Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Lentzeallee 94, 14195 Berlin, Germany
Humboldt University Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, Germany
Goethe University Frankfurt, Senckenberganlage 15, 60325 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
d
Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Olshausenstrae 62, 24118 Kiel, Germany
e
Free University Berlin, Habelschwerdter Allee 45, 14195 Berlin, Germany
b
c
h i g h l i g h t s
Mentoring quality can be described as either constructivist or transmissive.
Constructs are reliably measured in a study with more than 700 beginning teachers.
Constructivist mentoring improves teacher efcacy, enthusiasm and job satisfaction.
Constructivist mentoring also reduces emotional exhaustion.
Transmissive mentoring barely affects the professional development of teachers in these respects.
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 12 April 2012
Received in revised form
26 April 2013
Accepted 17 July 2013
This study examines the extent to which the quality of mentoring and its frequency during the rst years
of teaching inuence teachers professional competence and well-being. Analyses are based on a sample
of more than 700 German beginning mathematics teachers who participated in a pre-test/post-test study
over the course of one year. Findings indicate that it is the quality of mentoring rather than its frequency
that explains a successful career start. In particular, mentoring that follows constructivist rather than
transmissive principles of learning fosters the growth of teacher efcacy, teaching enthusiasm, and job
satisfaction and reduces emotional exhaustion.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Mentor
Cooperating teacher
Mentor support
Beginning teacher induction
Induction support
Professional development
1. Introduction
The rst years of teaching are frequently described as an especially stressful period in the socialization of beginning teachers
(Fantilli & McDougall, 2009; Gold, 1996; Veenman, 1984). Relative
to their more experienced colleagues, beginning teachers tend to
leave the profession at a higher rate (Ingersoll, 2001; KuklaAcevedo, 2009), report lower teacher efcacy (Wolters &
* Corresponding author. Humboldt University Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099
Berlin, Germany. Tel.: 49 30 2093 46522.
E-mail address: dirk.richter@iqb.hu-berlin.de (D. Richter).
0742-051X/$ e see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.07.012
167
teachers competence but also the quality of instruction and student learning. Indeed, beginning teachers report that mentoring
improves their instructional skills (Borko & Mayeld, 1995; FeimanNemser & Buchmann, 1987; Fletcher & Barrett, 2004). However,
studies using observer ratings of instructional quality have yielded
mixed results. Stanulis and Floden (2009) compared the instructional quality of beginning teachers who received intensive mentoring with that of a comparison group who did not. Their ndings
showed that mentored teachers outperformed non-mentored
teachers in the areas of classroom atmosphere, instruction, and
student engagement. In contrast, Glazerman et al. (2008) compared
the effectiveness of comprehensive induction programs (developed
by the Educational Testing Service and the New Teacher Center at
the University of California, Santa Cruz) with that of regular district
induction. This study showed that beginning teachers in the
comprehensive programs received more mentoring and participated more frequently in professional development activities, but
that this was not reected in either improved instruction or
increased student-test scores. In conclusion, the subjective
perception of beginning teachers is that mentoring develops their
skills. However, there is no clear evidence that mentoring necessarily leads to observable improvements in the quality of
instruction.
Psychological support includes building condence, encouraging
self-esteem, listening, and enhancing self-reliance (Gold, 1996).
This type of support is especially relevant at the start of the rst
year of teaching, as beginning teachers adjust to their new work
environment. Psychological support is thought to foster individual
well-being in terms of reduced stress levels and enhanced job
satisfaction. Strong psychological support may also reduce attrition.
A number of studies describing the interactions between mentor
and beginning teachers has shown that beginning teachers receive
and value psychological support (Ballantyne, Hansford, & Packer,
1995; Hall, Draper, Smith, & Bullough, 2008; Odell & Ferraro,
1992), but there has been little empirical investigation of its effects on their development. One study investigated the antecedents
of beginning teachers well-being and identied mentor support as
an important predictor (Kessels et al., 2008). Other studies have
investigated the relevance of mentor support for teacher attrition,
but ndings are inconclusive. Results presented by Odell and
Ferraro (1992) and Smith and Ingersoll (2004) indicate that mentoring has the potential to reduce beginning teacher attrition. In
contrast, Glazerman et al. (2008) found no difference in the attrition rates of beginning teachers in comprehensive induction programs and those receiving regular district induction. Organizational
psychologists have examined the effects of mentoring in other
professional contexts (Noe, Greenberger, & Wang, 2002; Wanberg,
Welsh, & Hezlett, 2003). Although the goals of mentoring in the
company context differ, employees who participated in a mentoring program showed greater job satisfaction (Seibert, 1999). This
suggests that mentoring may facilitate individuals well-being,
regardless of the organizational context. However, there is no
clear evidence that mentoring affects beginning teachers development longitudinally.
Role modeling is provided when beginning teachers observe
their mentors teaching. Although beginning teachers were
exposed to thousands of hours of teaching during their own time at
school, they can now use their professional knowledge to reect on
their observations. This gives them the opportunity to analyze
teaching from an external perspective, which can provide new
insightsdfor example, into how to organize instruction and
interact with students. Classroom observation can also serve as a
basis for further discussion with the mentor. By providing a role
model for beginning teachers, the latter can be socialized into the
teaching community and learn how to act as professional.
168
169
170
Table 1
Factor loadings from the exploratory and conrmatory factor analysis (two-factor
model).
Item Item Wording
1
2
3
4
5
6
Factor 1
Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 2
My mentor.
l (SE)
helps me to improve
independently.
supports me in trying out
different teaching methods.
gives me the opportunity
to draw my own conclusions.
has ideas that prompt
self-reection.
tells me what I need to
improve.
has specic ideas about
how I should
teach the lesson content.
tells me what I have to
do differently
in lessons.
.85* (.03)
.82* (.03)
.66* (.04)
.70* (.04)
.15* (.06)
.83* (.04) e
.81* (.04)
.11 (.06)
.70* (.04) e
.73* (.04)
.76* (.04) e
.76* (.04)
.00 (<.01)
1
Comparisons between individuals participating only at the rst or both measurement points, respectively, indicated no signicant differences with respect to
gender and socio-economic status but individuals participating at both assessments
were approximately 2 years younger. Furthermore, we found no statistically signicant differences between both groups for the outcome variables teacher efcacy,
teacher enthusiasm, transmissive and constructivist beliefs and emotional
exhaustion. Only teachers job satisfaction was d .20 higher for those individuals
who participated at both measurement occasions.
171
172
Table 2
Descriptive statistics of the independent and dependent manifest variables.
Outcome
Teacher efcacy
Teaching enthusiasm
Transmissive beliefs
Constructivist beliefs
Emotional exhaustion
Job satisfaction
Transmission-oriented
mentoring
Constructivist-oriented
mentoring
Frequency of interaction
Cohort
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
404
132
405
125
407
127
406
127
409
127
409
127
405
127
407
127
407
127
Time 1
Time 2
M1
SD1
M2
SD2
3.09
3.11
3.55
3.55
2.36
2.34
3.40
3.45
2.04
2.31
3.40
3.35
e
e
e
e
e
e
.37
.32
.44
.39
.46
.47
.37
.39
.61
.64
.50
.54
e
e
e
e
e
e
3.04
3.17
3.53
3.60
2.42
2.37
3.34
3.42
2.20
2.06
3.30
3.44
3.33
3.44
4.53
4.75
.56
.72
.36
.38
.47
.35
.49
.53
.41
.41
.74
.63
.64
.48
1.31
1.27
1.18
1.20
.50
.45
2.59
1.97
1.02
1.65
2.75
.86
3.50
.93
4.82
4.98
4.13
2.60
e
e
e
e
e
e
.01
.05
.31
.10
.01
.39
.00
.36
.00
.00
.00
.01
e
e
e
e
e
e
3. Results
3.1. Descriptive statistics
Table 2 provides the means and standard deviations of the
manifest variables for each cohort at both measurement points. The
results show statistically signicant change in different variables
Fig. 1. Structural equation model investigating the impact of constructivist- and transmission-oriented mentoring.
173
The regression coefcients of the model predicting the development of teacher efcacy show that the baseline measure strongly
predicted teacher efcacy at the second measurement point
(b1 .64, p < .05), indicating high stability of the construct between
the two measurement occasions. Moreover, beginning teachers
whose mentors exhibited a constructivist-oriented mentoring style
showed a signicant increase in teacher efcacy over the year
(b3 .14, p < .05). No signicant changes in teacher efcacy were
observed for beginning teachers who experienced a transmissionoriented mentoring style or interacted frequently with their
mentor teacher. The model explained a total of 45% of the variance
and exhibited reasonable model t (RMSEA .04). Similarly,
teachers enthusiasm for teaching was strongly predicted by their
baseline enthusiasm (b1 .63, p < .05) and a constructivistoriented mentoring style (b3 .08, p < .05). The model explained
43% of the variance in teacher enthusiasm and it provided a good t
to the data (RMSEA .04).
The models investigating the development of beginning teachers beliefs showed strong stability between the rst and second
measurement point (transmissive beliefs: b1 .70, p < .05;
constructivist beliefs: b1 .63, p < .05). However, whereas a
transmissive style of mentoring positively predicted the development of transmissive beliefs (b2 .09, p < .05), a constructivist style
of mentoring was not signicantly associated with beginning
teachers constructivist beliefs. Only frequent interactions with the
mentor negatively predicted constructivist beliefs (b4 .10,
p < .05) when all other variables in the model were controlled. This
nding indicates that beginning teachers who develop constructivist beliefs interact less frequently with their mentor teacher. The
model explained 53% of the variance in transmissive beliefs and
42% of the variance in constructivist beliefs. The goodness-of-t
indices indicated acceptable model t (transmissive beliefs:
RMSEA .05; constructivist beliefs: RMSEA .05).
The models predicting beginning teachers well-being also
showed high stability coefcients (emotional exhaustion:
b1 .56, p < .05; job satisfaction: b1 .65, p < .05). When
baseline levels were controlled, beginning teachers who experienced constructivist-oriented mentoring showed a statistically
signicant decline in emotional exhaustion (b3 .20, p < .05)
and a statistically signicant increase in job satisfaction (b3 .13,
p < .05). This is clear evidence that constructivist-oriented
mentoring supports beginning teachers well-being. The model
explained 40% of the variance in emotional exhaustion and 48%
of the variance in job satisfaction. Both models showed acceptable model t (emotional exhaustion: RMSEA .05; job satisfaction: RMSEA .06).
In addition to investigating the main effects of quality and frequency of mentoring, we were interested in testing whether
beginning teachers who experience a particular mentoring
approach benet from more interaction with their mentor. In other
Table 3
Results of structural equation models predicting beginning teachers outcomes at the second measurement point.
Predictors
Baseline measurea
Transmission-oriented mentoring
Constructivist-oriented mentoring
Frequency of interaction
Variance explained
R2
Model t
RMSEA
90% Conf. interval
Teacher efcacy
Teaching enthusiasm
Transmissive beliefs
Constructivist beliefs
Emotional exhaustion
Job satisfaction
.63*
.05
.08*
.00
.70*
.09*
.02
.04
.63*
.03
.08
.10*
.56*
.09
.20*
.01
.65*
.05
.13*
.04
.45
.43
.53
.42
.40
.48
.04
.036, .044
.04
.035, .047
.05
.041, .049
.05
.041, .049
.05
.044, .058
.06
.053, .061
b1
.64*
b2
.05
b3
.14*
b4 .04
174
workshops, teaching practice or feedback from colleagues. Therefore, future studies should take into account the complex system of
learning opportunities and analyze their unique effects. Sixth, we
have limited our study to examining the type of mentorementee
interaction. We did not, however, assess the content of their discussions and the initial skills of beginning teachers. Therefore,
future research needs to take a closer look at the topics of the
mentorementee-dialogs and mentees individual prerequisites
that may affect the support that mentors provide. Finally,
constructivist and transmissive mentoring is closely related to the
instructional support of mentoring rather than to the emotional
support and role modeling. Therefore, this study cannot provide
information as to whether mentors actually provided support with
respect to the other two goals of mentoring.
175
The results of this study inform the discussion about the effectiveness of teacher mentoring. The study provided the opportunity
Variables
1
.04
.08
.01
.04
.03
.23
.26
L.16
.08
.07
.13
.04
.09
.02
1
.17
.24
.20
.21
L.20
L.15
.18
.16
L.12
L.26
.20
.25
.16
10
11
12
13
14
15
1
L.46
L.69
L.07
1
.70
.03
1
.05
1
.74
.58
.45
.10
L.13
.19
.17
L.45
L.37
.50
.39
.01
1
.49
.58
.10
L.19
.20
.30
L.37
L.51
.37
.55
.03
1
.66
L.16
L.11
.20
.19
L.53
L.41
.69
.55
.03
1
L.19
L.20
.24
.32
L.36
L.43
.49
.67
.03
1
.77
L.58
L.42
.17
.02
L.11
.08
.04
1
L.48
L.54
.11
.06
.09
.08
.04
1
.68
.09
.06
.12
.14
.02
1
L.13
.09
.15
.18
.01
1
.67
L.63
L.45
.01
References
Anderson, R. N., Greene, M. L., & Loewen, P. S. (1988). Relationships among teachers
and students thinking skills, sense of efcacy, and student achievement. Alberta
Journal of Educational Research, 34(2), 148e165.
Ashton, P. T., & Webb, R. B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers sense of efcacy and
student achievement. New York, NY: Longman.
Ballantyne, R., Hansford, B., & Packer, J. (1995). Mentoring beginning teachers: a
qualitative analysis of process and outcomes. Educational Review, 47(3), 297e
307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0013191950470306.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Barnett, B., Hopkins-Thompson, P., & Hoke, M. (2002). Assessing and supporting new
teachers. Lessons from the southeast. Chapel Hill, NC: The Southeast Center for
Teaching Quality.
Baumert, J., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Dubberke, T., Jordan, A., Klusmann, U., et al.
(2008). Professionswissen von Lehrkrften, kognitiv aktivierender Mathematikunterricht und die Entwicklung von mathematischer Kompetenz (COACTIV):
Dokumentation der Erhebungsinstrumente [Professional competence of
teachers, cognitively activating instruction, and development of students'
mathematical literacy (COACTIV): scale documentation]. Materialien aus der
Bildungsforschung, 83. Berlin: Max Planck Institute for Human Development.
Baumert, J., & Kunter, M. (2006). Stichwort: Professionelle Kompetenz von Lehrkrften [Teachers professional competence]. Zeitschrift fr Erziehungswissenschaft, 9(4), 469e520. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11618-006-0165-2.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY:
Wiley.
Borko, H., & Mayeld, V. (1995). The roles of the cooperating teacher and university
supervisor in learning to teach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(5), 501e518.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(95)00008-8.
Bradbury, L. U., & Koballa, T. R., Jr. (2008). Borders to cross: identifying sources of
tension in mentoreintern relationships. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(8),
2132e2145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.03.002.
Brophy, J., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In
M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.). (pp. 328e375)
New York, NY: Macmillan.
176
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of
learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32e42.
Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Borgogni, L., & Steca, P. (2003). Efcacy beliefs as
determinants of teachers job satisfaction. Journal of Educational Psychology,
95(4), 821e832. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.821.
Carter, M., & Francis, R. (2001). Mentoring and beginning teachers workplace
learning. Asia-pacic Journal of Teacher Education, 29(3), 249e262. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1080/13598660120091856.
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-t indexes for
testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233e255.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Paris, C. L. (1995). Mentor and mentoring: did Homer have it
right. In J. Smyth (Ed.), Critical discourses on teacher development (pp. 181e202).
London, UK: Cassell.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers professional development: toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational
Researcher, 38(3), 181e199.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Collier Books.
Dubberke, T., Kunter, M., McElvany, N., Brunner, M., & Baumert, J. (2008). Lerntheoretische berzeugungen von Mathematiklehrkrften: Einsse auf die
Unterrichtsgestaltung und den Lernerfolg von Schlerinnen und Schlern
[[Mathematics teachers beliefs and their impact on instructional quality and
student achievement]]. Zeitschrift fr Pdagogische Psychologie, 22(3e4), 193e
206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652.22.34.193.
Dunkin, M. J., & Biddle, B. J. (1974). The study of teaching. New York, NY: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.
Edwards, A. (1998). Mentoring student teachers in primary schools: assisting student teachers to become learners. European Journal of Teacher Education, 21(1),
47e62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0261976980210106.
Enzmann, D., & Kleiber, D. (1989). Helfer-Leiden: Stress und Burnout in psychosozialen
Berufen. Heidelberg: Asanger.
Fantilli, R. D., & McDougall, D. E. (2009). A study of novice teachers: challenges and
supports in the rst years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(6), 814e825.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.02.021.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (1998). Teachers as teacher educators. European Journal of
Teacher Education, 21(1), 63e74.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). Helping novices learn to teach: lessons from an exemplary support teacher. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(1), 17e30. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022487101052001003.
Feiman-Nemser, S., & Buchmann, M. (1987). When is student teaching teacher
education? Teaching and Teacher Education, 3(4), 255e273. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/0742-051X(87)90019-9.
Fletcher, S. H., & Barrett, A. (2004). Developing effective beginning teachers through
mentor-based induction. Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 12(3),
321e333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/030910042000275936.
Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., Ldtke, O., Pekrun, R., & Sutton, R. E. (2009). Emotional
transmission in the classroom: exploring the relationship between teacher and
student enjoyment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 705e716. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0014695.
Glazerman, S., Doln, M., Bleeker, M., Johnson, A., Isenberg, E., Lugo-Gil, J., et al.
(2008). Impacts of comprehensive teacher induction: Results from the rst year of a
randomized controlled study (NCEE 2009-4034). Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/
ncee/pdf/20094035.pdf.
Gold, Y. (1996). Beginning teacher support: attrition, mentoring, and induction. In
J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 548e594). New
York, NY: Macmillan.
Guglielmi, R. S., & Tatrow, K. (1998). Occupational stress, burnout, and health in
teachers: a methodological and theoretical analysis. Review of Educational
Research, 68(1), 61e99.
Guo, Y., Connor, C. M., Yang, Y., Roehrig, A. D., & Morrison, F. J. (2012). The effects of
teacher qualication, teacher self-efcacy, and classroom practices on fth
graders literacy outcomes. Elementary School Journal, 113(1), 3e24. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1086/665816.
Hackman, J., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159e170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
h0076546.
Hall, K. M., Draper, R. J., Smith, L. K., & Bullough, R. V., Jr. (2008). More than a place to
teach: exploring the perceptions of the roles and responsibilities of mentor
teachers. Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 16(3), 328e345.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13611260802231708.
Haser, C., & Star, J. R. (2009). Change in beliefs after rst-year of teaching: the
case of Turkish national curriculum context. International Journal of
Educational Development, 29(3), 293e302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedud
ev.2008.08.007.
Hawkey, K. (1997). Roles, responsibilities, and relationships in mentoring: a literature review and agenda for research. Journal of Teacher Education, 48(5), 325e
335. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022487197048005002.
Hennissen, P., Crasborn, F., Brouwer, N., Korthagen, F., & Bergen, T. (2008). Mapping
mentor teachers roles in mentoring dialogues. Educational Research Review,
3(2), 168e186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2008.01.001.
Hmelo-Silver, C., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement
in problem-based and inquiry learning: a response to Kirschner, Sweller, and
Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99e107.
Hobson, A. J., Ashby, P., Malderez, A., & Tomlinson, P. D. (2009). Mentoring beginning teachers: what we know and what we dont. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 207e216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.09.001.
Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk, A. E. (1990). Socialization of student-teachers. American
Educational Research Journal, 27(2), 279e300. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/
00028312027002279.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for t indexes in covariance structure
analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation
Modeling, 6(1), 1e55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.
Hudson, P. (2004). Specic mentoring: a theory and model for developing primary
science teaching practices. European Journal of Teacher Education, 27(2), 139e
146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0261976042000223015.
Hudson, P. (2013). Mentoring as professional development: growth for both
mentor and mentee. Professional Development in Education.
Huling-Austin, L. (1990). Teacher induction programs and internships. In
W. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 535e548).
Reston, VA: Association of Teacher Educators.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: an organizational
analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499e534. http://
dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312038003499.
Ingersoll, R. M., & Kralik, J. M. (2004). The impact of mentoring on teacher retention:
What the research says. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
Ingersoll, R. M., & Strong, M. (2011). The impact of induction and mentoring programs for beginning teachers: a critical review of the research. Review of
Educational Research, 81(2), 201e233.
Jones, M. (2000). Becoming a secondary teacher in Germany: a trainee perspective
on recent developments in initial teacher training in Germany. European Journal
of Teacher Education, 23(1), 65e76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/026197600411634.
Jreskog, K. G. (1979). Statistical estimation of structural models in longitudinaldevelopmental investigations. In J. R. Nesselroade, & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), Longitudinal research in the study of behavior and development (pp. 303e351). New
York, NY: Academic Press.
Kaplan, D. (2000). Structural equation modeling: Foundations and extensions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kessels, C., Beijaard, D., Veen, K. v.,& Verloop, N. (April 2008). The importance of
induction programs for the well-being of beginning teachers. In Paper presented
at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New
York, NY.
Klusmann, U., Kunter, M., Trautwein, U., Ldtke, O., & Baumert, J. (2008). Teachers
occupational well-being and quality of instruction: the important role of selfregulatory patterns. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 702e715. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.702.
Klusmann, U., Kunter, M., Voss, T., & Baumert, J. (2012). Emotional exhaustion and
job satisfaction of beginning teachers: the role of personality, educational
experience and professional competence [[Beruiche Beanspruchung angehender Lehrkrfte: Die Effekte von Persnlichkeit, pdagogischer Vorerfahrung
und professioneller Kompetenz]]. Zeitschrift fr Pdagogische Psychologie, 26,
275e290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652/a000078.
Kukla-Acevedo, S. (2009). Leavers, movers, and stayers: the role of workplace
conditions in teacher mobility decisions. Journal of Educational Research, 102(6),
443e452. http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOER.102.6.443-452.
Kunter, M., Baumert, J., Blum, W., Klusmann, U., Krauss, S., & Neubrand, M. (2013).
Cognitive activation in the mathematics classroom and professional competence of
teachers. Results from the COACTIV project. New York, NY: Springer.
Kunter, M., Frenzel, A., Nagy, G., Baumert, J., & Pekrun, R. (2011). Teacher enthusiasm: dimensionality and context specicity. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 289e301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.07.001.
Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Dubberke, T., Baumert, J., Blum, W., Brunner, M., et al.
(2007). Linking aspects of teacher competence to their instruction: results from
the COACTIV project. In M. Prenzel (Ed.), Studies on the educational quality of
schools. The nal report of the DFG priority programme (pp. S. 39eS. 59).
Mnster: Waxmann.
Kunter, M., Tsai, Y. M., Klusmann, U., Brunner, M., Krauss, S., & Baumert, J. (2008).
Students and mathematics teachers perceptions of teacher enthusiasm and
instruction. Learning and Instruction, 18(5), 468e482. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.learninstruc.2008.06.008.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lenhard, H. (2004). Zweite Phase an Studienseminaren und Schulen [[The second
phase of teacher education in schools and teacher training institutions]]. In
S. Blmeke, P. Reinhold, G. Tulodziecki, & J. Wildt (Eds.), Handbuch Lehrerbildung
(pp. 275e290). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
Lindgren, U. (2005). Experiences of beginning teachers in a school-based mentoring
program in Sweden. Educational Studies, 31(3), 251e263. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1080/03055690500236290.
LoCasale-Crouch, J., Davis, E., Wiens, P., & Pianta, R. (2012). The role of the mentor in
supporting new teachers: associations with self-efcacy, reection, and quality.
Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 20(3), 303e323. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2012.701959.
Locke, E. A. (1969). What is job satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance, 4(4), 309e336. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(69)90013-0.
Luft, J. A., & Cox, W. E. (2001). Investing in our future: a survey of support offered to
beginning secondary science and mathematics teachers. Science Educator,10(1),1e9.
Marable, M. A., & Raimondi, S. L. (2007). Teachers perceptions of what was most (and
least) supportive during their rst year of teaching. Mentoring and Tutoring:
177