionalism complicates the development of his relationship
with Karen. He sees difﬁculty in reconciling trust with the intimacy of his relationship as
he attempts to describe their relationship in the following terms:

My relationship with the principal, it’s interesting, it’s not a personal relationship.

 

You try to make it personal but it never goes past professional. You. . .can’t if you
want to maintain that strict level of trust. I think it has to remain professional at
all times, which is awkward when you don’t think you can be yourself 100% of
the time when you’re around your administrator. I think that comes with the
profession to some degree, they say when you become an administrator your
circle of friends becomes smaller and smaller and smaller because people don’t
feel they can act the way they want to act around you. So it’s intimidating to
some degree, it’s like I can never say what I truly want to say. (Focus Group)
Brent’s trust in Karen took a blow after our second interview as he also referred to the
same contract issue described by Ellen. He did not discuss the issue with his principal,
but states that his faith, trust, and respect in his administration “has taken a huge
nosedive” and said that the whole situation negatively impacts his motivation (Focus

Group).

80

Summary

Brent has a strong sense of pride in the programs in which he is involved, such as
the girls swimming program and the history department (Focus Group). He is committed
to improvement in these programs and believes that his work can make positive changes.
He works to set himself apart from the other teachers by taking on additional
responsibilities such as coaching, committees, and acting as department chair. He
wonders though, about the value placed on various activities by administration. Brent
views himself as a professional worthy of trust and respect. Situations that call his
professional judgment into question such as his ﬁrst year evaluation and the requirement
of submitting lesson plans are troubling to him. He sets high standards for himself and
others and would hold others to a higher level of accountability if he were in a position to

do so.

Karen Summers: Building Family Ties

 

Background: Personal and Professional Background

I met Karen in her ofﬁce at Calvin on what was a typically busy day. Despite her
tight schedule, Karen was cheerful and enthusiastic about participating in the study. As a
fellow doctoral student, Karen was interested in the research process and the content of
my study. We began our ﬁrst interview with a discussion of the path that led her to
Calvin.

Karen began her career in education as an elementary school teacher. During her
six years teaching at the elementary level, Karen earned a masters degree in

administration. She became an elementary principal after her sixth year of teaching and

81

served as the principal at an elementary school near Calvin for four years before
becoming the principal of Calvin High School three years ago. Karen was initially
apprehensive about how the staff would view her due to her lack of experience at the
secondary level, but she took the approach that teaching was similar at all levels, making
sure that people in the building felt important, intelligent, and age appropriate.

Karen is a product of the Calvin School District, attending the schools in the
district from kindergarten through 12th grade. She earned a bachelor’s degree in
education and a master’s degree in administration and is currently in a K-l2 Educational
Administration doctoral program at a large university. She found her administrator
preparation program at the master’s level to be very inadequate in providing useful
concepts and timely information. She describes the program as having “very little
value.” She acknowledges that much of what she has learned on the job as an
administrator is not what would typically be found in a book. Her program did not have
an internship component, so she did not have the beneﬁt of learning from a mentoring
experience. She indicates that her current coursework in the doctoral program has been
more beneﬁcial, providing her with applicable information that has helped her guide the
many changes taking place in her school. The materials in her doctoral program are
described as being more “timely and realistic.”

A strong inﬂuence in Karen’s leadership perspective is the experience she had as
a teacher with one of her former principals. She describes this principal as a strong
building leader, “I feel she was a strong role model for what leadership should look like

from a feminine perspective and also ﬁom a holistic way of looking at how all children

82

 

can learn and what is best for all kids. I think some of the things I do today are strongly
rooted in things she did. I think that was a better model than any class I took.”

Karen chose the education ﬁeld as a career because of her passion for kids and
learning. She feels that she has something to offer students, especially those that
struggle. There were other teachers in Karen’s family and teaching seemed a natural ﬁt.
During her years in the classroom, Karen took on additional leadership responsibilities
such as that of union representative, and several building level leader positions. When
the principal position opened up at a nearby elementary, Karen was interested in the
challenge of an administrative position and the potential to work with students and staff.
The ﬁrst two years were difﬁcult as she grieved the loss of her own individual classroom,
but came to the realization that “my classroom was still there, it had just expanded and I
really feel that way now. I’m able to be a leader of large scale change as a building

leader where I could only make some of that impact as a classroom teacher” (Interview

1).

Expectations of Teachers: Desired and Realized

Many of Karen’s expectations of beginning teachers extend to the whole staff.
“We start every meeting on time for a reason and if you’re not there you’re going to hear
about it. That’s saying I expect you to be prompt and I expect you to go on and make
your kids be prompt. That we value dress code that when we say we’re going to do
something then we do it. . .if they don’t, there are consequences just like with the kids. I
also believe that I’m willing to allow them (teachers) to become the best they can be if

they want to” (Interview 1). She models these expectations, stating “I think I’m the

83

major cheerleader of the building, I think I inﬂuence them by my words, actions, and
look” (Interview 1).

She does acknowledge that her beginning teachers are likely to make mistakes
and considers that a part of learning and improving, “we always talk about how we all
make mistakes and we’re all trying to get better. If you make stupid mistakes and keep
making stupid mistakes, that’s where you get into trouble” (Interview 2). In an effort to
assist beginning teachers, Karen has developed an in-service for new teachers that she
conducts personally. As one of her artifacts, Karen brought the agenda for new teacher
in-service with topics including “what our beliefs are in the teaching environment, about
our building, give them a little idea of the building goals and how we got to where we
are, what the timeline is to develop their IDPs, their personal goal sheet, what their
professional responsibilities are, lesson planning and some classroom management tips”
(Interview 2).

She considers a major part of her job in working with teachers to give them the
tools that they need to improve and be the best they possibly can be. Those tools include
frequent feedback, materials and supplies, professional development, and time to make
improvements and changes. For example, when Calvin implemented a seminar into the
daily schedule, teachers were involved in the research process and in training for
implementation (Interview 2). In addition to her own support of beginning teachers,
Karen expects her veteran staff members to be supportive of the beginning teachers, but
realizes that sometimes they can be the exact opposite. She explains,

I know that veteran teachers can run people out of the district, the building, the

profession, by being mean, being catty, by always ﬁnding fault with the things

84

they do, by belittling the new ideas they bring to the table. I know that when I
can, I have honored new and innovative ways so it was less popular for those
teachers to say ‘we’ve always done it this way’ because they’ve heard me say

‘just because we’ve always done it that way doesn’t mean we have to keep doing

it that way’. (Interview 2)

Karen promotes positive relations through the assignment of a mentor (Interview 2). In
the case of Brent, his mentor was an example of a positive interaction that happened
between a new teacher and veteran staff member. Brent stated, “My mentor is awesome
and I think it (the mentor program) has worked really, really, really well at conditioning
me as a Calvin teacher. That’s a new teacher program that worked phenomenally”
(Focus Group).

There is an expectation at Calvin that staff be involved in the school. She
explains,

This district has historically been mostly coaches that are teaching staff, which is

not really the norm anymore. When we hire people here we tell them that the

expectation is that they are involved in extra-curriculars. You can go to a

basketball game, a swim meet, a play and see teachers there. We really encourage

them to do that”. (Interview 2)

Karen is proud that her school has teachers from the building running the
programs versus people from outside the education ﬁeld. Brad recognizes this
expectation as a function of the school setting, saying “we’re in a small district and I
think there is an expectation that people will do extra things. . .district is all about

involvement, the community is very strongly involved” (Focus Group).

85

 

Organizational Considerations

Time is one of the biggest factors that Karen struggles with in working with her
beginning teachers. She stops in each teacher’s classroom on a daily basis.
Every morning, unless I have a meeting. . .I make it a point to go to every
classroom and say good morning to the teachers and the students as I go. What
happens is there is a lot of interactions where teachers may talk to me about a
concern they have with a student, a parent that called them, class work they have
to do and they have to leave early, what to do about grading, what to do about
report cards. So during that time not only is it time to say “good morning” and
“how are you?,” it’s also a time every day that at least they have that moment to
capture me and give me lots of stuff. I always say to them “write that down”,
they know I’m a very visual person. (Interview 2)
These daily visits make up the bulk of her personal contact as given in an oral description
of her communication log. She gave an example of a contact with one of her beginning
teachers that transpired: “One of my new teachers. . .was having a meltdown when I
walked in. . .her class wasn’t there. She was just overwhelmed with her world and we
talked about her extra-curricular involvement and all. . .that it’s okay that she didn’t. . .feel
great everyday and that it’s okay to feel overwhelmed” (Interview 2).
Because Karen has so many other commitments within her position, meeting with
committees, instructional observations, meeting with parents, returning email and phone

calls, district level meetings, scheduling issues, dealing with effects of state mandates,

86

after school sports and arts events, attendance and truancy, and so on, she ﬁnds it very
challenging to ﬁnd time to properly recognize her staff (Interviews 1 & 2). She explains,
“I think that’s the hardest part of my job, I have so many plates in the air that sometimes
when people are doing a good job it’s easy to overlook. . .and [not] give them the kudos
they deserve. So on a regular basis I try to build in things where I make speciﬁc
individual stops where I say I just want you to know you’re doing a great job” (Interview 1
1). Karen values her staff and tries to ﬁnd ways to show her appreciation for their hard A
work, saying that “[with the]whole group. . .I try to do things that let them know, the staff

in general, that I value them that I care about them as individuals. If it means that I have

 

HI_

to step into their classroom so they can take an hour doctor appointment I’ll do that in a
minute. Making them lunch when they know I’m not a good cook at Christmas. I said to
them ‘I cook only for important people and you were it this year,’ so I think that’s
important” (Interview 1).

Another great challenge for Karen that impacts her teachers is dealing with
money. She explains, “I think money is most challenging. Trying to do more with less
takes a lot of energy and creativity. I think you always have to be thinking about ‘how
am I going to make this work now that they are going to cut my budget again.’ That’s
always a challenge” (Interview 1). Larger class sizes and less money for classroom
supplies can be particularly challenging for beginning teachers new to classroom
planning and management (Vecchio, 1984).

State mandates also dictate factors that inﬂuence how Karen works with her
teachers. She ﬁnds it “a challenge that the state mandates are imposing upon. . .public

education, especially at the secondary level. . .pose tremendous challenges in how we do

87

business” (Interview 1). One challenge that she has been dealing with is the new testing
requirements, “we’re well into how we’re going to run ACT and MME, because there are
some requirements that require us to change our staff around a little. . .we’re having a
brief staff meeting after school to share what it is we want to do...so we have a proposal
that deals with scheduling and home room and having parents come in and sign EDP
forms” (Interview 2).

All new teachers must have a mentor and Karen assigns each new teacher a
mentor before the beginning of the school year. Because of the large number of new
teachers, some mentors have more than one new teacher. Karen has each mentor and
new teacher keep a log of their meetings and topics of discussion as a record for the state
and for professional development hours (Interview #2, document). In addition to the
documentation of the beginning teacher’s professional development hours, she must also
abide by state and district regulations requiring observation and documentation of the
performance of the beginning teachers several times a year. Karen and her two assistant
principals divide the responsibility of teacher evaluations but with such a large portion of
the staff being non-tenured, it is still a very time consuming task (Interview 2). She holds
an IDP meeting with new teachers in the fall, pre and post observational meetings, the
observations themselves, as well as informal “stop-ins” scattered throughout the year

(Interview 2).

Complexities of Building a Relationship

Time is again a large factor for Karen in building a relationship with her new
teachers. By making it a daily ritual to stop by every teacher’s classroom in the morning,

she develops opportunities for communication. Karen also believes that her commitment

88

to following through on what she says is part of developing trust in the relationship.
Common perception leads one to believe that how one spends one’s time reveals one’s
core values. However, the perception of a situation and it’s reality can be two different
things. Karen has worked as a teacher and has experienced the challenges faced by both
new and veteran teachers while Brent and Ellen have no experience working in an
administrative capacity. It becomes a challenge to build a relationship when the
perception of the beginning teacher is skewed because of his/her lack of knowledge of the
realities of the complex roles and responsibilities faced by their administrator.

Karen must take into account the “big picture,” meaning the function of the
school in every capacity whereas the new teacher is limited to the “small picture,”
meaning their small slice of classroom reality. The inability on either part to recognize
the importance of the other leads to tensions in the relationship. Karen has a level of
power and authority that she must posses to make the organizational decisions and
interpretation of policy that are expected in a role such as principal. The level of
transparency in her management is dictated by the situation and at times it may be
completely inappropriate for any level of disclosure. This can muddle the relationship-

building process as the lack of disclosure may be misinterpreted as lack of trust.

Summary

Honest, open dialogue is the cornerstone of Karen’s relationships with her
teachers. She keeps an open door policy and hopes that her teachers feel that they can
come to her with any concerns they may have. She describes her contact with new
teachers as parent-like; where she checks with them to make sure everything is okay and

to assure them that they can count on her for strength. Karen, like Ellen, uses the analogy

89

of a family when talking about the faculty at Calvin. She explains, “We are a family
here. We spend lots and lots and lots of time together and I say that all the time. We are
a family. You create families in your classroom all the time because you are a classroom
family, too. I believe that we create together the environment that we want to live in

here” (Interview 2).

90

CHAPTER FIVE: TRIAD AT LAREDO HIGH SCHOOL

Introduction

 

Because I grew up in a neighboring suburb, I was familiar with the location of
Laredo High School. I had been to the high school many times as a student for athletic
competitions, but as I drove there to conduct my interviews I noticed that many of the
very large homes that I had remembered as a student had been demolished and replaced
by even larger palatial homes. Laredo High School and the city of Laredo are located in
a very wealthy county in the state.

Ironically, after visiting with the teachers and administrator in the building, it was
obvious that the building was in need of renovations, something I did not expect to ﬁnd
considering the afﬂuence of the community in which the school is located. Classrooms
appeared in need of new windows, ﬂooring, computer infrastructure, and the art room
seemed short on sinks and counter space. As my research was taking place, the school
board was trying to pass a bond issue that proposed the construction of two new high
schools, each to occupy the current location. It is important to note that two years prior,
the school board tried to pass a similar bond issue that would have built one large high
school on the current location of the west side high school. There would have been two
campuses that shared certain structures. The plan was to maximize taxpayer dollars
while maintaining the tradition of the two high schools. This bond failed by a large
portion. The new proposal had ended in failure as well. Facility problems are a major
concern in the district, and after the failure of the latest bond issue, the school board is
conducting a community survey to assist in creating a solution to the aging facilities

dilemma.

91

Table 5.1 Laredo High School

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Size of Student # of Teachers Location Racial Make-up Economy
Body
Approximately Approximately Afﬂuent Suburb 85% Caucasian Corporate,
1000 students 75 teachers (12- 15% African- Medical,

14 non-tenured) American Automotive

 

Laredo serves approximately one thousand students on the east side of the city
and a second high school serves the west side. Table 5.1 summarizes the major
demographic features of Laredo. Even though the city as a whole is considered to be
quite wealthy, there is a division among the community where the east side is not
considered as “well off’, as the principal I interviewed stated, the students from some
areas of the east side are referred to as “those kids” (Interview 1). As the housing market
has slumped in the state and houses have become more affordable, many people that
would have traditionally been priced out of the area have now been able to buy homes in
certain subdivisions on the east side of the city (Interview 1). The city is also
experiencing what the principal calls the second wave of ﬂight from the major city in the
area. He explains that in the 19603 there was “white ﬂight” from the inner city to the
suburbs and now they are seeing “black ﬂight” (Interview 1). As people in the inner city
and surrounding inner-ring suburbs have increased their means to move, they are
choosing to come to a city with one of the top educational systems in the state. Many of
them are renting in the city’s apartment complexes on the city’s east side. As a result, the
student body make-up has changed from almost exclusively Caucasian, to a more diverse
population.

Academics have always been a top priority at Laredo. The district boasts the

highest MEAP scores in the state and there is an expectation that every student will

92

attend college. Graduates attend the two major universities in the state as well as many
liberal arts and Ivy League colleges. Within the past ten years, educating students has
become more challenging at Laredo. Students transferring to Laredo from other school
districts often enter behind in the school district’s rigorous curriculum. Teachers at
Laredo have been forced to learn to differentiate instruction and also to deal with more
classroom management issues.

Table 5.2 provides a summary of the participants’ roles at the high school as well
as their experience at Laredo and in education in general. Both Penny and Brandon are in
their ﬁrst years of teaching although Brandon worked as a long term substitute for six
weeks at the end of the previous school year. Penny is a member of the art department
and teaches several different art courses including a graphic design class. Brandon is a
math teacher and teaches three different math courses to a variety of grade levels. Chad
is in his second year at Laredo but is a seasoned educator with many years of both
teaching and administrative experience.

Table 5.2 Laredo High School Participants Professional Experience

 

 

 

 

 

Participants Position at Laredo Years at Laredo H.S. Total Years in
HS. Education
Penny Pallance Teacher of Art and 1 year 1 year
Graphic Design
Brandon Billings Teacher of Math 1.25 years 1.25 years
Chad Holden Principal 2 years 9 years Teaching
7 years Admin.

 

 

 

 

93

 

Penny Pallance: Philosophy vs. Facility

Background: Personal and Professional

I met Penny, one of Laredo’s art teachers, after school in the main ofﬁce for our
ﬁrst interview. We walked through the maze of hallways to the art wing where her
classroom was located. I was surprised by the condition of the room, expecting
something more “state of the art.” The room did not have windows and was fairly small
considering the number of students she was teaching. Computers were set up in a
makeshift fashion in the art room, which was also used for her graphic design classes.
When asked if having computers so close to all the art materials was a concern, she
explained that the set up was deﬁnitely not ideal, but with the current building it was the
only solution (Interview 1). A huge sheet of plastic material covered what appeared to be
a large metal grate on one wall. Penny described it as some sort of ancient ventilation
system that had not worked in ages. The room seemed to be lacking the counter space
and sinks that one would expect in an art room. Penny did say that she wanted another
sink installed, but was waiting to see the results of the bond issue (Interview 1). If it
were not for the lively student artwork that covered the walls, it would have been a drab
space.

Penny was much older than I had expected for a ﬁrst year teacher. Penny entered
teaching in her mid-thirties while the other teachers in the study began their teaching
careers in their early to mid-twenties. As we were walking to her room she explained
that she had done many other things before she decided to become a teacher. We began
our ﬁrst interview in her classroom and I was quickly intrigued by her path to become an

art teacher.

94

Penny graduated from a design school on the east coast and worked as a
professional illustrator for several years, having her works published in books and
magazines. After living in three different states as an illustrator, Penny became more
interested in abstract painting and attended a prestigious school of design in Manhattan,
where she earned a master’s degree in painting. She found New York a hard place to
live. It was very difﬁcult to survive as an artist, so she worked as a temp for stockbrokers
on Wall Street for three years in order to pay her bills. That changed when she exited the
subway one morning to ﬁnd hundreds of people running in her direction. The ﬁrst plane
had hit the World Trade Center and as she looked up from a block away, she saw the
second plane hit. She explains, “that was a very, very life changing experience ...it’s a
powerful experience, it was a horrible experience. I was lucky though, I got out of there
without having any visceral effects. As soon as I saw it I got back on the subway and
came back to my apartment in Brooklyn. Within a month, I recognized that my family
was here and I wanted to be around my family so I came back home and felt at a loss
about what to do” (Interview 1).

Penny had lost her motivation to paint and was working in a book store when her
mother, an elementary teacher, asked her to volunteer for the art teacher at her elementary
school. Her mother was worried about Penny and the loss of passion for her art. Penny
described how she began to volunteer at the elementary school and how it brought art
back to her. She stated, “It is the perfect blend for me, of being able to do art yet having
a social element for what you are doing in life because I felt very isolated with what I was
doing in the ﬁne arts without having that teaching element” (Interview 1). It was this

experience that inspired her to enter the teaching profession.

95

Despite having a master’s degree in ﬁne art, Penny found that she had to go
through quite an extensive program in order to become certiﬁed to teach art. She
explained that when she ﬁrst inquired at the university where she went for certiﬁcation,
“They almost laughed at me. They said ‘you’re so overqualiﬁed for this’ and said ‘are
you sure you really want to teach? You’re going to have to stand in bus lines and things’
and I’m thinking you’re supposed to be my education teacher. . .yes, I want to teach, this
gives meaning to my life” (Interview 1). Penny had to take several courses in order to ﬁll
the gaps in her program, such as science courses, in addition to education courses. When
I asked Penny if she felt that her education courses had prepared her for what she was
experiencing as a ﬁrst year teacher, she explained that some teachers and courses had
been better than others, but that “some of it seemed absolutely ridiculous and
absurd. . .does this have anything to do with what’s really going to happen?” (Interview
1). She found that her instructors, who had worked for many years as teachers in public
schools, were the most helpful and realistic in her preparation. She noted that two
instructors who worked in private institutions had actually discouraged her from going
into education, to which her response was, “you just don’t get it, you don’t get why I’m
doing this” (Interview 1).

Penny believes that her student teaching experience was a very important part of
her development as a teacher. She had two placements, one at an inner-city high school,
which she described as “amazing”, and a second at a suburban middle school that she
described as “not so amazing” (Interview 1). I asked her to explain what had made them

such different experiences. Penny explains that it was based on the teacher involved,

96

The philosophy of art education is so open to interpretation. There’s a lot of
people. . .who go on to art education because its artsy-craftsy. .. I don’t mean to be
negative, but I don’t know if they realize the depth of what art education is in
terms of brain development, in terms of cognitive development, and development
of the whole student. The teacher I had at (the inner-city) school clearly
understood that... she also was an artist and understood why art was so important.

She believed in every one of those kids and worked so hard with them as opposed

to the other experience I had where the person was really more interested in

perfectly done things than developing creativity. (Interview 1)

After earning her teaching certiﬁcate, Penny was selected from a large number of
applicants for the position at Laredo High School. Penny teaches three preps; two
drawing classes, two painting classes, a graphic design class, and additionally one
seminar course. Through her teaching, Penny believes that she can provide an impact in
art education for students at all levels. She describes this quest,

The ﬁrst year you start to question what kind of teacher you want to be and there

are these teachers who have these programs where they have all these super

advanced students, they must weed out the other kids. But then there are other

teachers that are the balance of that. I want to be the balance of those things. I

want to be here for kids that need social development [or] for whatever other

reasons it is they need to be here. [They] may never be great artists, but it’s a

therapeutic experience for them and it’s also a learning experience on another

level. I also want to be here for the kids that are great and advanced. So I want to

try to make an impact across the board in some way. (Interview 1)

97

Expectations: Desired and Realized

Penny is very satisﬁed with the way that her administrators value the visual arts at
Laredo. She values art as a way to learn and develop both intellectually and socially and
has found that her administrators hold these same views. She believes that “they (her
administrators) want to see some real learning occur and that’s what I like about it. In so
many districts they think of art and they don’t think of learning but here it’s thought of
differently and they do realize that kids can have ah-ha moments and they can learn too in
the art room and they want to see that happening and they want to see that not just doing
through the motions, but rather how do you facilitate real learning and social
development too, how can we work on some of those skills in here too” (Interview 1).

She ﬁnds this attitude toward the arts very motivating and works hard to provide
an exceptional experience for all of her students. In her teaching, Penny knows she needs
to be ﬂexible and “to see what each student needs, to be able to adjust to each student, to
ﬁnd out what that students needs because one size does not ﬁt all, especially in art. You
have to ﬁgure out what each one of the students has to get out of this rather than just
putting this lesson here. Getting to know the students and where they need to develop
and where they need to go with it. I think that’s super important” (Interview 1). Her
principal agrees with and has encouraged Penny in ﬁnding ways to work with all of her
students.

Penny deals with students ranging in abilities and social skills. She expects that
her administrators will support her when she has discipline issues and has reported that
her administrators have always helped her and handled the few situations she has

encountered to her satisfaction. For example, when two students had been suspended for

98

ﬁghting in her class, Penny was concerned about their return to the class and how they
might respond to each other. She explains,
Those kids were suspended from school for quite awhile and this was the day they
were going to be coming back to school, and I was a little nervous about that, so I
went down to the assistant principal and I talked to him about what he thought
would be the best way to handle it because I knew there was going to be some
tension. And so he just said ‘you know if I were you I‘d say it happened and
we’re over it now.’ I said I was still nervous about it so he arranged it so that
when the kids ﬁrst came in I would send one of them down to the school social
worker. So they all came in and I immediately sent one down to the social worker
and when he came back I sent the other one down and it kind of broke up the
tension. So that was orchestrated by the assistant principal. That was kind of a
nice thing, it helped. (Interview 2)
Penny had only positive comments in regards to the mentoring program at
Laredo. Her mentor teacher is also in the art department, a three member department. A
very seasoned teacher and professional artist, her mentor has been invaluable in assisting
Penny in the everyday ﬁrnctioning of the school, “I’m very lucky because she’s someone
that I respect so much and because she’s somebody ...that I’m learning so much from.
She’s somebody who is an artist, she’s a teacher, she’s been doing this and she just puts
her all into it. I have a role model that really helps me to see what’s possible” (Interview
1). Her mentor has served as not just an advisor, but also as a protector. Penny’s mentor
warned Penny about the potential for becoming overwhelmed and burning out during her

ﬁrst year of teaching and advised her to not take on any additional responsibilities outside

99

her department. She even taught Penny how to avoid additional duties by saying, “if
anyone asks you to be on a committee, tell them that you’ll consider it and that you’ll get
back to them. . .then just never get back to them” (Focus Group). Penny also has her own
way of avoiding being considered for coaching sports by “pretending that I don’t know
anything about athletics” (Focus Group).

By using these techniques, Penny has limited her involvement to strictly
departmental events and activities such as exhibits and competitions. Art exhibitions and
competitions have taken up a large amount of Penny’s time this year. When asked what
she had found most challenging in her ﬁrst year of teaching, she replies “Just all the extra
stuff, the scholastics competition, the Taylor competition, all the extra paperwork”
(Interview 1). As a new teacher, she thought that she would be able to sit back and learn
the ropes from her two colleagues, but when one of her colleagues left on a medical leave
followed by a maternity leave, Penny was forced to take on a leadership role. Penny
explains how the absence of her colleague has impacted her work, “I’ve had to take on a
lot more responsibility. . .it’s made me have to grow up very fast in just accepting all sorts
of additional responsibilities because the person that left is also our department chair. It’s
made it so there is just more administrative responsibilities on me” (Interview 1).

Penny expects her administrators to be visible in the school to the teachers and
students. She frequently sees her administrators during the day as they monitor the
hallways, lunch room, and stop by her classroom when they are in her area
(Communication log). She is impressed by their dedication and work ethic, “I feel like
they genuinely care about the students and about making this a quality educational

program. They’re here every day, their cars are here when we leave, their cars are here

100

before we get here and they’re hard workers. Just the fact that they are that involved, that
they’re putting in the hours and they are really trying to make an effort and are genuinely
concerned is very inspiring” (Interview 2). She believes that it is important to have an
administrator that can act as a “sounding board,” someone that is available without an
appointment that can listen, offer advice, and help with a problem (Interview 1). She
says that she most often talks to her assistant principal Roy because she trusts that he will
act on his word. She trusts his judgment, ﬁnds him easy to talk to and much more
available than her principal, Chad (Interview 1). She says that if there was a critical
issue, she does believe that Chad would make the time to handle it with her, but realizes
that he is typically dealing with a myriad of school related issues.

One area in which Penny expresses a high level of frustration is teacher
certiﬁcation. She has been trying to ﬁnd out what she needs in terms of credits or SBCEs
in order to maintain her teaching certiﬁcate and told the members of our focus group the
story of her attempt to obtain answers:

I’m doing something this summer and I could get SBCEs and I don’t even know

what this is. I’m in my ﬁrst year and I have my master’s degree so I don’t think I

even need graduate credits. So does this go toward the twelve hours of my own

time? I wrote to our coordinator for new teachers and he said I think you should
ask the other [coordinator] so I wrote another letter and they said well here’s sort
of the answer but look on the web site. I wrote back that the web site is hard to
navigate. Those requirements ...I get nervous about it because I know I have to
have certain things and I could use some help trying to ﬁgure it out. (Focus

Group)

101

Penny knows there are speciﬁc requirements she must meet, but wonders how she is
expected to be able to ﬁgure it all out as a new teacher when much more experienced and

supposedly knowledgeable people cannot answer her questions.

Organizational Complications

It has been challenging for Penny to teach the large number of students in her
classes within the current classroom space. She describes her teaching conditions:
It’s tough trying to deal with that many kids because so much of it is. . .program
oriented, so you have to learn the program ﬁrst and then to around and try to get
them to be doing creative stuff. . .and make sure all the computers are working.
This building is so old, you see the crazy structure of how we have the wiring and
stuff. I’m grateful we have the computers, however, the wiring and the network
go down constantly. That’s been a challenge too, just making sure that everything
is functioning all the time. I have a couple of printers from 1976 and they’re
slowly dying. We have one new one but we’re ordering some new stuff ﬁnally.
Thankfully we have some funds to do that. (Interview 1)

The number of students per class is also a concern for Penny since the previous teacher
always had less than ten students and Penny has thirty (Interview 1). Teaching the
graphic design class has been challenging, but Penny views it as part of her professional
responsibility to improve her own knowledge to better serve her students. She describes
the graphic design course as “my biggest challenge because I came into this a painting
person not having much graphic design experience, so I’m learning as I go along. This
summer I’m taking three classes in Scotland in graphic design. . .we’ve got all this

technology and I want to be able to bridge the gap between this handmade art and the

102

technology art so that the kids really ﬁnd that the two can go hand in hand. It’s up to me
to be the person to do that” (Interview 1).

Penny was hired to replace a well-liked teacher in the department. She explains
that he “was here for 37 years. He invited me to his retirement party and they said
‘you’re taking over for Nate, he’s a legend,’ so that was scary. He left a lot of supplies so
that was good. But he was a drawing teacher doing dry media and I’m more of a painter;
so for me, there’s so much in terms of paint that I had to look into and materials that I had
to get that were just never here” (Interview 1). Penny spent a considerable amount of
time before school started preparing her room and ordering and organizing supplies
(Interview 1). The curriculum is fairly open ended which is appealing to Penny, but she
states that constantly developing her curriculum has been one of her biggest challenges:

We don’t really have a set curriculum in place. It’s not like we have a text book

we go to. . .I’m grateﬁrl for that because I don’t think that art should be taught in

just one way. Because of that, I was forced to develop my own curriculum based
on what I felt was important and to try to get some sort of benchmarks and
standards in there while giving an interesting curriculum. That has been the
biggest challenge, just what is it I want to teach, and what do I want the kids to

learn, and how I want the student to develop. (Interview 1)

Penny feels very fortunate that Chad values the art program as a serious learning
opportunity for students. He has changed some aspects of the art program and dealt with
some issues of censorship, receiving criticism from one of Ellen’s colleagues in the

department. She describes the scenario:

103

We had a situation at Taylor (school art competition) where something had been
censored. This was the ﬁrst time that something had been censored. We had a
report that the principals and counselors had come in and picked the pieces up and
took them out. Mary (her mentor) was livid, she said ‘this is the arts, its freedom
of speech.’ I’m looking at the pieces and saying okay, its freedom of speech,
we’re art teachers, but we’re art teachers in a public high school. I didn’t ﬁnd
anything objectionable; however, I can understand why Chad felt nervous. So
there was tension there. We consulted with the people who had dealt with that
before. They had made a committee with parents that decided what should be
censored, so we did that. It was a great thing because it made it so it wasn’t us
against the administration and it took the pressure off Chad because if someone
got upset he could say, ‘well, we had a committee.’ That was a good way to deal
with it. (Interview 2)
Penny feels that as a new teacher, she has the ability to look at situations with fresh eyes
and believes that Chad has “a lot of people to answer to. . .I think he’s trying to be
diplomatic. . .I think his viewpoint on how to do things differs from Mary’s (her mentor)
who has been here for many years. She has her idea of how things are supposed to go,
but since I’m new, I’m seeing both sides of things” (Interview 2). Because of her support
of her principal, Penny says that some colleagues have told her that she is “hopping on
the Chad train” (Interview 2), but she is steadfast in her belief that Chad is working hard

to improve the school for everyone.

104

Complexities of the Relationship

During the two weeks that Penny kept her communication log, she had personal
contact with her administrators almost every day. A large portion of her contacts were
meaningful, important meetings or discussions. Very little of her contact with
administration was through email, most was face to face. During this time frame Penny
had both a formal and an impromptu observation and a post evaluation meeting as part of
the evaluation process at her school. She was also extensively involved with the
principal in the production of the Taylor art competition held at the school.

Penny feels that her administrators believe in the importance of art education and
do their best to support the arts at Laredo (Interview 1). Penny provides the example of
how one of the assistant principals brought a group of community members into her art
room as part of a tour designed to help the community understand the need for a new
high school (Interview 1). He introduced Penny and talked to the group about Daniel
Pink’s book about the need for creativity in the world and how companies are recruiting
people with MFA’s instead of MBA’s, trying to generate a more creative workforce. He
pointed out the limitations of her room and how it impacts what she and the students are
trying to achieve. She was pleased that her assistant principal took the time to show the
group her room and was impressed that he cited current literature that supported the value
of arts education in his presentation to the community members.

Penny stated that it is fairly easy to talk to Roy, one of the assistant principals. He
maintains an open door policy and has always helped Penny with her concerns. Penny
likes Roy’s approachable, ﬁiendly personality and appreciates that he takes all of her

concerns seriously and always follows through on what he says he will do in a timely

105

manner (Interview 2). The second assistant principal at Laredo is also typically available,
but Penny says she does not go to him ﬁrst because she has found that he does not always
do what he says he will and then she has to go back and ask again, or ask somebody else.
Penny believes that her principal, Chad, would help her with whatever she needs, but that
because he is typically so busy, she has a hard time getting to speak with him unless she
makes an appointment.

Penny has very little to say that is critical toward her administration. In our focus
group when I asked about tensions that may exist in her relationships with her
administrators, she laughed, “there’s no tension with me. I’ve got no problems.” While
her conversations lack any direct criticism, they are laced with anxiety over a situation
that may just be “going too well.” Her past experience with authority in various jobs was
not positive and her current situation is very different (Interview 1). Penny admits some
anxiety, “I think this can’t be going right, this is going too well. I’m so used to having
that feeling [anxiety] with administration (Focus group). She talked to the focus group
about how she liked her administrators, “I usually don’t like authority ﬁgures at all. . .I
think that we have some pretty good leaders because usually I distrust authority. . .they’re
pretty darn good or they’re pulling the snow over me”. One of the teachers in the focus
group after hearing Penny’s lack of “problems” warned her to be careful of being to
content, to which Penny replied, “I know. . .I’m always nervous about that. I’m always

nervous that things are going to change”.

Summary

Because Penny was selected from a very large pool of applicants for her position,

she feels a sense of loyalty to the school and the administration for hiring her (Interview

106

1). While she does wish that she had better facilities, she realizes that she is fortunate to
have a job and even more fortunate to have an administration that she believes to be
extremely supportive of the arts. She has a strong commitment to the students in her
program and to the other two teachers in her department. Their help has been invaluable
to her and she has a great deal of gratitude toward them. She has a strong sense of
efﬁcacy which was evident when one teacher in the focus group talked about how there
are some students that cannot be helped, even by veteran teachers. Later in the focus
group, Penny came back to the statement and said, “I think what you were saying. . .about
is there something you can do better. . .you were saying sometimes there’s nothing you
can do, well as a ﬁrst year teacher, I’m still hopeful. There [has to] be some way I can do
this. I keep [saying] what is it that I can change? What is it that I can do so I can get
these kids to connect?”

She has noticed that she has a sense of school pride, something that she did not
posses when she was in high school herself. She has purchased a Laredo high school
sweatshirt and showed me a pin of the school mascot that she brought as one of her
artifacts. She received the pin at a staff meeting at the beginning of the school year
where the new staff was introduced (Artifact from Interview 2)). She says, “It’s a little
goofy, but it was sweet because it was like ‘hey you’re one of us’ and it was just one of
these nice little things. I keep it on my bureau at home so I see it in the morning”
(Interview 2).

Penny believes that after many years of searching, and a wide variety of life
experiences, she has found what she deﬁnes as her “calling” in life (Interview 1). It is

her intention to retire as a teacher and she hopes she will be able to maintain her

107

optimistic outlook on the profession and her employers. Penny has a very strong belief in
what art education should and should not be at the secondary level and is very motivated
by the fact that her administration shares the same values for her program. On one
occasion Chad asked her to stop by his office where she was surprised to see that he had
taken one of her student’s art pieces and had it copied, framed, and hung on his ofﬁce
wall.

Chad’s commitment and value of the arts is a signiﬁcant reason for her not
wanting to leave Laredo for another, better equipped school district. Penny describes the
temptation in the focus group, “sometimes you start to get this ‘grass is greener’ thing
especially with our facilities. This building is falling apart. What if I got offered another
job? Would I take it? But. . .right now, I have to consider myself lucky and my principal
is always saying ‘it’s about people and programs, it’s not about facilities.’ You’ve got to
go with people and programs, it’s more important to me so don’t be tempted. . .you’ve got

to go with what’s important” (Focus Group).

Brandon Billings: In Search of an Advocate and Guide

Background: Personal and Professional

Brandon, a ﬁrst year math teacher, met me in the main ofﬁce at Laredo. As we
navigated the busy hallway during passing time, students where shouting out ‘Hey Mr.
B!’ as we walked along. It was clear that he was a well-liked teacher. Brandon was the
only teacher in the math department without a permanent classroom, so we conducted the
interview in the math department ofﬁce, which was very quiet and empty. We began our
ﬁrst interview with a discussion of his background and position at Laredo. Brandon was

actually hired as a substitute at Laredo in May of the previous school year when one of

108

the new teachers in the math department abruptly resigned near the end of the school year
(Interview 1). He was hired permanently for the following school year.

Brandon grew up in a suburban area very similar to Laredo. The suburb where he
was raised was also one of the wealthiest in the state and had a top ranked school district.
Brandon says that the high school offerings at Laredo are very comparable to those of his
high school. He found himself to have a strong academic advantage when he attended
college because of the educational opportunities that were available to him growing up.
He believes the students at Laredo have similar opportunities and most take advantage of
them and pursue college after graduation.

Brandon attended a large state university after high school. He took all of his core
classes as a freshman, and at the end of that year, worked with his advisor to make a
decision in terms of a major. He loved his math courses, had enjoyed the high school
atmosphere, and liked being around kids, so he thought that teaching might be a good ﬁt.
When I asked Brandon if his coursework or student teaching experience had prepared
him for what he was experiencing at Laredo as a ﬁrst year teacher his response was “no,
not at all” (Interview 1).

Brandon was placed in his year long student teaching experience at a brand new
suburban high school very close to his university. He went on to explain that in his
student teaching he was in mid—level math classes with very little discipline problems and
had no experience teaching lower-level courses or dealing with serious discipline issues.
He says that his coursework did address issues such as student motivation and discipline,
but as he puts it, “until you get in there and have to deal with it, you have no idea what to

do” (Interview 1). Brandon believes experience, either observing or working with

109

teachers that effectively teach “difﬁcult” students, would have been helpful in preparing
him for his current position (Interview 1). Although his student teaching experience did
not prepare him for dealing with all types of students, it did provide him with practice in
the everyday duties of teaching.

Brandon teaches ﬁve sections of math at Laredo High School. He has three preps,
two sections of Algebra 2, one section of Statistics ( a lower level course for seniors), and
two sections of a lower level version of Algebra 1. One section of Algebra I is
particularly difﬁcult for Brandon in terms of classroom management and student
motivation and learning. The students in the class have been tracked together for several
years and know each other well, referring to themselves as the “dumb class” (Interview
1). Brandon continued to explain, that over the past ﬁve years, there has been a large
inﬂux of students transferring to Laredo from other school districts. Many of these
students entered behind in the math curriculum and were not prepared for lower level
Algebra 1. Because of state standards, the school district will be eliminating the lower
level Algebra 1 course and requiring all students to take regular Algebra 1.

Brandon is working as part of a group of four teachers that will conduct a math
program this summer to assist students identiﬁed by the middle school counselors as
being at risk. Brandon hopes this will ease the transition to the Algebra 1 course.
Brandon sees the integration of these students into the regular course as a positive move.
He believes that they will be exposed to higher standards and that peer pressure from
higher achieving students will help students to conform to appropriate learning and

behavior standards (Interview 2).

110

Brandon feels a strong sense of commitment toward his classroom students as
well as his student athletes (Focus Group). Brandon gains satisfaction from working with
his athletes and is very proud of the athletic program in general. He currently coaches
two sports and will be coaching three the following year. I asked him if spending so
much time after school coaching affects his work in the classroom, to which he explains
that he does ﬁnd it more challenging ﬁnding time to do things like planning and grading
(Interview 1). Much of the time he spends weekends catching up from the time that he
puts in during the week coaching. He does not want to give up coaching because he
enjoys the athletics, working with the kids in a different area, and the personal sense of

satisfaction that it provides.

Expectations: Desired and Realized

Brandon is often overwhelmed with the daily responsibilities of teaching. He
describes his biggest frustration as a new teacher, “just feeling like you’re never caught
up. You’ve never done this before so you’re trying to see what works and what doesn’t
work and in the process you’re grading papers, trying to stay involved in school. It just
feels like it just keeps piling on, piling on, and piling on and you get to the weekend and
you try to get caught up for the next week. So it always seems like there’s something
else that’s coming at you” (Interview 2). Compounding the stress from his teaching
responsibilities is the difﬁculty he has experiences with classroom management.

Described by Brandon as “being ﬁlled with some of the craziest kids I’ve ever
seen in my life,” one particular class has caused him tremendous difﬁculties in classroom
management. Many of the students in this course are behind in the curriculum, struggle

with the content, and behave poorly. Brandon shares his perspective,

111

I think they have been together so long. . .the expectations. . .are so low that it’s
hard to go in there the ﬁrst time and expect them to work hard and actually learn
something. It’s been really difﬁcult because these kids have been known as the
behavior problems in the school. Every day it’s ‘He stole this!’ and jumping up
and running around the classroom. It’s been hard for me to kind of control that
and then actually move to the math part because it seems like every day there is
something new with some behavior issue I have to deal with every single day so
that has been really difﬁcult for me to get past. . .it has been really difﬁcult for me
to go in there and get some kind of math done every day. (Interview 1)

Brandon expects his administrators to help him deal with his classroom

management difﬁculties. He has discussed his situation with both Chad and his assistant

principal (Roy) on several occasions, one of which he referred to in his communication

log:

I saw Chad in the hall and he wanted to talk to me about behavior issues in my 5‘h
hour class. What this stemmed from was a ﬁght one of the kids in my class got
into and was punched in the face. The mom was upset. It was in lunch before my
class. The mom brought up that this class was a problem with behavior

issues. . .Chad brought up to me that it was becoming an issue because of the fact
that she had brought that up. We tried to discuss possible solutions, the problem
was that everything he suggested I had already tried in class, so we didn’t really
get anywhere with that. What he did do with one of the bigger problems (student)
was, and I’m not sure how this went, but we went to the lunchroom and he pulled

him out and we talked to him right there. I’m not sure that was the best idea

112

doing that in front of all his friends because he didn’t seem too happy about it and

it didn’t really change anything. There’s only so much you can do after awhile,

so he said if it comes down to it, just send them out. That was the interaction. He

was really good about coming up with ways to do it but he realizes that I’m

basically on an island with those kids in there. (Interview 2)

Brandon was disappointed that neither his mentor nor any of the administrators
ever sat in on his difﬁcult class (Interview 2). Brandon wishes that he could be put into
contact with someone, either inside his school or outside, that has expertise in dealing
with highly challenging students. He wants to see a master teacher working with these
types of students so that he can learn and make changes in his own classroom. In our last
interview, at the end of the school year, Brandon still had not received guidance that
made an impact on his class and was resigned to the fact that he was “alone on an island”
in his classroom (Interview 2).

When Brandon began teaching at Laredo he had the expectation that all of his
students would learn the curriculum and have a certain degree of self control (Interview
1). Brandon wishes to engage all of his students, but has reluctantly come to the
conclusion that with particular students, no matter what he does, it will not make a
difference. He explains,

In some of my classes. . .there’s thirty-two [students] in each of them, so it’s hard

for me to stay on each and every one of them every day. There are a couple of

students in. . .my classes that I think have just completely shut it down for the

year and no matter what I say, or try to work with the parents, they’re either going

113

to take it in summer school or try it again next year and they’ve already made up their
mind so they’re done. That is hard for me to come to terms with as well. (Interview 1)
Brandon thought his mentor would be helpful in guiding him through the

curriculum and in dealing with difﬁcult students but quickly found that his mentor, while
a wonderful person, was out of touch with what was happening in Brandon’s classroom
(Interview 1). Brandon says that his mentor has given him some useful general advice i-
such as “every day you have to go in there and you can’t let them walk all over you,
every day you have to go in there with some sort of plan and execute it, because if you

don’t they’ll walk all over you” (Interview 1). However, he wished that his mentor

 

would become more involved and observe some of his classes, particularly his difﬁcult
class in hopes that he might offer more concrete ideas for improving Brandon’s
classroom management and teaching.

Brandon expresses a desire for a collaborative working relationship with his
department colleagues. He makes it clear that his department members are all very nice,
friendly people, but that they all go about their own business with little thought to how
they might work together or to what they might do to help Brandon in his ﬁrst year on the
job. He described their interactions as limited, explaining “as far as collaboration goes,
there’s really not much there for me. . .that’s been difﬁcult” (Interview 2).
Organizational Complications

Due to lack of building space, Brandon does not have a classroom, but shares
rooms with other teachers. So, he is consistently moving ﬁ'om one room to another.
While some effort has been made to try to limit the movement, it is tradition in the

department that room assignments are based on seniority with the newest member

114

ﬂoating to available spaces. One aspect of ﬂoating rooms that has adds to Brandon’s
stress is the lack of calculators, for his students (Interview 2). Not all of the classrooms
have a set of calculators so if Brandon has a class in a room without a set of calculators,
he has to take the time to make arrangements to borrow them. Lesson planning is
difﬁcult when the calculators are not consistently available.

Something new to Brandon that is a difﬁcult adjustment is the daily school F
schedule (Interview 1). Laredo uses a modiﬁed block schedule which Brandon does not
have any experience teaching in a block schedule and has found it challenging to prepare

lessons and teach for such a long period of time. He ﬁnds it easier to maintain students’

 

attention and cover material on Mondays when the classes are only forty minutes,
explaining “I like it better for math classes, you can get through stuff and not have to
cover two things in one day” (Interview 1). Unfortunately, Brandon has not received any
training or advice on teaching in a ninety minute block of time and feels that would have
been helpful.

As a new teacher, Brandon was assigned a mentor teacher from within the math
department. Brandon describes the mentor program as weak with much room for
improvement. He says that his mentor “ is a great guy, I love him to death, but as far as
our kind of lesson planning it’s kind of ‘how did the Tigers do last night?’ He has kids,
he’s never really around, even after ﬁnals yesterday he was gone. Even when I do have
questions he’s really hard to ﬁnd, he has 6th and 7th hour prep so he scoots out right at the
end of the day, we don’t share a class, we don’t really share anything. When we talk
about stuff, he has a hard time seeing it from my point of view with the kids I have”

(Interview 2). I asked Brandon how the program might be improved and he says that he

115

would like to see teacher observations as part of the program. He would like the
opportunity to observe other teachers that deal with students like his and have other
teachers observe his class as well to give him tips and ideas on how he can improve.

Brandon’s difﬁcult class was a source of concern for his evaluating administrator,
Roy, in his second semester post-observation meeting. In our discussion of Brandon’s
communication log, Brandon said that he was very disappointed by his second
evaluation. He brought in the evaluation as one of his artifacts so we were able to discuss
it in our second interview. He explained that Roy had observed four out of his ﬁve
classes during the evaluation period, the only class that Roy did not observe was
Brandon’s most difﬁcult class.

Brandon did not have any input in the classes that were observed. His assistant
principal, Roy, selected the classes, observing four out of Brandon’s ﬁve classes. The
one class that was not observed was Brandon’s most difﬁcult section. Brandon showed
me his lesson plan and described what he had done with the students during his last
formal observation and shared, “One of the things that was upsetting about it was that the
classes that I was in went really well for me. It wasn’t just me up there talking it was a
lot of them having the discussion, coming up with ideas. But he wrote the evaluation
from the perspective of that difﬁcult class, probably because what he had heard of from
Chad. So he wrote. . .that students seemed to be unruly. . .so that was upsetting and I said
something to him about it and he just went in another direction so I just let it go”
(Interview 2).

I followed up by asking Brandon if Roy made any suggestions for improvement.

Brandon said that Roy had not, and that the only positive comments that had been

116

 

included in his evaluation were based on his personality and not his actual teaching. The
only statement regarding his teaching was a comment that Brandon felt somewhat
offended by, that Brandon was a “traditional teacher” (Interview 2). Brandon shared,
“my idea of a traditional teacher and what he put in there was myself standing up there
and regurgitating. . .what I want for them to know. That isn’t what happened. . .some of it
is valid criticism, but it would have been nice to have more positive in there or more
about the classes that he saw. Three of [the observations] he only stayed for about ten
minutes, but the one that went really well he stayed for almost the whole time” (Interview
2). This was very disappointing to Brandon because he feels he is working hard to do
well and teach in an effective manner, an effort that has not been recognized by his
administrators.

During their post-evaluation meeting, Roy made a recommendation to Brandon
that he attend some professional conferences in his academic area (Interview 2). Brandon
had not mentioned attending any professional development activities outside the school
day that year, only the mandatory school in-services. Brandon said that he plans on
going to the state math teachers’ conference during the summer with another teacher
from the department. I asked him about the conference, if expenses are covered by the
district. He says that if there is money left in the budget they may cover the $125.00

registration fee.

Complexities of the Relationship

The tensions within Brandon’s relationship with Chad seem to be based on the
values of educating all children and fairness/justice. Brandon is motivated by Chad’s

desire to build a school community that has high expectations for all students. However,

117

 

the fact that Brandon has consistently struggled with the students most at risk but has
never been observed instructing those students sends a different message.

Brandon wants his administrators to help him by coming into his difﬁcult class,
observing, and offering constructive criticism and possible solutions. He is disappointed
that his evaluation highlights the classroom management issues that had never been
observed by the administrators. While he is not surprised that his evaluation discloses his
management issues, he was hoping that there would have been some form of praise in his
evaluation for the positive things that are happening in many of his classes.

Brandon feels that he works hard to prepare engaging lessons and that his
administrators have overlooked that effort because of the constant discipline issues that
exist in one particular class (Interview 2). There is a sense of frustration and lack of
fairness because he was negatively evaluated based on a class that was never observed.
This ﬁustration may be linked to Brandon’s lower self-efﬁcacy, as evaluations have been
shown to inﬂuence beginning teachers’self-efﬁcacy (Chester, 1996; Rozenholtz, 1989).
Despite this frustration, Brandon still feels that he can approach Chad and Roy with
problems and believes that they will do what they can to help him. He seems satisﬁed
that his administrators are putting in the effort to assist him even though he is still

struggling (Interview 2).

Summary

Brandon sees Chad as an instructional leader that truly cares about his
school. He respects that Chad and the other assistant principals have a visible presence in
the school and that they make an effort to communicate with him on a face-to-face basis,

rather than strictly using email. He is very complimentary of Chad’s communication

118

skills explaining that even when they discuss areas where Brandon needs improvement,
he leaves the conversation feeling “good about what I was doing” (Focus Group). He
explains, “I think Chad’s enthusiasm is something that makes me want to stay here with
his leadership and enthusiasm. He wants to move ahead. He wants to push forward. He
wants new things to happen here. He doesn’t want things to say the same. I think that’s
exciting for us. . .we know it’s not just going to stay the same, things are going to change,
things are going to get better and he’s the one that pushed us in this direction” (Interview
2). This feeling resonates with Brandon’s own desire to improve his teaching and

classroom management skills and the instructional experience of his students.

 

Brandon believes that he will remain in the teaching profession for a long time
(Interview 2). He feels like the school and district are a good match for him, closely
resembling his own high school experience. He likes that the district is proactive, and
overall, a very good place to work. At some point Brandon would like to consider

entering into administration, but plans to teach for quite some time.

Chad Holden: Leading a Legacy

 

Background: Personal and Professional

After signing in with school security, I sat in the main ofﬁce at Laredo waiting to
meet Chad Holden. I was greeted enthusiastically and led back to his ofﬁce. He had a
very polished, modern appearance and was younger than I had anticipated, in his early
forties. He had a very upbeat demeanor and I immediately felt at ease in his presence. It
was evident that he was an effective communicator and conversationalist. Before our
interview began, he expressed his interest in the school I worked at and with the doctoral

program I was attending. As busy as his schedule was that day, he made it seem as if he

119

had all the time in the world to speak with me. We began our ﬁrst interview with a
discussion of his personal and professional background.

Chad was raised attending private schools on the east coast. Beginning in 7‘h
grade, he attended boarding school and graduated from a private boarding school. While
Laredo high school is a larger public high school serving approximately 1000 students, he
feels there are many similarities between Laredo high school and the schools that he
attended as a youth. The community of Laredo is quite afﬂuent and he has learned that
they operate by some of the same principles as private schools, i.e. methods of student
recruiting and a high level of personal involvement.

Chad graduated with a degree in history and a certiﬁcation in secondary education
ﬁom a small private liberal arts college in the mid-west. He earned a master’s degree in
teaching from the same college. Several years later he attended a different university in
the state to earn his Education Specialist degree which in his state is necessary for
administrator certiﬁcation. He began his teaching career in 1986 as a high school history
teacher at a large comprehensive high school in the mid-west. He taught there for twelve
years before becoming an assistant principal at the high school for three years, followed
by two years as the principal.

After his second year as principal, he began applying for principal positions in
and around Laredo. He admits that he was surprised when he was offered the position at
Laredo but was excited with the opportunity. Chad had never lived in the state before,
but his father and wife had ties to the state. The area itself was new to Chad, but in
speaking with him during our interviews, it was evident that he had learned about the

state, community, and educational system extensively.

120

 

I asked Chad if his coursework in administration had prepared him for work as a
principal. He indicated that there were three types of courses that he has found
particularly useful as an administrator. The ﬁrst was his coursework in educational law,
which has helped him understand issues that he deals with on a regular basis such as
students with disabilities, special education, and 504 mandates. The second were classes
that dealt with community relations, effective communications as a school leader and FE
school administrator. The third class was school ﬁnance, which he says he does not use

as much on a daily basis but that is helpful in understanding the nuances of school

funding.

 

Overall, he believes that his administrative education program did a good job in
giving him a realistic overview of what to expect as a school administrator. There were
things that he joked about that professors “never run over in a course, like how to deal
with a girl ﬁght in the lunch room or how do you deal with a ﬁre alarm or those sorts of
things” (Interview 1). He credits much of his learning to just being “on the job”
(Interview 1). His Education Specialist program was in a cohort format which he found
useful in that he was with people in similar situations for several classes and was able to
share experiences that helped him prepare for some of the challenges that would be faced
as an administrator.

Chad had one college professor that particularly stood out in his mind because he
had recognized Chad’s leadership potential and had encouraged him to pursue his
Education Specialist degree and obtain administrator certiﬁcation. Chad also credits
several former supervisors for adding to his knowledge as an administrator. He explains

that he has worked for great principals and superintendents and some that were not so

121

great. In both cases, he learned because he was able to observe what happens when good
and bad decisions are made as well as the effect of indecision.

Chad is in his second year as principal at Laredo. He is challenged by his
community and supervisors to maintain the high level of achievement that Laredo has
traditionally experienced (Field notes, Interview 1). He has developed several strategies
aimed at increasing the success of the students transferring from other districts such as
the implementation of remedial summer programs for students and support and
mentoring groups for the parents of those students (Interview 1). These changes are seen
as positive steps in maintaining the high level of performance expected at Laredo

(Brandon Interview 2).

Expectations of Teachers: Desired and Realized

Chad expects his beginning teachers to focus their energies on classroom
instruction. He states, “I try to support them by not burdening them with expectations of
[doing] more, and when I say to do more I mean, ‘Hey will you do student council for me
next year, will you do yearbook?’ Part of the way we support them is by not putting
more on their plate. Their focus has to be on instruction” (Interview 2).

While attention to content is essential, Chad expects his teachers to work with
parents in a professional and timely fashion. The parents at Laredo are highly involved in
the academic progress of their children and communicate frequently with the teachers.
Sometimes the parents can be very demanding, and thus reasoning with them can be
challenging. He explains, “It goes with expectations, communications, keeping up on
communications. Its kind of their (beginning teachers) baptism and they get through the

ﬁrst one and then they know the rules of the game, but we tell them from the outset that

122

 

"ll‘ﬁ I

it’s high expectations and you’re going to need to problem solve with the parent whether
they are right or wrong on an issue. You need to provide clear communication with
them” (Interview 1).

Chad meets with the beginning teachers in the fall to discuss goals for the school
year (Interview 2). They work together to make individualized development plans (IDP)
and Chad and the other administrators use this as a guide for their evaluations. If he ﬁnds

a beginning teacher struggling, Chad meets with her to develop a plan on how to address

 

the particular concerns. He wants the teacher to know that she needs to work on the

issue, but that he is there to support her in the process. He realizes that beginning

 

teachers are in many ways still learning how to teach. He describes the situation,
“especially the ﬁrst year, you can’t expect them to be perfect, but you do expect them to
make progress. That’s why you have a probationary period, because we do expect them
to make progress and work on the things and those areas where they are somewhat
deﬁcient” (Interview 2).

Chad works to balance the mandatory evaluation process with opportunities for
his beginning teachers in order to develop academic independence. Describing this
balance, Chad says that he needs “to be understanding, to be supportive, to let them take
chances, to let them get their feet wet and I’m not going to sit there and micromanage.
Some districts want to look at lesson plans every week and grade books every week. I
don’t want to do that, I don’t want to look like big brother is looking over their shoulder
but at the same time I want them to feel like they can come to me or somebody else that
they feel comfortable with that has the knowledge and expertise to help them should they

need help. I think that its important to not start out with that antagonistic relationship by

123

saying ‘Well gee, I need to see you down here Friday afternoon to see if you have your
lesson plans written for next week.’ I just think that’s not the right way to make them
feel comfortable or build their success” (Interview 1).

Expecting his beginning teachers to come to him with problems requires a certain
level of trust. He describes trust as a particularly important part of the relationship, “if
they trust you, and I think trust is a huge factor, and you have a good relationship with a
probationary teacher, or for that matter, any staff member. They feel they can come to
you and say whatever they need to say and get it off their chest and know that you’ll be
trusting and respectful. I think that’s the main key to maintaining those trustful
relationships and then being able to support them in whatever their needs may be”

(Interview 2).

Organizational Considerations

The largest factor that inﬂuences Chad’s ability to work with beginning teachers
is time. He describes this dilemma,
Time has been a big factor, especially with the new high school [bond issue] and
because those teachers are spending so much time in their development. There
are so many external factors for them. We’re now re-doing all the content
standards because of the new state high school graduation requirements and now
we’ve got the new merit exam coming up next week so we’re the test prep
factory, so they’ve got a bunch of stuff. The district has a ﬁrll program...for the
mentor-new teacher program and honestly, it’s ﬁnding time in my schedule to
be able to sit down with them and be able to meet their needs too. So it’s a

challenge. (Interview 1)

124

 

His time is frequently spent dealing with parents, students, personnel, budget
issues, committee meetings, state mandates, and the like. He is a part of a large number
of building and district committees that all meet on a frequent basis. This past year has
been especially challenging as he has been regularly pulled out of the building to work on
the bond issue. He admits that he does not have the time he needs to work with
beginning teachers, especially those in their second through fourth years of teaching.

At the district level, there are some programs in place for ﬁrst year teachers such
as a beginning of the school year induction day and periodic meetings of all the districts’
new teachers. At the building level, Chad sees a need for more assistance,

I think we have to formalize some new teacher support in the building. I think

it’s typical in schools across the country. I think we do a good job supporting the

ﬁrst year teachers. I think we do a terrible job of supporting second, third, and
fourth year probationary teachers. It’s assumed you got through the ﬁrst year,
you’re good to go. I think with them being assigned different classes. . .we forget

about the second, third, and fourth year teachers”. (Interview 2)

During his time as an administrator Chad has observed factors that he believes
have a big inﬂuence on a beginning teacher’s persistence in the profession, one being
school culture. He acknowledges the role of the principal in supporting the new teacher,
but adds that the teacher spends the majority of her time with students and other staff
members, particularly within her department (Interview 2). A non-welcoming, non-
collaborative department can isolate and push a new teacher out. Because of the quality
candidates that apply in the district, typically Laredo hires top-notch ﬁrst year teachers

which in some cases may be intimidating to a current teacher. Chad talks of the “sick

125

 

pecking order” where “everybody sits in the same spot in the lounge at lunch and heaven
forbid the new teacher comes and sits in Bill’s chair, I have to let them know, ‘hey, you
know what? Sit in my chair today and I’ll sit somewhere else.’ He encourages his staff,
with friendly reminders, that it’s little things that make a big difference in the new
teacher’s feeling of welcome. When he feels that one of his beginning teachers is not
being treated in an appropriate manner, he has what he calls a “come to Jesus” meeting
where he outlines his expectations for working with the new teacher and the importance
of professionalism and collaboration (Interview 2).

Chad believes that the quickest way to discourage and burn out a new teacher is
by giving them the hardest courses (Interview 1). He says that in many schools,
scheduling is traditionally done by seniority, leaving the new person with all of the
classes that nobody else wants to teach. At Laredo, Chad works with the assistant
principal and the department heads to develop schedules that assign all teachers to some
upper and some lower level classes. He believes that interactions within the department
are important for supporting the beginning teacher and explains “in smaller schools it’s a
little easier because the interactions tend to be more personal” (Interview 1). At a larger
school like Laredo, he tries to ﬁnd a mentor that will assist the new teacher and
encourage other department members to do the same.

Chad does all evaluations of ﬁrst year probationary teachers. The exception was
Brandon because he taught the last six weeks of the previous school year and was rotated
to Roy’s group of observations. He meets with them at the beginning of the year to
review the evaluation process so that they feel comfortable with him coming into their

classrooms and know what to expect. He works with them to develop their goals and put

126

together some long range plans so they feel invested in working in a particular area and
he tries to support them in whatever they choose. Two formal evaluations are conducted
in which the teachers are allowed to choose the class to be observed. In addition, Chad

makes it a point to do ﬁve or six informal or “drive-by” observations at his choosing

 

(Interview 2). The teacher’s evaluation is based off all observations with the bulk of
information being collected in the lengthier formal observations. Chad holds two post- F'-
observation meetings with his new teachers where they discuss the contents of the

evaluations and make adjustments in goals.

 

Chad makes it a priority to offer professional development built within the

1'1- r. '_.-' -

existing school day that is based on the needs of all of his teachers. At the end of the
school year, he surveys his teachers to determine their needs and what they may want to
see in terms of professional development. Based off this input, Chad works together with
other committees and school staff to develop meaningﬁrl professional development
experiences. Chad also encourages teachers to attend professional development
opportunities outside of the school and tries to “make sure that professional development
monies are allocated to new teachers and that they have an opportunity to grow through

outside workshops and conferences. (Interview 2).

Complexities of Building a Relationship

Supporting the new teacher is only one of many tasks, all very different in nature,
for which the school principal is responsible. Chad’s proverbial plate is brimming give
the recent demographic shifts in the school and the lack of physical space and resources
at the school. He gives the example of the past school year when the district was trying

to pass the bond issue to build two new high schools. He explains,

127

I would love to say that my job is solely to support new teachers in their
instructional endeavors. I would love to spend all of my time doing that, my
background is in curriculum and instruction. But that’s often not the case. It’s
frustrating at times for me because I get wrapped up in parent or budget issues.
That high school bond issue, the hours it took me out of this building, down to the
administrative center, down to another community meeting, down to another tour,
down to another whatever, was it worth it? I do it because I need new facilities,
but at the same time I look and I think, I’m not seeing kids, I’m not supporting

faculty and that was frustrating. That’s the biggest frustration of the job.

 

(Interview 2)

Chad believes that the key to developing a trusting relationship is to listen to the
person, treat her with respect, and do what he possibly can to help her with her situation.
He believes that getting to know his teachers in terms of their background, what they are
involved in at the school, and how they respond and interact with others is an important
skill in dealing with any of his staff. Particularly in dealing with beginning teachers,
Chad believes that there are key qualities that can serve to encourage a new teacher:

Caring, knowing that you care about them. Being supportive of what they’re

doing and their quest to be successﬁrl in the classroom. Maintaining an open door

policy for them so when there are problems they can come and share those with
you. . .provide them with other opportunities such as professional development or
connections with other parts of the school. Being able to explore those

possibilities with them and helping them ﬁnd their comfort levels I think is

128

important. Making sure they’re equally represented within their departments and

within the school. (Interview 2)

Summary

Chad faces the challenge of maintaining a reputation of excellence at Laredo.
Continued success has meant ﬁnding ways to support learning for all students. This
value is shared by his two new teachers and serves to strengthen their relationships.
Supporting his new teachers means allowing them to focus on classroom instruction,
providing opportunities for growth, and giving them the necessary resources to become

successful. Chad tries to balance the beginning teacher’s need for feedback with her need

 

for independence and hopes that mutual trust and respect develop from the exchange.

129

CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION

Introduction

 

This chapter is structured to show the reader the analysis process. That is, the
theoretical frameworks introduced in Chapter 1 are used to explore and begin to deﬁne

the emergent themes. To more fully support these themes (claims), extant ideas from the

 

literature and data from this study are reintroduced. The signiﬁcance and implications of F:
each theme will be discussed as well as how each theme responds to the research sub-
questions.

Based on the assumption ( Billingsley, 1993; Lee, 1994; MetLife, 2004-2005) that E

beginning teachers consider administrative support an important factor in their
persistence to stay in the teaching ﬁeld, this study examines the nature of this relationship
through a conceptual lens that draws on two theories, LMX and SEM (see Chapters 1, 2,
and 7). The work of Maslow (1968) and Argyris (1993) were used to deepen the
understanding of the data within these theoretical frameworks in order to understand the
constraints placed on the administrator by the organization and how those in turn impact
their relationship with the beginning teachers.

To address the exploratory research question- What is the nature and substance of
the administrator/beginning teacher relationship that can make a diﬂ’erence in a new
teacher ’s determination to stay in the teaching profession ?- It is necessary to integrate
salient elements of the frameworks. Each of the theories asks different questions that
assist in coding, interpreting, contradicting, and conﬁrming claims made. The Leader-
Member Exchange theory explores the fundamental idea that leaders form different types

of exchange relationships with their subordinates and that the quality of the exchange

130

relationship and the leader is a key factor in determining the fate of the member within
the organization (Gerstner, 1997; Sparrowe, 1997).

Factors in the new teacher/administrator relationship identiﬁed as signiﬁcant in
LMX theory that present themselves in the data will be discussed in detail. Particularly,
factors such as value agreement, performance appraisal, justice, communication patterns,
and upward maintenance appeared frequently within the data and were determined to be
essential elements of the relationship. LMX theory provides the necessary lens through
which to analyze these factors, but additionally, the unique educational setting in which
this research takes place allows an opportunity to push up against this lens in a way that
extends the possibilities of LMX theory.

Bandura’s (1993) Self-Efﬁcacy Mechanism is used as a lens to help clarify how
the beginning teacher copes with challenges and stresses brought on by the requirements
and expectations of teaching, and how factors related to the teacher/administrator
relationship may inﬂuence new teacher efﬁcacy. Within the analysis, references will be
made to the work of Maslow (1968) and Argyris (1993), which were used as a means to

deepen the understanding within the theoretical model (see C h. 1).

Emergent Themes

Three primary themes emerge that appear to reveal the nature and substance of
the relationships between the administrators and their beginning teachers. They are:
l. A new teacher’s disposition and professional preparation affects the nature of the
administrator-teacher relationship.
2. A new teacher’s perception of her own value alignment with the administrator

impedes or enhances the teacher/administrator relationship.

131

 

3. Organizational structures and politics/policies often complicate the character of

the teacher/administrator relationship.

Disposition and Professional Preparation Affects the Nature of the Relationships

A new teacher’s disposition and professional preparation affects the nature of the
administrator-teacher relationship. The term “disposition” in this case refers to the
individual’s professional and personal life stories or what she “brings to the table,” while
professional preparation refers to the individual’s course work, internships, and past
professional experience. The new teacher’s disposition and professional preparation
(particularly student teaching) can either positively or negatively inﬂuence their self-
efﬁcacy, their dependency in the relationship, and their classroom practice.
Understanding the complexities of the disposition and professional preparation helps us
to better respond to the sub-question of how this dyadic relationship does (or does not)
impact the beginning teacher’s capacity to cope with challenges and stresses brought on
by the expectations and requirements of teaching and in turn, her efﬁcacy and persistence
in the profession.

Each beginning teacher comes to her job with a unique personal and professional
background. Beginning teachers that feel most prepared by their student teaching
experience feel most conﬁdent in their duties as teachers and have different needs in
terms of the type and extent of involvement expected from their administrators. Both
Brandon and Penny display a high level of independence in their classroom instruction
(First Interviews), along with characteristics related to teachers with higher self-efﬁcacy.
The Wolfolk-Hoy (2005) and Tschannen-Moran and Wolfolk-Hoy (2002) studies

displayed conﬂicting results on the impact of administrative support on a new teacher’s

132

 

self—efﬁcacy with the 2002 study, indicating that there was a lack of connection and the
2005 study revealing that there was a relation between amount of support received and
self-efﬁcacy of the beginning teacher. Both studies only asked participants to rate
“interpersonal support” and did not deﬁne the meaning of the support.

While it cannot be concluded from my study that there is a signiﬁcant relationship
between administrative support and self-efﬁcacy, it does indicate that the term “support”
has different meanings to the participants, making it difﬁcult to assign a concise
deﬁnition to the term. Support, as discussed by the new teachers in this study, includes a
variety of activities including assistance with curriculum, discipline, classroom
management, instruction, goal achievement, and “just listening” (Interviews). It is also
shown that the beginning teachers requiring the least amount of administrative support
with instruction and classroom management exhibit signs of stronger self-efﬁcacy. The
use of Maslow’s lens may aid in explaining and the individual experiences and needs of
the individuals.

According to the work of Maslow in administrative theory, it is the job of the
administrator to provide avenues for the satisfaction of a teacher that also supports the
school’s goals and to remove impediments that block need satisfaction and cause
ﬁustration, negative attitudes, or dysfunctional behavior (Lunberg & Omstein, 2008). It
makes sense then that a beginning teacher would likely have more needs than a veteran
teacher. While all beginning teachers in the study demonstrate needs, what emerges from
the data is that the needs of the individual beginning teachers vary based on their personal
and professional experiences. What appears in the data is a connection between the new

teacher’s self efﬁcacy, her personal needs, and her disposition.

133

The individual teacher’s disposition or “what she brings to the table” inﬂuences
the personal needs for her work as a teacher and her commitment and sense of belonging
to the school community. LMX theory supports the connection between a sense of
commitment and loyalty to an organization or a supervisor and job satisfaction (Vecchio,
1985). As we learn through Penny’s interviews, her commitment to teaching at Laredo is
tied to her strong philosophical beliefs on the purpose of art education. She is willing to
sacriﬁce facilities for an administration that validates and supports her beliefs. Brandon
and Brent are both very proud of their student athletes and loyal to their athletic
programs. The talents they bring as coaches serves to strengthen their bonds to the
school and students. Ellen has a great deal of compassion for her students and perceives
her students as part of an extended school family. The family atmosphere of the school
community meets her need to be a part of a caring group of people.

Ellen’s disposition is linked to the amount and quality of the attention she desires
from her administration. Ellen grew up in an unstable home where she was expected to
take on an adult role and responsibilities. She was put into a position where she was
trying to meet the needs of her family and schooling was secondary to those needs. She
was able to ﬁnish high school with the encouragement and support that she received from
a key teacher. Similarly, she connected with her professor/advisor in college and relied
on his support and encouragement to complete college and enter the teaching profession.
At Calvin she is again searching for a relationship where she is supported and mentored.
She has found this type of relationship with her principal, Karen, in her ﬁrst year at
Calvin and describes their relationship as one of a parent and child, but is disappointed

that in her second and third years, the amount of attention she receives has decreased.

134

 

Ellen does not feel adequately prepared by her undergraduate and student teaching
experiences and expresses some doubts regarding her own teaching efﬁcacy.

Although Ellen and Brent work for the same administration and have similar work
demands, Brent has a very different expectation of his administration, stemming from his
own disposition and professional preparation. Brent grew up in stable home in an upper-
middle class community with high expectations for all students. He had a positive
college experience and went on to have a self-described outstanding student teaching
placement. He worked collaboratively with his cooperating teacher to improve his
teaching skills throughout the year long placement. He credits his conﬁdence and
success to this experience. Because Brent had opportunities to develop his skills and
conﬁdence, his reliance on his administration is relatively small. His more basic needs
have been met, much due to his own background, and he is able to focus on the self-
actualization of trying to be the best teacher he can be. He actively seeks opportunities
for involvement in the school and leadership opportunities. His strong self-efﬁcacy is
evident in the high expectations he has for all of his students and his unwillingness to
settle for anything less. He feels that there is mutual respect between himself and his
administrators, reﬂected in the various leadership positions that he holds. LMX Theory
links the progression of subordinates’ career paths and empowerment to satisfaction
within the organization, which is a possible explanation of Brent’s overall satisfaction
with his current position.

The theme of the individual teacher’s disposition or “what she brings to the table”
inﬂuencing her personal needs for her work as a teacher and her commitment and sense

of belonging to the school community is signiﬁcant in its implications for administrators

135

 

 

working with beginning teachers. Because each individual beginning teacher comes to
her new job with different personal and professional backgrounds, the standard methods
of intervention for new teachers such as induction/orientation sessions, mentors, release
time, meeting with other new teachers, conferences and workshops, reduced teaching
loads, observations of other teachers, and team teaching (Veenman, 1984), while
deﬁnitely beneﬁcial, may not address the unique individual needs of the beginning
teacher. Therefore, it is the charge of the administrator to evaluate the beginning
teacher’s level of competence and work with her individually to build opportunities for

her to use her strengths and improve her weaknesses. The complexity of this task lies in

 

the competition between the myriad organizational commitments to which an
administrator must attend and the need for individualized guidance.

The need for individualized support creates dilemmas for administrators when
working with new teachers. The ability to assess the new teacher at a depth that would
help that teacher move from a state of immaturity and dependence to one of maturity and
independence requires adequate time. An administrator must struggle with the balance of
time and shifting of responsibilities in order to give the appropriate level of support
without neglecting other important duties. Additionally, administrators working with
universities are challenged to ﬁnd adequate student teaching placements that will best
prepare new teachers for the multitude of challenges they will face in a variety of school
settings.

The individualized support received by the new teachers inﬂuences the
relationships between the new teachers and their administrators and in turn, has varying

impacts on the beginning teachers’ capacities to cope with challenges and stresses

136

brought on by the requirements of teaching. The ability of the new teacher to cope with
challenges and stresses has varying impacts on her behavior, achievements, career
pursuits, and perceived self-efﬁcacy. Beginning teachers expressing higher levels of
challenges and stress exhibit a stronger need for a working and personal relationship with
their administrator. Often with these teachers, the outcome is not as important as having
the relationship in place. Teachers with a stronger student teaching experience exhibit a
higher level of maturity and independence in the relationship. Based on the work of
Maslow (1968), it is expected that teachers with more basic needs will require more
attention. The need for more attention then leads to potential conﬂicts between the needs
of the individual beginning teacher and the job demands of the school administrator.
Argyris (1993) describes these tensions as inherent and the cause of frustration and
apathy in the individual. Those less dependent on the relationship show signs of a
stronger self-efﬁcacy and have had strong teacher-mentors.

Elements of the new teacher/administrator relationship that seem to play a
particularly important role in the new teachers’ and administrators’ perception of their
relationships are personal disposition and professional preparation. The personal
experiences of the individuals shape their values and expectations. The level of maturity
and independence in the relationship inﬂuences the new teacher’s ability to cope with the
challenges and stresses brought on by the expectations and requirements of teaching.
Additionally, when the expectations between the new teacher and the administrator are
not aligned, tensions develop that cause greater levels of stress. Tensions develop around

the expectations of evaluations, facilities, and resources (including time and attention).

137

 

Alignment of Expectations and Clarity of Roles and Responsibilities

A beginning teacher’s perception of her value alignment with the administrator
may impede or enhance the new teacher/administrator relationship. This theme helps to
explain additional elements of the new teacher/administrator relationship that play a
particularly important role in the teacher’s perception of her relationship. The
complexities of the educational system force new teachers to quickly develop
relationships with their administrators. LMX Theory explains that leaders form different
types of relationships with their subordinates and that the quality of the relationship
between the member and the leader substantially impacts the fate of the member within
the organization (Sparrowe, 1997).

Because the work of teaching and learning involves many complex interactions
between the various stakeholders in a school setting, it is impossible for a teacher to act
independent of others. Due to the nature of the role of a new teacher, it is reasonable that
she would seek higher levels of interaction in order to answer questions, obtain advice,
and improve her practice. New teachers in the study have a network of people that they
turn to for assistance such as their mentor, colleagues, and their administrators. As these
teachers work with their administrators, their perceptions of values, character, and
responsibilities inﬂuence the nature of their relationship.

The new teacher’s perception of the value of justice/faimess appears at both
schools but inﬂuences the relationship between the teacher involved, and their
administrator, differently. LMX theory describes justice/faimess as one of several factors
that act to develop an overall quality rating of the relationship, with the relationship

exhibiting multiple positive factors, such as justice or “fairness”, resulting in the member

138

 

being more likely to stay and ﬂourish within the organization (Vecchio, 198 5).

 

Beginning teachers desire fairness and justice in their performance appraisal. Outcomes
of the teachers’ evaluations seem to inﬂuence their self—efﬁcacy, persistence, teaching
practice, and their relationship with their administrator. Both Brent and Brandon
experience an almost identical scenario in their respective high schools, yet emerge with
two very different outcomes that impact their relationship with their administrators, their
persistence, and their self-efﬁcacy. Both teachers are evaluated by one of their assistant
principals and receive negative feedback based on classes that have not been observed.

The outcome of Brent’s ﬁrst evaluation initially has a negative inﬂuence on his

 

persistence, but ultimately enhances his relationship with his principal. Brent believed
that he was doing a good job and was surprised that his assistant principal thought
otherwise, especially when he had never observed the class. Brent questioned his career
choice because of the unfair judgment. Fortunately, Brent has a strong relationship with
his mentor and felt comfortable discussing his anger and frustration with the evaluation
and his mentor, in turn, went to Karen with the issue. Karen, although not Brent’s
evaluating administrator, makes it a point to brieﬂy visit her beginning teachers’
classrooms on a regular basis and knows that the evaluation is neither a fair or accurate
representation of what was happening in Brent’s classroom. Karen discusses the issue
with the assistant principal and it is resolved. Brent is pleased with the manner in which
Karen handles the problem and feels that she has strongly supported him, increasing his
trust in her. He is able to regain his commitment and understands that in this case, the

inexperience of the administrator is at fault.

139

The outcome of Brandon’s evaluation has inﬂuenced his self-efﬁcacy and his

 

teaching practice as well as his persistence to seek assistance. While Brandon was also
negatively evaluated on a class that his evaluator had not seen, his principal Chad has not
observed Brandon’s class. Chad has only heard of the difﬁculties that were taking place
from others, including Brandon. Because Brandon’s difﬁcult class has never been
observed, only general statements such as the “students are unruly,” are made by his F‘
assistant principal in his evaluation. Brandon consistently seeks assistance in working
with these students throughout the school year and feels that it is unfair that nobody has

actually observed the class in order to give him effective guidance and an accurate

 

evaluation. Brandon never receives justice in this situation. In our ﬁnal meeting on the
last day of school he states his class had never been observed and that he still feels his
evaluation is an unfair representation of his teaching practice. While he still believes that
he has a good relationship with his principal and assistants, he has lost trust that he will
be fairly evaluated in the future and that he will get appropriate assistance in difficult
situations. Brandon ultimately gives up hope in working with several students and does
what he can to make it to the end of the school year.

Part of Brandon’s perception of the role of administrator is that of a supervisor
and instructional leader. Based on this perception, Brandon expects a fair and reasonable
observation from him administrators. The absence of an appropriate observation and lack
of justice negatively impacts the relationship with both his assistant principal Roy and his
principal Chad. Brandon cannot yet trust that he will be given a fair evaluation. The lack
of observation of his difﬁcult class also creates a discrepancy between the espoused value

of the administration that all students are held to high expectations, and their actions. If

140

all students are important and deserving of a high caliber education, then why is
Brandon’s classroom where known difﬁculties are reported by Brandon and parents, not
a higher priority for his administration? This is not to say that Brandon’s administration
did nothing for the situation, Brandon explains that they did offer suggestions, but at
some point did they lose efﬁcacy as well? How can Brandon reconcile the value of high
expectations for all students with the lack of observation and feedback?

Clear and frequent evaluation by administrators contributes directly to the
teachers’ commitment to school goals when they believe that they are capable of

inﬂuencing the outcomes base on their own efforts (Rosenholtz. 1989). This aids the

 

effort of the administrator in building and inclusive learning community. The complexity
of this task lies in competition between the myriad organizational commitments to which
an administrator must attend and the need for individualized guidance. The ability to
structure time in such a way that gives opportunities for beginning teachers and
administrators to communicate frequently holds the potential for the development of
stronger relationships. Karen demonstrates the effectiveness and impact of ﬁ'equent
evaluation when she is able to support Brent with the inaccurate evaluation conducted by
the assistant principal. Because Karen makes it a priority to visit her teachers’
classrooms on a daily basis, she is familiar with Brent’s teaching skills and is able to
provide him with the justice he deserves. Brandon’s case proves that lack of frequent,
and in his case thorough evaluations, leads to frustration and increased tension in their
relationship. Brandon wanted to discuss the evaluation comments based on the class that

had never been observed, but felt he could not safely do so.

141

 

The theme of new teachers’ perceptions of roles and responsibilities is signiﬁcant
for administrators because beginning teachers need frequent and descriptive feedback in
order to improve their practice. Constructive feedback that allows teachers to take
control of the learning in their classroom has a positive impact on their self—efﬁcacy
(Chester, 1996). Tensions then develop between the time required of administrators to
observe their beginning teachers on a frequent basis in order to get an accurate picture of
the teaching and learning taking place, and the myriad other responsibilities placed on the
administrator in light of their position within the organization. Incompatibility between

the demands of running a school and the needs of the beginning teacher produce

 

ﬁ'ustration and coping behaviors (Lunenburg & Omstein, 2008).

This particular situation also presents a conundrum; if the job of an administrator
is to provide avenues for the satisfaction of a teacher’s needs (that support the
organizational goals) and to remove impediments that block need satisfaction and cause
frustration, negative attitudes, and dysfunctional behavior, then what is a beginning
teacher to do when the administrator is the source of her frustration? As in Brandon’s
case, there is a fear that, by pressing the issue, his job may be in jeopardy and as a result,
he may decide it is not in his best interest to probe further into his evaluation. People
desire a stable work environment (Maslow, 1968). The fear of upsetting that stable work
environment is in conﬂict with Brandon’s desire for fairness in his evaluation, with the
desire for his basic need of stability winning out. The situation highlights some
challenges faced by administrators such as the balance of organizational demands with

the need for frequent and meaningful feedback for beginning teachers, the need for

142

avenues in which new teachers can discuss their evaluations concerns , and the need for

 

administrators to ensure an accurate depiction of the performance of their new teachers.
In addition to the importance of the new teachers’ perception of her own roles and
responsibilities and those of her administrator, the new teacher’s perception of her value
alignment with her administrator is also a key factor in the shaping of the relationship. In
the cases presented in this study, value alignment has positive effects but also presents F-
some conundrums. Value agreement is a factor cited in LMX theory that has the

potential to enhance the relationship between a leader and a member (Graen, 1995). In

 

H‘:'.".l_‘-' . 'I‘ .

the case of the triad at Laredo, value agreement has played a signiﬁcant role in the
development of positive relationships between the beginning teachers and their principals
while at the same time presenting a question of commitment to values.

The shared value of social justice serves to strengthen the relationships between
the new teachers at Laredo High School and their principal, Chad. Laredo High School is
going through a demographic shift in the student population. The arrival of transfer
students with their pre-existing educational experiences coming from outside of the
school district is creating a performance gap that is an unprecedented challenge at the
school. In his short time at Laredo, Chad has actively sought solutions to close the gap
and make Laredo a positive learning environment for all students. Both Penny and
Brandon view Chad’s actions as motivating and exciting. Penny expresses her desire to
provide all of her students with a high quality arts experience and feels that Chad
understands and is helpful in suggesting ways to support that desire. Brandon too wants
to be able to provide all of his students with a meaningful mathematics experience but is

struggling with the students that are most at risk. His consistent search for assistance is

143

an indicator of his strong desire to help all of his students. Even the disappointment of

 

his negative evaluation is not enough to stiﬂe Brandon’s praise of Chad’s work with
teachers and students. While both Penny and Brandon are motivated and committed to
the shared vision of social justice, their belief in their own ability to fulﬁll that vision
differs based on their self-efﬁcacy. This goes back to their personal and professional
backgrounds as well as the types and amounts of assistance sought and received. F—
While the shared value of social justice is certainly a positive factor in Penny’s

relationship with Chad, the key value that she holds is her philosophy of art education.

 

Penny believes that Chad has an understanding of the deeper meaning of art education

"m”- up .w

and shows that support through his words and actions. This is very meaningful for Penny
and although there are temptations to leave Laredo for a school with better facilities, she
says that she will stay at Laredo because of the value placed on art education and the
philosophical harmony between the department and the administration.

The role of the principal is to promote teacher development and build a learning
community (Fullan, 2002; Lambert, 1998; Sergiovanni, 1993; Sergiovanni, 1995) with
one aspect of the development being shared vision or values. In this case, Chad has a
vision and goals that are shared by the new teachers, but has not found an effective way
to help Brandon work with the students that need the most assistance in meeting the
school goals. In fact, one might wonder about the value of educating all students when
the very students that need the most attention are never observed. Each teacher, based
on their own individual circumstances, will be at varying levels in their ability to put the
goals and vision into action. Brandon wants to help all of his students achieve, but is not

sure how to go about the task with one particular group of students and has difﬁculty in

144

obtaining effective assistance that will help him work toward the vision. Leadership in

 

this case becomes a challenge of collective learning that will lead to constructive changes
(Lambert, 1998).

Value agreement is a cornerstone in the development of a learning community.
Leadership in this type of setting means that adults learn together in a community that has
shared goals and visions (Lambert, 1998). Chad, Brandon, and Penny share the vision -»
and are doing their best to work toward the goal of excellence for all students. Due to her F—
professional experiences and background, Penny has experienced more success with the

type of students challenged by the high expectations at Laredo. The task then is to

 

develop a plan for Chad to work with Brandon in a way that will allow him to begin to
experience success with his most difﬁcult students.

Building a learning community requires an administrator to release authority and
to develop the personal and collective power of the staff (Lambert, 2005). In light of
what we know from the data, perhaps a community approach to mentoring beginning
teachers would be a more effective alternative to the common role of principal as
supervisor and assigner of a mentor. A community approach to mentoring includes the
principal, but in a coaching and mentoring role, along with the new teacher’s assigned
mentor, department colleagues, and perhaps a group of veteran master teachers that
would serve as a support/resource team. This approach provides a new teacher with a
greater support network and more immediate availability. Because administrators have
such a vast array of demands and responsibilities, a larger support network will alleviate
some of the dependency on the administrator, which in turn will ease the frustration of

the beginning teacher. The demands that the organization places on an administrator may

145

shift and change, but they do not go away. The restructuring of a support/mentoring
system to a community based support system provides the individual beginning teacher
with multiple avenues for assistance. A shift from the “sink or swim” attitude to one of
“we all swim together” is a natural ﬁt for a learning community.

Several challenges develop in trying to build a learning community at Laredo that
focuses on social justice. How do people with little experience in dealing with at risk
populations go about making constructive changes that impact learning? What practical
methods are available to train teachers how to work with at risk students? How does an
administrator move a teacher from a state of willingness to make a change to a teacher
possessing the will and necessary skills to make the change? How do teacher training
programs prepare teachers for the instruction of students from a variety of backgrounds
and skill levels? Lastly, how can beginning teachers work to ﬁnd resources that assist
them with difﬁcult and at-risk students and with sharing the responsibility of ensuring
excellence in education for all of their students? These are issues that the triad at Laredo
High School must work through together in their goal of social justice.

Value agreement at Calvin High School also seems to strengthen the relationship
between Ellen and Karen, while at the same time creating the potential for doubt. Karen
and Ellen both express their commitment to the education of all children, especially those
most disadvantaged (refer to Ch. 4). The nature of Ellen’s classes attracts students that
are not typically college bound and have more personal and academic challenges than
most students. Both Karen and Ellen visibly express a passion in their interviews for
working with these children. They even describe their relationships in similar fashions

with Ellen referring to Karen as a mother ﬁgure and Karen referring to herself as a parent

146

 

to her beginning teachers. This “family” based relationship and commitment to
educating even the most disadvantaged children strengthens their relationship as they
both work for improving learning for these students. A glitch in the relationship arises
from what Ellen considers a lack of disclosure in the budget. Ellen wants to purchase
items for her classroom and is told by Karen that there is no money left in the budget.
Because Ellen believes that the money allocated for her program is possibly spent
elsewhere, it called into question Karen’s value of supporting these students. Ellen might
be inclined to see this situation as Karen’s inability to put the “money where her mouth
is.”
Elements of the new teacher/administrator relationship that seem to inﬂuence the
nature of the relationship include the individual’s values and the presence of value
agreement, clarity of roles and responsibilities in the school organization, and the
teacher’s perception of the administrator’s character. Administrators that are perceived
as “walking the talk,” meaning they behave in a way that shows support for their
espoused values, builds trust in their teachers and characterizes them in a positive
manner. Actions that seemingly go against their values cause doubt. Additionally, the
expectations of roles and responsibilities of the teacher and administrator, when not

aligned, caused tensions to develop that produce greater levels of stress and lower levels

of trust.

Inﬂuence of Organizational Structures, Politics/Policies, and Traditions

Organizational structures, and politics/policies, often complicate the character of
the teacher-administrator relationship. Understanding this theme helps to deﬁne various

organizational elements that impact the nature of the beginning teacher-administrator

147

relationship. The impact of these structures, policies/politics and traditions has been
shown to impact the leader/member relationship in areas outside of education.

Dansereau (1975) predicted that because of constraints on a leader’s time and other
resources, only a limited number of subordinates would eventually become trusted ,
respected members. Argyris explains that these constraints on a leader’s time and
resources create an inherent conﬂict between the individual and the organization
(Lunenburg, 2008) a dilemma for an administrator working toward developing a learning
community. The skill and approach which are employed by the administrator in
addressing these issues has the potential to ease the inherent conﬂict.

Organizational structures in the school such as daily schedule (hours or blocks),
number of preps, room assignments, facilities, curriculum, and extracurricular activities
all show potential to ease or create tensions in the new teacher/administrator relationship.
Inexperience with teaching in a block schedule is a factor in Brandon’s struggle with his
math class. The block schedule, combined with three preps (one which was very
difﬁcult), no permanent room, and limited assistance with curriculum from his mentor
and colleagues, leaves Brandon in a difﬁcult situation and results in greater dependence
on his administration as well as ﬁ'ustration with his ability to “keep up” (Interviews 1 &
2). This very situation of challenging students and classes, difﬁcult assignments (room
traveling), extra responsibilities, and lack of effective monitoring from administration are
described by Johnson (as cited in Dyal, 2002) as being some of the most challenging and
disheartening for beginning teachers.

Extra-cunicular activities are part of the school structure that seem to have

disparate inﬂuences on the new teacher/administrator relationship. Both Brandon and

148

 

 

Brent welcome the opportunity to coach athletic teams at their schools and though
admittedly time-consuming, they ﬁnd them to be a great source of pride that enhances
their commitment to their school. They both enjoy the recognition and appreciation from
their administrators for working with the student—athletes. On the other hand, Penny
works to avoid extra-curricular activities, but does not feel at conﬂict with Chad’s values
since Chad believes that his new teachers should primarily concentrate on classroom F—
instruction and not be burdened with additional duties. Ellen, like Penny, was not excited

by the prospect of supervision additional activities. However, her administrator believes

 

that it is part of the teacher’s responsibilities to participate in all aspects of school life.

 

Therefore, Ellen does reluctantly supervise additional after school activities, thus
increasing her level of stress.

In addition to the inﬂuence of organizational structures on the new
teacher/administrator relationship, there is evidence to suggest that politics and policies
an administrator must attend to also inﬂuence the relationship. Both administrators are in
a position of promoting a bond issue which costs time in meeting with board members,
the community, central ofﬁce, and others involved in the generation of the bond proposal.
In the case of Calvin, teachers and administrators work together to produce a play to
showcase the need for a new performing arts center. Chad discusses his ﬁ'ustration with
the amount of time that the bond proposal takes away from being in his building and
working with his teachers but recognizes that it is an essential part of his responsibility in
obtaining a new facility for his staff and students.

While the bond proposals are well known political issues in both cases, the role of

federal, state, and local policies and their inﬂuence on the new teacher/administrator

149

relationship is recognized by administrators as a major inﬂuence, but often overlooked by
the new teachers. This claim is supported by statements ﬁ'om both Karen and Chad that
“factors out of [their] control” (Interviews) took away from the time these administrators
needed to invest in working with their new teachers. Both Karen and Chad similarly
describes the difﬁculties in dealing with all of the federal and state mandates such as No
Child Left Behind, state testing, attendance and related funding, curriculum alignment,

mentor programs, and all of the associated paperwork with these programs. Additionally,

 

each deal with his/her own building policy issues such as policy revision, development,

and enforcement. The new teachers in this study rarely mention these types of political

 

l t

and policy issues other than a brief conversation with Brent on curriculum alignment and
state testing (Interview 2).

Although teachers rarely mention the role of policies in their interviews, evidence
suggests that policies surrounding mandatory teacher evaluations are a source of tension
for several of the teachers in the study. Brandon’s difficulties with his evaluation (as
previously discussed) are a main source of tension from his perspective. Even though
Brent eventually resolves his inaccurate evaluation dilemma, he struggles with what he
perceives as a conﬂicting message of trust. Brent discusses his displeasure with turning
in lesson plans during his ﬁrst year and questions their value and use in the evaluation
process (Focus Group). It seems to send a message of lack of trust in professional
abilities. Administrators are faced with the delicate balance of required supervision by
the state and the beginning teachers’ desire for instructional independence and respect.

One politically related issue that appears to generate a great deal of tension in the

relationship from the teacher’s perspective is disclosure of information. The data from

150

Ellen and Brent suggest that lack of disclosure has the potential to detrimentally affect the
relationship. Both Brent and Ellen were upset with a contract issue involving a colleague

as described in Chapter 4. Neither Brent nor Ellen had ﬁrst hand information regarding

 

the issue and it was unclear as to where their information originated. Regardless, in their
eyes, it impacted the level of trust placed in their administration. Personnel and contract
issues can be very complex and “sticky” and are a very delicate matter in many cases as r—
the administrator must consider an individuals right to privacy. Administrators have the

task of deciding what types of information are appropriate to share and sometimes face

 

criticism, whether unfounded or not, based on their decisions.

 

The combination of organizational structures, politics, and policy issues combine
to create constraints on the administrator’s availability and in turn, inﬂuence their
relationships with their new teachers. Argyris explains that the structure of many
organizations keep their employees in a state of dependence (as cited in Lunenburg &
Ornstein, 2008). This causes conﬂict with the individual’s natural desire to progress to
an independent state and results in frustration and failure. What develops as a result of
the incompatibility of the demands placed on the administrators and the growth and
development of the beginning teachers are tensions within their relationships. These
tensions are a pull between the individual needs of the beginning teacher and the
availability of the administrator to meet those needs. How individuals might deal with the
conﬂict varies, with some developing defense mechanisms or becoming apathetic to their
work.

Administrators have a large group of constituents (community, school boards,

supervisors, parents, students, teachers, staff, and so on) and issues (ﬁnances, curriculum,

151

professional development, public policy) that demand time and attention. These demands
compete with the diverse needs of the new teacher. Elements of the school structure have
the ability to impact the nature of the relationship both positively and negatively. Politics
and policies to which the administrator is required to attend also cause tensions as new
teachers desire time, constructive feedback, accurate evaluations, instructional

independence, and trust in their professional judgment.

152

 

 

CHAPTER SEVEN: CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Many years ago, I walked into my ﬁrst teaching assignment at a large
comprehensive high school. There was no new teacher induction, no mentor assigned, no
teachers in my department to meet with prior to the start of school, and no set curriculum
for the class. I arrived to ﬁnd classes overﬂowing in size and ﬁlled with academically
and behaviorally challenged students. I had not been told that I would be team teaching
one section with a special education teacher and was surprised when she came to my
class with her severely mentally and physically handicapped students and their para-pros.

Needless to say, I was overwhelmed. I worked hard to meet the needs of my
students but I needed help. My department chair suggested that I ﬁnd a better job as soon
as possible, that the school was “going down the tubes.” Meeting with my administrators
required an appointment and concerns were typically dismissed with phrases like “it will
get better” or “everyone has these problems, it’s not a big deal.” When an administrator
responded to an attempted assault on my person with the statement “boys will be boys,” I
decided to leave my job. I began to consider a profession in the medical ﬁeld, thinking
that perhaps I was not cut out for teaching.

Out of necessity, I did work again as a teacher in a different high school with an
attentive mentor, helpful colleagues, and administrators that made it a point to help me
become successful. I began to wonder how many other potentially successful teachers
had left the profession because of situations similar to mine. This began my interest in
working with beginning teachers and research into the inﬂuence of the administrator in

their success and persistence.

153

 

In my position as a qualitative researcher conducting a phenomenological inquiry,
it was necessary for me to put my own personal experiences aside and be open to the
lived experiences, the stories of personal meaning that would unfold. In the search for all
possible meanings, a researcher must suspend her own personal and preconceived notions
and her own personal experiences in order to allow the data to show the true meaning of
an experience (Moustakas, 1994). To ensure the credibility (similar to internal validity)
and conﬁrrnability (similar to objectivity) of my inquiry, I purposely sought peer
debrieﬁng (a second analytical eye from a peer), debrieﬁng with my dissertation chair,
and maintained an audit (research log) trail of my work. I was most concerned with
meeting the authenticity criteria (Guba, 1989), in particular, ensuring that I treated each
participant’s contributions fairly, that I represented their meaning accurately, and that
each participant felt satisﬁed with his/her participation. Given brief, initial feedback
from each participant, I believe I have met the authenticity criteria. (I do plan to share
my study with participants).

Based on my review of related literature and my own experiences and
observations, I had some initial hunches about my topic and used those to construct my
set of exploratory research questions. In addition, this information helped me to develop
a preliminary conceptual model that integrated three frameworks: LMX theory, SEM,
and Maslow’s Hierarchy.

Because the relationship between the administrator and the new teacher is my unit
of analysis, I use LMX to examine that dyadic relationship and factors associated with
building that relationship such as communication patterns, value agreement, interaction

patterns, loyalty, commitment, empowerment, procedural and distributive justice, and

154

 

 

 

performance appraisal. My thinking was that I would likely ﬁnd participant
relationships of varying qualities based on a combination of the aforementioned
described factors and that these relationships, based on the LMX literature, would
develop very slowly. To better understand how the administrator and new teacher
relationship might inﬂuence the teacher’s efﬁcacy and persistence, I link elements of
SEM to my model to shed light on my assumption that new teachers having a higher
quality relationship with their administrator would exhibit signs of higher self-efﬁcacy
and perhaps have a stronger commitment to the profession.

Finally, Maslow serves as a tool to explain how the participants’ personal and
professional needs inﬂuence their ability to build a relationship. Because the new teacher
cannot meet all of her own needs (such as feeling of belonging and esteem needs)
independently, the relationships that she forms are important in ﬁlling those needs. I
expected that relationships deﬁned through LMX as being higher quality would be more
fulﬁlling to the participants and that in turn, these teachers having their needs met would
also show signs of higher self efﬁcacy. Based on the integration of these three
frameworks, my conceptual model was designed (Figure 7.1). The overlap of the three

lenses represents the relationship of the new teacher/administrator.

155

 

 

M.H.

SEM
LMX

 

Figure 7.1

An Initial Conceptual Model

While the model explains certain aspects of the relationship, I had failed to
consider the impact of school constraints on the relationship between the administrator
and the beginning teacher. It is clear from the data that the administrators in this study
face constraints impacting their ability to work with these beginning teachers. Based on
the data that supports this dilemma, I have referenced the work of Argyris(l993) in order

to provide more depth to my analysis. Argyris’ work in administrative theory describing

156

 

the conﬂict between organizations and individuals assists in the understanding of the
complex nature of these new teacher/administrator relationships.

My analysis provided evidence that while Maslow’s work was useful in
explaining the backgrounds and dispositions of the participants, it was not a dominant
theoretical lens as was LMX or SEM. Therefore, my analysis refers to the work of
Maslow, but only to provide a richer picture of the participants. My new model shows
the revision of how my conceptual lenses were applied, with the concentration on the unit
of analysis, the relationship between the administrator and the new teacher (through
LMX and SEM), while allowing consideration from Argyris and Maslow to provide a

richer description.

Administrator

   
   
   

Organizational
Setting

Disposition

Teacher A W Teacher B

 

 

Figure 7.2

A Visual Presentation of the Conceptual Model

157

 

 

The resulting conceptual model (Figure 7.2) shows the constant push and pull between
the individual’s needs, desires, personal and professional backgrounds, and the
organization’s goals, demands, setting, and culture. The nuances of the model will be

discussed within the important ﬁndings.

Overview of Important Findings

In answering my research question— What is the nature and substance of the
administrator/beginning teacher relationship that can make a difference in a new
teachers ' determination to stay in the teaching profession ?- I did not ﬁnd a simple
“recipe” for a successful relationship but rather a complex system of interactions,
circumstances, and settings that form the relationship and its various tensions. I will use
my theoretical model to answer my research question and begin at the individual level

and progress to the impact of the organization.

Important Finding at the Individual Level

 

A new teacher’s disposition and professional preparation affects the nature of the
administrator/new teacher relationship. Each beginning teacher in the study had a unique
upbringing and teacher training experience. The degree to which these experiences ﬁll
their own personal needs appears to inﬂuence their level of professional maturity and
dependence on their administrator. This supports Maslow’s (1967) work that describes a
hierarchy of personal needs that must be fulﬁlled at each level before progressing to the
next. The beginning teachers came to their jobs at various levels on Maslow’s hierarchy,

in part, due to their backgrounds. They struggle to meet their own personal needs via

158

 

 

 

their relationship with their administrators while competing with the demands of the
school community.

The relationships at Calvin high school illustrate how disposition and
personal/professional backgrounds work to inﬂuence the relationships. Both Brent and
Ellen work at the same school, for the same principal, and experience similar work
demands. Despite these similarities, Brent and Ellen developed very different
relationships with their principal Karen. These differences are explained by the contrasts
in their up-bringing and educational and professional experiences. Maslow’s work
implies that a new teacher’s ability to strive for self-actualization in the classroom is
inﬂuenced by his/her disposition and professional background which proves true in the
case of Ellen and Brent.

Connected to the desire for self-actualization is the teacher’s self-efﬁcacy. The
motivation to pursue a task or challenge (such as teaching) comes form an individual’s
internalized goals, aspirations, and needs, which are dependent upon the concept of self-
efﬁcacy (Bandura, 1977). Previous studies produced conﬂicting results when linking a
new teacher’s self-efﬁcacy to the support of his/her administrator ( Chester, 1996;
Wolfolk-Hoy, 2002; Wolfolk-Hoy, 2005). This study shows that the relationship
between the administrator and the new teacher is not as signiﬁcant as the new teacher’s
disposition and professional experience on inﬂuencing the new teacher’s self efﬁcacy. In
both the cases of Laredo and Calvin, one teacher at each school exhibits behaviors
associated with a lower self-efﬁcacy while the other teachers show signs of a higher self-
efﬁcacy. With the school, demands, and principal as constants, the changing variable in

this situation is the teacher, his/her disposition and professional experiences.

159

 

 

The research conducted to date on teacher efﬁcacy has examined variables such
as resources, interpersonal support from colleagues, interpersonal support and
supervision from the administrator, parent involvement, and community support (Chester,
1996; Wolfolk-Hoy, 2002). An important aspect to consider as a result of this study is
the inﬂuence of the new teacher’s disposition and professional experience on his/her self-
efﬁcacy. A deeper investigation of the teacher’s childhood, educational experiences,
teacher training program, and student teaching placement in relation to the ﬁrst teaching
assignment has the potential to produce new and meaningful data regarding these

elements and their link to the new teacher’s self-efﬁcacy.

Important Findings at the Relational Level

A new teacher’s perception of (a) her value alignment with the administrator, (b)
the character of leadership exhibited by the principal, and (c) the clarity of her own
teaching responsibilities can impede or enhance the teacher/administrator relationship.
LMX literature describes value agreement as a factor that inﬂuences the relationship
between a subordinate and a supervisor (Graen, 1995). This study demonstrates that a
strong value agreement between the new teacher and the administrator serves to
strengthen the relationship along with the teacher’s commitment to her school and
profession. Tensions from the perspective of the new teacher arise when administrators
exhibit behaviors that seemingly go against her own values. The ability of the
administrator to “walk the talk” do relate to the level of tension experienced by the new
teachers; however, the teachers do not always consider the constraints dealt with by their
administrators that potentially impact their ability to consistently behave in a way that

reﬂects their personal values. Penny and Brent show more knowledge of the pressures

160

 

and demands placed on administration by the school and its constituents. This makes
sense considering Brent’s education and Penny’s professional background. This insight
allows them to view their administrators’ character in a more understanding fashion.

I had expected, given the assumptions of the LMX theory, that the
teacher/ administrator relationship would progress at a fairly slow rate considering that the
beginning teacher and the administrator start their work as strangers. I did not ﬁnd this to
be true, rather their relationships progressed much faster than expected. LMX research is
based in business and industrial literature and the bulk of research has been conducted in
organizations with low-complexity tasks such as phone operation or bank telling which,
in this study, is a limitation of the theoretical framework. In comparison, the work of
teaching, leading, and managing a school are all highly complex processes, and as a
result, the teacher and administrator are forced to quickly develop a relationship. All of
the dyads in the study were working toward what the LMX model classiﬁed as a mature
partnership in which exchanges are highly developed and involve mutual respect, trust,
and obligation (Graen, 1995). What we learn is that the substance (both affective and
cognitive complexity) of the work affects the rate of relationship building as well as the
nature of exchange.

The nature of the relationship not only depends on speciﬁc factors described in
LMX , but relies on the organizational setting as well. For example, the complexity of
teaching and managing tasks, combined with the internal and external pressures of the
school organization seems to inﬂuence the rate at which the teacher/administrator
relationship progressed. One might think that because all teachers and administrators

deal with similar complexities and pressures from their schools that all

161

 

 

 

teacher/administrator relationships would progress at very similar rates; this is not the
case. Indeed, similar complexities and demands exist across schools, but the most
signiﬁcant factor in the progress of the relationship in this study is the disposition and
personal/professional background of the beginning teacher.

While LMX literature looks at large numbers of factors that inﬂuence the
development of a relationship (see Review of Literature), what it has not considered are Fr-
the personal and professional backgrounds of the subordinate and the supervisor. This

might be attributed to the fact that LMX research has been traditionally conducted with

 

lower skill level jobs where disposition of the participants would not be perceived as a
signiﬁcant factor. Based on the results of this study, the LMX theory might be
redesigned to take the disposition and personal/professional backgrounds of the
participants into account, as well as the inﬂuence of LMX factors in a setting that
involves complex work and relationships.

Another important ﬁnding at the relational level is that although both new
teachers and principals perceive that this relationship is important, intervening tensions
(e. g., roles and responsibilities, structure of the school day, policies of practice, customs
of the school) appear to deﬁne this relationship as secondary. Because principals and
new teachers are both very busy with their own individual responsibilities, it is difﬁcult
to establish and maintain an authentic, rich, personal relationship. So, despite what some
theorists might say (e.g., Fullan) the principal and new teacher relationship is not the key
connection that ensures new teacher efﬁcacy. In light of this, it would seem that other
relationships appear to be more useful to new teacher’s efﬁcacy (e. g., other teachers,

mentor teachers, assistant principals, department chairs, and so on).

162

A dilemma that arises from this ﬁnding is how to reconcile the “perception” of
what the relationship should be according to theory, and where new teachers and school
principals should place their energy. Based on the data presented in this study, it would
seem unlikely that either new teachers or administrators would be able to carve out any
signiﬁcant increase in time available for each other. Therefore, a school principal may
want to focus on providing the new teachers with a strong resource team. This team
could consist of the new teacher’s mentor, department chair, other teachers that may
teach the same course, a veteran teacher from outside the department, as well as a teacher
that may be recently tenured. These types of colleagues were all mentioned by
participants as playing a role in the success of the new teachers, with some participants
describing the roles of theses colleagues as critical in their development as a teacher.
Perhaps if the principal were to invest time into developing strong support teams, the
reality of the relationship between the principal and the new teachers as secondary would
be more acceptable. A more realistic picture of the relationship could then be that of a

resource provider.

Important Finding at the Organizational Level

Organizational structures, and policies/politics often complicate the character of
the new teacher/administrator relationship. Based on the work of Argyris (1993) we can
infer that teachers move from a position of dependence and psychological immaturity to
that of independence and maturity; however, this process can be hampered by the
competing demands for the attention of the administrator. Both administrators veriﬁed
that a large number of factors compete for their time and that lack of time to work with

their new teachers is a challenge.

163

 

 

 

While Chester (1996) has linked the number of classroom observations to new
teacher efﬁcacy, I offer the possibility of a link between quality/accuracy of classroom
observations and new teacher efﬁcacy as well. Administrators, as mandated by the state,
are required to spend some time in the process of evaluation of the new teachers. LMX
theory supports the importance of faimess/justice in evaluations as a factor that
inﬂuences the relationship. The time invested, attention to detail, and accuracy of the
content of these evaluations comes to be a source of tension for Brent and Brandon. In
the case of Brent, the evaluation is an extension of his professionalism, and while
monitoring new teachers is mandated, there is a tension generated regarding professional
trust. Brandon on the other hand, desires a higher level of administrative observation and
input which could call into question his principals’ value of equity. These two examples
demonstrate that while the organizational constraint of time is a factor in the relationship,
the degree to which tension develops is variable across the new teachers in the study.

New teachers in the study that began their teaching experience at a higher level of
independence and professional maturity due to their disposition and professional
background, perceived their relationship with their administrator as having fewer
tensions. It would be of interest to examine the root of the incompatibility between the
new teacher and the school organization in future administrative theory research. Such a
study might imply the need for the examination of variables related to disposition and
professional preparation such as a new teacher’s own K-12 experience, college
coursework, student teaching, and how these variables impact the compatibility of the

teacher to her school and administrator.

164

 

 

Clearly, the competing demands on the school organization and the manner in
which the school administrator interprets and manages these can create misunderstanding
and tension (Argyris, 1993). Hence, the ubiquitous “us versus them”
administrator/teacher predicament. When a teacher is unaware of the professional
constraints placed on the administrator, some behaviors may be viewed as questionable
or even deceitful, impacting the level of trust in the relationship. The administrator must
reconcile the need for teachers to have certain information with the appropriateness of
disclosing that information. This dilemma of the transparency of decision making can
lead to tensions in the relationship, as was the case with Ellen and the disclosure of the

budget.

Limitations of the Study and Recommendations for Further Research

Limitations to the study include the settings and size of the study, race/ethnicity of
subjects, and employment status of the new teachers. Research was conducted in only
two settings, one rural and one suburban high school. It would be of interest to extend
the study to include an urban school setting as well. Due to my own (professional and
personal) time constraints, the study was limited to only two triads whereas a larger
number of triads may have provided additional insights not revealed in this study.
Attempts were made to secure a diverse ethnic/racial sample, however, due to the
voluntary nature of participation, it was not possible. Lastly, the sample of new teachers
in the study remained in the teaching profession. The data collected from these new
teachers would likely be different than data collected from new teachers that had left the

teaching profession.

I65

 

 

 

Based on the limitations of the study and what we now know as a result of the

study, I would make several recommendations for further research. The following is a

 

short list of potential next step inquiry work:
1. The principals in the study are of different genders, lending to a study of the
inﬂuence of gender on building relationships with beginning teachers.
2. Reﬂecting on the conceptual model used in this study, the connection between
new teachers in the same school becomes apparent and would also be of interest.
This would provide further insight into the ﬁnding of the relationship between the

administrator and the teacher as being secondary to other relationships.

 

3. The new teachers in the study interact with many colleagues. It would be
worthwhile to see if schools using a new teacher cohort approach might have
positive results in the support of neophyte teachers.

4. Lastly, because the dispositions and professional preparation of teachers
signiﬁcantly inﬂuence the relationships in this study, the development of an
instrument that measures disposition/preparation would be useful in linking this

element to others such as efﬁcacy.

Implications for Practice

Beginning teachers in this study that had a positive high school experience, solid
teacher training, and most importantly a self-described “excellent” student teaching
experience, express higher quality relationships with their administrators and are less
dependent on them for support with discipline, curriculum, and so on. These
circumstances have several implications. First, the student teaching experience should be

a primary consideration when hiring a beginning teacher. Academic preparation,

166

 

including student teaching, is an inﬂuential factor in teachers staying in the profession
(Schlecty, 1981). Beginning teachers that are not adequately prepared for the type of
classroom management and discipline issues they will encounter are less likely to stay in
the profession (Bolich, 2001). Ideally, protocols that probe the personal and educational

backgrounds of new teacher applicants could be developed in order to better determine

 

the disposition of the individual. However, because of availability of cooperating
teachers for student teaching placements and teacher’s limited control over where they
will be hired, it is not always possible to closely match the student teaching experience to

the teacher’s ﬁrst job. The dilemma now becomes a question of how an administrator

 

might prepare a beginning teacher for challenges she has never experienced.

Secondly, universities and schools need to ﬁnd ways to expose student teachers to
a variety of educational settings for an extended period of time. Only one of the three
teachers in the study had been exposed to more than one student teaching experience.
Lack of exposure to a variety of students and settings is only half the problem, the other
being the hierarchical relationship between a cooperating teacher (master craftsman) and
student teacher (apprentice) that might foster a notion of inequality on the part of the new
teacher. The beginning teachers in this study that were placed with true master teachers

were slowly guided in the art of teaching. They were supported in every aspect of their

 

craft. Beginning teachers that were placed with “master” teachers that left the classroom
the day after the beginning teacher arrived showed greater dependency on their
administrators and signs of lower self-efﬁcacy.

Thirdly, new teachers in the study that exhibit lower levels of dependence on their

administrators were also paired with mentors that provided quality assistance. Teachers

167

 

in the same schools had varying opinions of their mentoring program based on their
experiences with their own mentors. My research supports that selection of an
appropriate mentor is imperative and would perhaps promote new teacher independence.
Development of a training program for mentors, as well as an evaluation system, might
provide mentors with the insights needed to support and sustain a beginning teacher as
well as give an administrator feedback on the helpfulness of the mentor. Fm
Lastly, the development of speciﬁc evaluation criteria that are clearly articulated
as an unambiguous process, and links to professional development for beginning teachers

may hold promise of improving performance, persistence, and efﬁcacy. The data of this

 

study support the importance of frequent and accurate observations as does the literature
(Chester, 1996). While non-tenured teachers are evaluated more frequently than tenured
teachers, a more rigorous series of observations may be in order.

Currently, in the state in which the study took place, a beginning teacher must
have two formal evaluations per school year. Chester’s (1996) work indicates that
teachers observed ﬁve or more time a year are three times less likely to leave the
profession than those evaluated less than ﬁve times per year. One administrator obtained
a well-rounded picture of her teachers by very brieﬂy stopping into their classrooms on
an almost daily basis. Both teachers in the study praised this practice and the
administrator reﬂected that it allowed her to not only make contact with students and
teachers, but provided her with an opportunity to make sure everything was going well
for that teacher in their class. While it may be difﬁcult to mandate such a practice, it may
be beneﬁcial to modify the practice to a weekly brief visit as a way to establish rapport

and ensure that support in some form is provided.

168

Reﬂections

As I think about what I have learned from my research, I ﬁnd myself comparing
my data and its analysis to what I have been teaching in my biology classes for years.
This beginning teacher/administrator relationship I have studied, at a micro level, is like
an individual cell, yet one of many cells that work for the organism (principal). The
nucleus of the cell (the new teacher) is only concerned with maintaining homeostasis (the
regulation of the internal environment) for its' own cell and is not aware of the "big
picture"...what is happening in the rest of the organism. On the other hand, the organism
must regulate all the systems (teachers, staff, curriculum, professional development,
extra-curricular activities, and so on) and respond and adapt quickly to the environment
(school boards, state mandates, community) if it is to maintain overall homeostasis.
Sometimes, these two work at odds with each other, creating disease (tensions in the
relationship). This scenario is an undeniable fact of life, as is the continual struggle

between personal needs and organizational demands.

169

APPENDIX A

Deﬁnition of Phenomenological Terms
Bracketing or epoche is the researcher setting aside all prejudgrnents and personal
experiences in order to rely on their intuition, imagination, and universal structures to

obtain a picture of the experience (Creswell, 1998).

Essence refers to the way in which we encounter something, our way of thinking and
deriving meaning. To describe the essence of an experience requires the realization that
the experiences all have an underlying structure and that the reader should come away
with a better understanding of that experience based on the researchers development of

the essence of the experience (Creswell, 1998).
Horizontalization is an initial step in the reduction of data in a phenomenological study.
It involves the assembling of data into statements and then the clustering of statements

into themes.

Imaginative variation occurs after data reduction, at which point the researcher tries to

understand the structural essences of the experience.

Intentionality is how we connect with the world. It occurs when we reﬂect on our

activities (Moustakas, 1994).

170

 

 

Lived experience is the description of a situation as it is experienced by the person
themselves. A lived experience is how the person experiences the world, their own reality
and meaning. The researcher explores the meaning of an experience for an individual be
designing questions that ask the individual to describe their every day lived experiences

(Creswell, 1998).

Reduction is looking at the phenomenon as a whole in order to pull from it the textural

descriptions of the essences of the phenomenon.

l7l

 

APPENDIX B

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coding of Data
Table A]
Idea
Leader Member Exchange: Organizational Elements

OE: PD Professional development: desire for pd and availability of opportunities

OE: EV How does the evaluation process inﬂuence the relationship?

OE: EXT Extra-curricular participation: expectations and impact

OE: CR How do classroom variables such as supplies, class size, # of preps, and
types of courses taught inﬂuence the relationship?

OE: COMM What types of interactive communication patterns inﬂuence the
relationship?

Leader Member Exchange: Elements of the Relationship

ER: LC What factors in the relationship inﬂuence new teacher loyalty and
commitment to the profession?

ER: EMP How does empowerment inﬂuence a new teachers’ persistence?

ER: VA How does value agreement between administrators and beginning teachers
inﬂuence the relationship?

ER: ADT How do antecedents/ determinants of the relationship such as time impact
the relationship?

ER: AFF How does the need for afﬁrmation and the act of afﬁrmation inﬂuence a
beginning teachers’ persistence?

Maslow’s Heirarchy of Needs

M: PN Physical needs: How does the need for factors such as sleep, activity, and
rest impact the relationship?

M: SA Safety: The need for a stable work environment. How do administrators
provide this or not? What impact does it have on the beginning teachers
relationship and their persistence?

M: BEL Need for a sense of belonging and community. How does the feeling of
community or lack of impact the beginning teacher? How does the
administrator go about trying to build a learning community that supports
beginning teachers?

M: EST Esteem needs, respect from others and self. How do new teachers earn
respect from others including their administrators? How is respect valued
in the relationship?

M: SEL Self actualization, desire to be their best. How do administrators work to
develop beginning teachers and what inﬂuence does an administrator have
on a beginningteachers desire to improve their practice?

Self Efﬁcacy Mechanism (SEM)

SEM: T Does the relationship between the beginning teacher and the administrator
inﬂuence the teacher’s self-efﬁcacy? If so, how?

SEM: A How does the administrators own beliefs regarding their ability to support a

 

beginning teacher inﬂuence theadministrators actions and relationship?

 

 

172

 

 

Idea

 

Leader Member Exchange

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LMX: CP Need for professional development. Is there a connection to career
progress?

LMX: EV How does the evaluation process inﬂuence the relationship?

LMX: J/F How does the need for justice/fairness inﬂuence the relationship?

LMX: UM How is upward maintenance used in the relationship?

LMX: COMM What types of interactive communication patterns inﬂuence the
relationship?

LMX: L/C What factors in the relationship inﬂuence new teacher loyalty and
commitment to the profession?

LMX: EMP How does empowerment inﬂuence a new teachers’ persistence?

LMX: VA How does value agreement between administrators and beginning
teachers inﬂuence the relationship?

LMX: ADT How do antecedents/ determinants of the relationship such as time
impact the relationship?

LMX: AFF How does the need for afﬁrmation and the act of afﬁrmation
inﬂuence a beginning teachers’ persistence?

Maslow’s Heirarchy of Needs

M: PN Physical needs: How does the need for factors such as sleep, activity,
and rest impact the relationship?

M: SA Safety: The need for a stable work environment. How do
administrators provide this or not? What impact does it have on the
beginning teachers relationship and their persistence?

M: BEL Need for a sense of belonging and community. How does the feeling
of community or lack of impact the beginning teacher? How does the
administrator go about trying to build a learning community that
supports beginning teachers?

M: EST Esteem needs, respect from others and self. How do new teachers
earn respect from others including their administrators? How is
respect valued in the relationship?

M: SEL Self actualization, desire to be their best. How do administrators
work to develop beginning teachers and what inﬂuence does an
administrator have on a beginning teachers desire to improve their
practice?

Self Efﬁcacy Mechanism (SEM)

SEM: T Does the relationship between the beginning teacher and the
administrator inﬂuence the teacher’s self-efﬁcacy? If so, how?

SEM: A How does the administrators own beliefs regarding their ability to
support a beginning teacher inﬂuence the administrators actions and
relationship?

SEM: S Teachers self-expression of their own efﬁcacy.

 

 

173

 

 

‘I‘T

 

 

Example of the Use of Initial Coding on Interview Text

Ch. 6 Data Analysis Thematic Notes

Brent : Calvin High School, Interview #, pg. # Penny: Laredo High School
t I: High \ Brandon: Laredo High School
Karen: Calvin High School Chad: Laredo High School

LEADER MEMBER EXCHANGE (LMX)
LMX: CP
A: Do you have many opportunities for subject area professional development?

B: That’s one of the great things about working in the district is that we have a number
of opportunities for professional development. Just at the department level we just had a
full day ofit. We have had a lot oftime to do that and independently our administration
has been great about supporting us going to conferences or observing other teachers in
other schools, they’ve been great about helping us there. #1, p.3.

8: Our administration is incredibly collaborative with the staff. It has bee awesome
working with the current administration. We have a staff meeting every month, we have
all these committee meetings we’re involved in so it’s not an autocratic method of
administration, it’s much more so that it’s very, very diverse and it’s not a top down
approach. Everyone has some ownership in what is going on. The administration has
been awesome in working with us. their hands are in it just as much as the teachers’ are.
so working with them and knowing what we’re doing reﬂects upon the future and the
direction of the seminar program. We’re moving to a block schedule next year and
they’ve been involved in that, it’s been a really neat process. #1, p8.

A: Is there any type of exchanges that you ﬁnd helpful or motivating like when you had
this workday, do you think it is substantial, worthwhile.

B: Yeah it was a great work day. This school has been great about giving us a lot of
release time. I know a lot of schools don’t do that. I know that with all the stuff that
everyone in our department is involved in, we wouldn’t have time to do this outside the
school day. lfit is a curricular goal, or admin is good about giving us days to work with
our department and meet these different goals. We’re looking at our 9th grade MEAP
weaknesses, we looked at that yesterday. Our administration has been awesome about
giving us that time to do that stuff, it wouldn’t get done otherwise, I guarantee that. #2,
p.3.

A: (22:10) With a new teacher. at what point can the admin start backing off?

174

 

 

 

APPENDIX C
Research Protocols
First Interview — Teacher
Purpose: To explore the beginning teachers’ belief and assumptions regarding their role
as a new high school teacher in addition to their relationship with colleagues, staff, and
administration. The interview will focus on their professional preparation, expectations
of themselves and from others, speciﬁc interactions with others, and school related

factors that may or may not impact their persistence to stay in the teaching core.

T hank you for meeting with me today, we will begin our interview with some questions
about your background.

A. Background Information
(1) Where did you attend school (K-12)? Can you brieﬂy describe this
educational experience?
(2) What are some of your interests (talents/hobbies) outside of the school?
(3) Please explain why you chose teaching as your profession.
B. Tell me about your teacher preparation program and any pre-teaching/student

teaching you had. Probes:

(1) What coursework or student teaching experiences do you believe best
prepared you for your beginning teaching years?

(2) What teaching experiences have you found most challenging? Follow-up:
How did or didn’t your teacher preparation program prepare you for this?

(3) Were there any people in your preparation that were particularly
helpful? Tell me more about how they were inﬂuential.

C. My next set of questions deal with self expectations. Probes:
(1) What do you consider the most important aspects of teaching?

(2) What type of impact do you believe that you can make through your
teaching? Why do you believe this?

(3) In what area(s) do you feel you need more learning?

175

D. Along with your self expectations, I am also interested in your perceived
expectations of others. Probes:

(1) What do you perceive your [school administrator] expects from you?

(2) What do you perceive your students expect from you?

(3) What do you perceive your colleagues (other new teachers) expect from
you?

(4) What do you perceive your more seasoned colleagues (other teachers in
the building/department/ grade level) expect from you?

(5) In light of these expectations, what support do you believe you need from
[school administrator]?

E. Next I would like to learn about interactions that have helped or hindered your

teaching practice. Probes:

(1) Describe an example of an interaction with another new teacher(s) that
had some impact on your teaching.

(2) How have interactions with veteran teachers impacted your persistence
and /or practice in your classroom?

(3) Describe the types of interactions you have had with your mentor and how
these interactions have impacted your persistence and/or practice?

(4) How has your teachers’ union interacted with you as a new teacher?

F. In addition to the interactions with colleagues and staff, I would also like to hear

about interactions with [school administrator]

Reﬂect back on your [number] years teaching in this school. What three(3) key
interactions with [school administrator] have helped or hindered your work as an
effective teacher?

Probes:
(1)
(2)
(3)

How did you feel about yourself after the situations you just described?
What were your expectations of your administrator in these situations?

If you were an administrator, would you have handled this differently? If
so, how?

176

(4) What could an administrator potentially do that could positively impact
your teaching practice?

G. Finally, I am interested in your perception of new teacher determination to stay in
the teaching profession. Probes:

(1) Do you know of any teachers who have left the profession or are
considering leaving the profession? If so, what do you think about their
decision?

(2) Why do you think so many new teachers leave the teaching profession?

(3) Would you or have you considered leaving teaching? If so, for what
reasons? If not, what makes you stay?

H. Do you have any questions for me?

T hank you for spending time with me today. For our next meeting there are two
things you will need to do to prepare. First, you will need to keep a communications log.
During ten consecutive school days, you will record any type of communication that you
have with your administrator. Each entry should include the date, the time of any
contact/communication made, a brief description of the content or nature of the
communication, and any action that was taken as a result of the communication.

Second, please bring with you three items: one item that shows how your school
supports the development of a beginning teacher, one item that shows how you may be
working collaboratively with other teachers/administrator in your building, and one item
that shows your perception of your own teaching practice. Any questions?

177

 

Second Interview — Teacher

Purpose: The ﬁnal interview with the beginning teachers will ask them to describe and
make meaning of the interactions they have experienced with their administrators. The
interview will focus on a discussion of the information that they provided in their
communication logs and items that they have chosen to bring for this interview.

Interview protocol #2: At the conclusion of Interview #1, the interviewer will instruct the
respondent to complete a communication log over a two-week period. And, the
interviewer will ask the teacher to bring at least three items that best represent: (1) school
led teacher development activities; (2) collaborative work that s/he may be involved with
colleagues — school based; and (3) his/her perception of their own teaching efﬁcacy.

T hank you for meeting with me and taking the time to keep your communications log and
gather your three items for discussion today. I would like to begin our second interview
by exploring the communications log that you have kept for the past two weeks.

A. Let’s look at your communications log together. Probes will include:

1. Please point out those exchanges that you feel helped you in your classroom
instruction. Explain. (Probe for strategies used, tone of the exchange, content
of exchange, and so on.)

2. Following-up on this, did this exchange help you change what you did in the
classroom and how? (Probe for how teacher regulates his/her behavior.)

3. Which of these exchanges motivated you? In what way? What did you do?
(Probe for teacher’s perceptions of needs, personal/professional, met or not
met.)

4. Were any of the exchanges over the last two weeks particularly focused on
helping or encouraging you to work with other teachers in your building?
Please share with me more. (Probe for collective efﬁcacy.)

B. Exploring the Artifacts

“At the end of our last interview, I had asked that you bring with you today three items:
one item that showed school support for teacher development, one item that showed how
you may be working collaboratively with other teachers/administrators in your building,
and one item that showed your perception of your teaching practice. Would you please
take a moment to describe each of these items?”

178

 

Probes:
1. In what ways do you feel supported/or not by your [school administrator]
to further participate in [insert activity]?

2. Given your description of [insert artifact], in what ways do you expect
[school administrator] to support you?

 

3. How has the participation in [insert activity] impacted you classroom
teaching?
4. In what ways has working with [group/individual] impacted your

classroom teaching and your career choice decision?

C. Final Queries:

“Would you please take a moment to deﬁne what each of the following ideas mean to
you?”

 

1. How would you deﬁne “Effective Administrator and Teacher Interactions”?

2. What qualities of a school administrator do you believe helps a beginning
teacher “stay-in” the profession?

3. What role does the school organization as a whole play in supporting a
beginning teacher?

D. Do you have any questions for me?

T hank you for spending time with me today. Our last meeting will involve
participation of all of the beginning teachers in a focus group. The focus group will
serve as an opportunity for you to hear the experiences of others and to compare and
contrast your thoughts and ideas with the thoughts and ideas of others.

The conclusion of the focus group marks the end of the data collection portion of
the study. I will then conduct my data analysis and write-up of that data in my
dissertation. Once the dissertation is completed, I will notify you via email and make
available for you a copy of the dissertation. Thank you again for your participation.

179

 

First Interview — Administrator

Purpose: To explore the administrators’ beliefs and assumptions regarding their role as
an administrator in addition to their relationships with beginning teachers. The interview
will focus on professional preparation, expectations of themselves and from others,
speciﬁc interactions with others, and school related factors that may or may not impact
their ability to support and sustain beginning teachers.

T hank you for meeting with me today, we will begin our interview with some questions
about your background.

A. Background Information:
(1) Where did you attend school (K-12)? Brieﬂy describe this educational
experience.

(2) What are some of your interests (talents/hobbies) outside of the school?

(3) Please explain why you chose to work in schools?

(4) Before move on, can you please explain the different roles you have
taken-on over your career (e. g., classroom teacher, committee chair,
department head, assistant principal, and so on).

B. Tell me about your administrator preparation program and any prior
administrative experience you may have. Probes:

(1) What coursework or leadership experiences do you believe best prepared
you for your work as an administrator?

(2) What administrative experiences have you found most challenging?
Follow-up: How did or didn’t your administration preparation program

prepare you for this?

(3) Were there any people in your preparation program that were particularly
helpful? Tell me more about how they were inﬂuential.

C. My next set of questions deal with expectations. Probes:

(1) What do you consider the most important aspect of working with
beginning teachers in your position?

(2) What type of impact do you believe that you can personally make in your
interactions with beginning teachers? Why do you believe this?

(3) In what area(s) do you feel you need more learning?

180

D. Along with personal expectations, I am also interested in your perceived
expectations of others. Probes:

(1) What do you perceive your beginning teachers expect from you as an
instructional leader and a teacher evaluator?

(2) What do you perceive your more seasoned teachers expect from you as an
instructional leader and teacher evaluator?

(3) What do you perceive other stakeholders (e.g., students, parents, and
community members) expect from you as an instructional leader and
manager of the school?

(4) In light of these expectations, what support do you believe you should
provide to beginning teachers?

E. Next I would like to learn about interactions that have helped or hindered your

role as a mentor of beginning teachers. Probes:

(1)

(2)

How have members of the school community (e. g. new teachers, veteran
teachers, staff, parents, community leaders, district personnel, other
administrators, and so on) shaped your ability serve as a mentor and
instructional leader for beginning teachers?

What types of interactions between beginning teachers and administrators
do you believe have the most impact on a beginning teachers practice and
persistence?

F. In addition to the interactions with members of the school community, I would
also like to hear about speciﬁc interactions with beginning teachers.

Reﬂect back on your [number] of years as an administrator in this school. What three
(3 ) key interactions with beginning teachers have helped or hindered those teachers’
work as an effective teacher?

Probes:
(1)
(2)
(3)

How did you feel about yourself after the situations you just described?
What were your expectations of the beginning teacher in these situations?

If you had been the teacher, would you have handled the situation
differently? If so, how?

181

 

(4) What do you think you can do as an administrator that could positively
impact beginning teachers’ practice?

G. Finally, I am interested in your perception of new teacher determination to say in
the teaching profession. Probes:

(1) Do you know of any teachers who have left the profession or are
considering leaving the profession? If so, what do you think about their
decision?

(2) Why do you think so many new teacher leave the teaching profession?

(3) I realize that you left teaching to become an administrator, but while you
were teaching, did you ever consider leaving the ﬁeld of education? If so,
for what reasons? If not, what made you stay?

H. Do you have any questions for me?

T hank you for spending time with me today. For our next meeting there are two
things you will need to do to prepare. First, you will need to keep a communications log.
During ten consecutive school days, you will record any type of communication that you
have with the beginning teachers. Each entry should include the date, the time of any
contact/communication made, a brief description of the content or nature of the
communication, and any action that was taken as a result of the communication.

Second, please bring with you three items: one item that shows how your school
supports the development of a beginning teacher, one item that shows how you may be
working collaboratively with other teachers/administrator in your building, and one item
that shows your perception of your own practice as an instructional leader. Any
questions?

182

 

Second Interview — Administrator

Purpose: Purpose: The ﬁnal interview with the administrator will ask them to describe
and make meaning of the interactions they have experienced with their beginning
teachers . The interview will focus on a discussion of the information that they provided
in their communication logs and items that they have chosen to bring for this interview.

Interview protocol #2: At the conclusion of Interview #1, the interviewer will instruct the
respondent to complete a communication log over a two-week period. And, the
interviewer will ask the teacher to bring at least three items that best represent: (1) school
led teacher development activities; (2) collaborative work that s/he may be involved with
colleagues — school based; and (3) his/her perception of their own work as an
instructional leader.

T hank you for meeting with me and taking the time to keep your communications log and
gather your three items for discussion today. I would like to begin our second interview
by exploring the communications log that you have kept for the past two weeks.

A. Let’s look at your communications log together. Probes will include:

(1) Please point out those exchanges that you feel helped the teacher in their
classroom. Explain. (Probe for strategies used, tone of the exchange,
content of the exchange, and so on.)

(2) Following-up on this, do you think that this exchange caused any change
in what the teacher does in the classroom?

(3) Which exchanges do you believe to be most motivating to the beginning
teacher? In what way? What did you do?

(4) Were any of the exchanges over the last two weeks particularly focused on
helping or encouraging the new teacher to work with others in the
building? Please share with me more. (Probe for collective efﬁcacy.)

B. Exploring the Artifacts

“At the end of our last interview, I had asked that you bring with you today three items:
one item that showed school support for teacher development, one item that showed how
you may be working collaboratively with other teachers/ administrators in your building,
and one item that showed your perception of your own practice as an instructional leader.
Would you please take a moment to describe each of these items?”

183

 

Probes:

D.

(1)

(2)

(3)

In what ways do you think you have supported new teachers to further
participate in [insert activity]?

Given your description of [insert artifact], in what ways do you provide
support to beginning teachers?

How do you think participation in [insert activity] has helped the practice
of beginning teachers?

Final Queries:

“Would you please take a moment to deﬁne what each of the following ideas
mean to you?”

(1)

(2)

(3)

How would you deﬁne “Effective Administrator and Teacher
Interactions”?

What qualities of a school administrator do you believe helps a beginning
teacher “stay-in” the profession?

What role does the school organization as a whole play in supporting a
beginning teacher?

Do you have any questions for me?

Thank youfor spending time with me today. Our last meeting will involve participation
of all of the administrators in a focus group. T he focus group will serve as an
opportunity for you to hear the experiences of others and to compare and contrast your
thoughts and ideas with the thoughts and ideas of others.

The conclusion of the focus group marks the end of the data collection portion of
the study. I will then conduct my data analysis and write-up of that data in my
dissertation. Once the dissertation is completed, I will notify you via email and make
available for you a copy of the dissertation. Thank you again for your participation.

184

 

Communication Log

Directions: Over the next 10 school days please record all communication between
teacher/administrator. Data recorded should include the date, time of the contact, the
content of the communication and any action connected to and/or generated ﬁ'om that
interaction.

[For example, you may receive an email requesting your presence at a particular meeting,
so you would record the time of the email, that it was a request for a meeting, and your
intent to attend the meeting]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Date:
Time Content Action
Date:
Time Content Action

 

 

 

 

 

 

185

 

Focus Group Interview Protocol for Beginning Teacher Group
(Audio taped)

Introduction for the participants: Today is an opportunity to reﬂect on your experience a
new teacher. We’ve had two individual interviews that resulted in rich information about
your experiences. The distinctive feature of today’s focus group interview is that you get
to hear the experiences of others. The listening process is meant to prompt the memory
of your own experiences as you compare and contrast your thoughts and ideas with the
thoughts and ideas of others.

Our work today will be audio taped affording me the opportunity to go back and
reﬂect on our work together. It will be used strictly for reviewing your responses as I
reﬂect on the data you’ve provided through this discussion.

Purpose: 1. Prompt an open discussion about the experiences of being a new
teacher.
2. Probe your thoughts and feelings about the support you may or
may not receive as a beginning teacher.
3. Discuss the elements of the relationship between beginning

teachers and administrators that supports teacher practice and
perhaps encourages beginning teachers to stay in the profession.

4. Probe for strategies that appear to meet the need or not of
beginning teachers.

Setting the tone: Introduce the Participants

1 have had the wonderful opportunity to hear your stories. You live and work in
different places, but share the connection of being a new teacher. Take a moment and
introduce yourselves by sharing you name, your school, and something new that you may
have recognized as a result of this research process.

Focus Group Protocol

Thank you for your introductions. Let’s begin. I’ll ask a question. Take a
moment to think about it, and if and when you would like to respond, go ahead. Since it
is important to hear from everyone, I’ll check with you before moving on to a new
question.

1. You are at the beginning of a journey of learning and discovery as a beginning
teacher. There have been challenges, victories, and collisions along the way.
You have discovered that teaching is not a solo effort. What are some of the
tensions and challenges you have experience so far, particularly with your
interactions with your school administrator?
Probes:

186

 

a. Have these tensions and challenges changed what you do in your
classroom or how you view your effectiveness as a teacher?

b. Have you ever questioned your career choice because of the tensions and
challenges you have faced as a new teacher?
c. Do you feel that your teacher preparation program prepared you for the

types of tensions and challenges that you are facing as a new teacher?

What elements of the relationship with you and your administrator has supported
you and perhaps encouraged you to stay in the teaching profession?
Probes:

a. What types of interactions with your administrator seem to be
most motivational?
b. Do you feel any loyalty in this relationship? If so, describe.

What are some strategies used by your school or district that appear to meet the
needs or not of beginning teachers?

Probes:
a. Have these strategies positively impact your classroom teaching?
b. What might be provided by your school or district that is currently lacking

in terms of support for beginning teachers?

In thinking about your experience so far as a new teacher, what might make
things easier for you?

Probes:
a. To what extent do you believe these are feasible?
b. To what extent do you actively seek assistance as a new teacher?

To what degree does the relationship with your administrator fulﬁll your
individual needs to feel a sense of belonging and motivation to remain committed
to the teaching profession?

To what extent, if any, do organizational elements (e. g. school structure,
commitment to teacher development, teacher evaluation processes, and so on)
impact the nature of your relationship with your administrator and in turn, does
this have any inﬂuence on your commitment to teaching?

Do you have anything that you would like to add that we have not discussed or do
you have any questions for me?

187

REFERENCES

Andrews, S. P., & Martin, Ellice. (2003). No teacher left behind: Mentoring and
supporting novice teachers, Annual Meeting fo the Georgia Association of

Colleges for Teacher Education/Georgia Association of Teacher Educators.St.
Simons Island, GA.

Argyris, C. (1993). Knowledge for action: A guide to overcoming barriers to
organizational change.Sanfrancisco: J ossey-Bass.

ASCD. (2003). The cost of teacher turnover. from
www.ascd.org/publications/researchbrief/volumel /v 1 n8 .html

 

Ashton, P., & Webb, R. (1986). Making a difference: T eachers'sense of self-eﬂicacy and
student achievement.New York: Longman.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efﬁcacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Bulletin, 84, 191-215.

Bandura, A. (1996). Self-eﬂicacy in changing societies.New York: Cambridge.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-eﬂicacy: The exercise of control.New York: W. H. Freeman.

Benner, A. D. (2000). The cost of teacher turnover.Austin, TX: Texas Center for
Educational Research.

Billingsley, B. S. (1993). Teacher attrition and retention in special and general
eductation: A critical review of the literature. Journal of Special Education, 27,
137-174.

Bolich, A. M. (2001). Reduce your losses: Help new teachers become veteran teachers.
(pp. 3-8). Atlanta: Southern Regional Education Board (SREB).

Brock, B. G., M. (1998). Beginning teacher induction programs: The role of the
principal. The Clearing House, 71(3), 179-183.

Brown, K. L. (2002). Acclimating induction teachers to low-performing schools:
Administrators role. Education, 123(2), 422-426.

Bullough, R. V., Jr. (1989). F irst-year teacher: A case study.New York: Teachers
College Press.

Cawelti, G. (1999). Improving achievement: Finding research-based practices and
programs that boost student achievement. The American School Board Journal,
186(7), 34-37.

188

Chapman, D. W. G., Michael S. (1986). Teacher retention: A further examination.
Journal of Educational Research, 79, 273-279.

Chester, M. B., B. (1996). Efﬁcacy beliefs of newly hired teachers in urban schools.
American Educational Research Journal, 33(1), 233-257.

Chester, M. D. (1992). Alterable factors that meditate the induction-year experience of
teachers in urban schools, Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research

Association.SanFrancisco, CA.

Colley, A. C. (2002). What can principals do about new teacher attrition? Principal,
81(4), 22-24.

Corcoran, E. (1981). Transition shock: The beginning teacher's paradox. Journal of
Teacher Education, 32(3), 19-23.

Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design choosing among five
traditions.Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Dansereau, F ., Jr., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to
leadership within formal organizations - a longitudinal investigation of the role

making process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 46-78.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Keeping good teachers. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 6-
77.

Dienesch, R. L., R. (1986). Leader-member exchange model of leadership: A critique
and further development. The Academy of Management Review, I 1(3), 618-634.

Dyal, A. a. 8., Sharon. (2002). Effective strategies to develop successful beginning
teachers for let century schools. Catalyst for Change, 31(2), 5-8.

F eistritzer, E. (1997). Alternative teacher certiﬁcation: A state by state analysis (1997).
In W. D. N. C. f. E. Statistics (Ed.).

Fullan, M. (1991). The meaning of education.New York: Teachers College Press.
Fullan, M. (2002). The change leader. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 16-20.

Gerstner, C. D., David. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange theory:
Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(6), 827-844.

Glickman, C., S. Gordon, J. Ross-Gordon. (1995). Supervision of instruction (3rd ed.).
Needham, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

189

Goddard, R., Hoy, W., & Wolfolk-Hoy, A. (2000). Collective teacher efﬁcacy: Its
meaning, measure, and impact on student achievement. American Educational
Research Journal, 3 7(2), 479-507.

Graen, G. B., Liden, R.C., & Hoel, W. (1982). Role of leadership in the employee
withdrawl process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 868-872.

Graen, G. U.-B., M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership; development of
leader-member exchange (lmx) theory of leadership over 25 years. The
Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219-247.

Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1989). 4th generation evaluation.Newbury Park: Sage.

Guin, K. (2004). Chronic teacher turnover in urban elementary schools. Education Policy
Analysis Archives, 12(42), 1-30.

Gusky, T. P., P. (1994). Teacher efﬁcacy: A study of construct dimension. American
Educational Research Journal, 31(3), 627-643.

Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2000). Mentoring in the new millennium. Theory into
Practice, 39(1), 50-56.

Hogben, D., & Petty, M. F. (1979). Early changes in teacher attitude. Educational
Research, 21(3), 212-219.

Ingersoll, R. (1993). Loosely coupled organizations revisited. Research in the Sociology
ofOrganizations, 11, 81-112.

Ingersoll, R. (2001). Teacher turnover, teacher shortages, and the organization of schools.
In U. S. D. 0. Education (Ed.) (pp. 1-35): Center for the Study of Teaching and
Pohcy.

Ingersoll, R., & Smith, T. (2003). The wrong solution to the teacher shortage.
Educational Leadership, 60(8), 30-33.

Ingersoll, R., & Smith, T. (2004). What are the effects of induction and mentoring on

beginning teacher turnover? American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 681-
714.

Labor, U. S. D. o. (2006). Job openings and labor turnover. from
www.blsgov/newsrelease/pdf/jolts.pdf

 

Lambert, L. (1998). How to build leadership capacity. Educational Leadership, 55(7),
17-19.

190

Lambert, L. (2002). A framework for shared leadership. Educational Leadership, 59(8),
37-40.

Lambert, L. (2005). Leadership for lasting reform. Educational Leadership, 62(5), 62.

Lee, R. W. J. (1994). Perceptions of the beginning teacher, Annual Meeting of the
American Educational Research AssociationNew Orleans, LA.

Lunenburg, F ., & Ornstein, A. (2008). Educational administration: Concepts and
practices (5th ed.). Belmont: Thomson Higher Ed.

Marshall, C., Rossman, G. (1999). Designing qualitative research.Thousand Oaks: Sage.

MetLife. (2004-2005). The metlife survey of the american teacher: Transitions and the
role of supportive relationships. from http://www.metlife.com

 

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Mumane, R., Singer, J ., Willett, J ., Kemple, J ., & Olsen, R. (Eds). (1991). "420 will
teach? Policies that matter.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Onafowora, L. (2005). Teacher efﬁcacy issues in the practice of novice teachers.
Educational Research Quarterly, 28(4), 34-43.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods.Newbury Park, CA:
Sage Publications.

Rosenholtz, S. (1989). T eachers' workplace: The social organization of schools.New
York: Longrnan.

Schlecty, P., & Vance, V. (1981). Do academically able teachers leave education? The
north carolina case. Phi Delta Kappan, 63, 105-112.

Schriesheim, G, Castro, 8., & Cogliser, C. (1999). Leader-member exchange (lmx)
research: A comprehensive review of theory, measurement, and data-analytic
practices. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(1), 63-113.

Sergiovanni, T. J. (1993). Organizations or communities? Changing the metaphor
changes the theory. Access eric: F ulltext (150 Speeches/Meeting Papers; 120
Opinion Papers). Texas.

Sergiovanni, T. J. (1995). The principalship (3rd ed.). Needham, MA: Allyn and Beacon.

Sergiovanni, T. J. (1999). Refocusing leadership to build community. High School
Magazine, 7(1), 10-15.

191

 

Sergiovanni, T. J. (2005). The virtues of leadership access eric: Fulltext. The Educational
Forum, 69(2), 112-123.

Shea, M. A. (1993). Handbookfor beginning teachers.Springﬁeld, IL: Charles C.
Thomas.

Smith, T., & Ingersoll, R. (2004). What are the effects of induction and mentoring on
beginning teacher turnover? American Educational Research Journal, 41 (3 ), 681-
714.

Sparrowe, R., Liden, R. (1997). Process and structure in leader-member exchange theory.
The Academy of Management Review, 22(2), 522-552.

Stronge, J. H. T., PD. (2000). Teacher evaluation and student achievement.Washington,
DC: National Education Association.

 

Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efﬁcacy: Capturing an elusive
construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 1 7, 783-805.

Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A. & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efﬁcacy: Its
meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68, 202-248.

Tschannen-Moran, M. W. H., A. (2002). The inﬂuence of resources and support on
teachers' efﬁcacy beliefs, The Annual Meeting of the American Educational
Research Association.New Orleans, LA.

Vecchio, R. P. (1985). Predicting employee turnover from leader-member exchange: A
failure to replicate. The Academy of Management Journal, 28(2), 478-485.

Veenman, S. (1984). Perceived problems of beginning teachers. Review of Educational
Research, 54, 143-178.

Wilhelm, C., Herd, A., Steiner, D. (1993). Attributional conﬂict between managers and
subordinates: An investigation of leader-member exchange theory. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 14(6), 531-544.

Wong, H. K. (2004). Induction programs that keep new teachers teaching and improving.
NASSP Bulletin, 88, 41-58.

Woolfolk, A. S., R. (2005). Changes in teacher efﬁcacy during the early years of
teaching: A comparison of four measures. Teaching and Teacher Education,
21(4), 343-356.

Zalesny, M. D., & Graen, G. B. (1987). Exchange theory in leadership research. In G. R.

A. Kieser, & R. Wanderer (Ed.), Handbook of leadership (pp. 714-727). Stuttgart,
Germany: E.D. Paeschel, Verlag.

192

   

llllllllllllllll[lllllllllllltllllHillllllllllllllll
3 1293 02956 3180