University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Collaborative team approach to mentoring beginning teachers: a case study of a collaborative elementary school

(USC Thesis Other)

Collaborative team approach to mentoring beginning teachers: a case study of a collaborative elementary school

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content
COLLABORATIVE TEAM APPROACH TO MENTORING BEGINNING TEACHERS:
A CASE STUDY OF A COLLABORATIVE
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

by

Elda Pech

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

December 2009

Copyright 2009 Elda Pech

ii
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated in memory of my mother, Buenaventura Pech de
Pech. Were it not for her support, love, and constant encouragement the completion
of this dissertation would not have been possible. I am truly grateful to my mother
for teaching me to value education. Throughout this process, she has been my
inspiration and source of strength. Because of your example, each day I try to be a
better person so that you can always be proud of me.
I would also like to dedicate this dissertation to my sister Ruth, and brother
Alex. Thank you for listening to me and for offering words of encouragement as I
worked on this dissertation! Juan, just want you to know that I am thankful for all of
your encouragement, love, and support throughout this long journey. You were there
to pick me up each time I was ready to give up. For that and many other reasons, I
thank you. Above all, I thank my little bundle of joy that was part of me towards the
end of this dissertation process.

iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I thank my committee chair, Dr. Margo Pensavalle, for her insight, guidance,
and feedback. I am greatly appreciative to my committee members, Dr. Sandra
Kaplan and Dr. Gisele Ragusa their experience and knowledge helped me complete
this dissertation.
A special thank you to all LAUSD administrators, support personnel, veteran
teachers, and beginning teachers who participated in this dissertation, their
experiences, and feedback were invaluable.
Thank you to Dr. Jo-Ann Yun, a friend that I meet in this dissertation process.
Thank you for sharing this journey with me and for constantly offering words of
encouragement. To Marcela, a long time friend, I want you to know how much I
appreciate your friendship and support. I am truly grateful for having such wonderful
friends.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii
LIST OF TABLES v
ABSTRACT vi
CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY 1
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 15
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 67
CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS 90
CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS 168
REFERENCES 185
APPENDICES 195
APPENDIX A: BEGINNING TEACHER SURVEY 195
PROTOCOL

APPENDIX B: ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF, 197
INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT PERSONNEL, AND
VETERAN TEACHER INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

APPENDIX C: BEGINNING TEACHER INTERVIEW 200
PROTOCOL

APPENDIX D: OBSERVATION FOR GRADE LEVEL 203
MEETINGS (GLMs) PROTOCOL

v
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Overview of Methodology 70
Table 2: Dynasty Elementary School: Student Information 75
Table 3: Dynasty Elementary School: Faculty and Staff Information 77
Table 4: Research Framework for Research Question One 79
Table 5: Research Framework for Research Question Two 81
Table 6: Grant Chart: Illustrating Schedule for Data Collection 88
Table 7: Summary of Methodology 90
Table 8: Frequency of Participation in GLM Discussion 123
Table 9: Grade Level Meetings. 124

vi
ABSTRACT
The educational problem that schools face is the loss of new teachers that
leave the field of education with in the first five years of teaching (Hope, 1999;
Darling-Hammond, 2003). Teachers have cited many reasons for leaving the
classroom such as lack of administrative support, lack of classroom management
strategies, difficulties differentiating the curriculum, non-supportive school
environment, time management issues and many more. The loss of teachers due to
attrition disrupts the school environment. As a possible solution, many beginning
teachers receive BTSA mentors. The problem is that many mentor teachers hold
several key leadership positions within the school setting. Mentor teachers are left
with little time to provide quality one-to-one support beginning teachers really need.
The purpose of this qualitative case study was to develop a deeper
understanding of how school site personnel might collaborate to promote a school
culture that is collectively responsible to meet the needs of beginning teachers. The
intent of this study was to identify an effective school-site paradigm that will support
and retain teachers while simultaneously contributing to their professional growth and
their classroom students learning. The selected unit of study was an urban California
Distinguished elementary school. The school was selected due in part to the
availability of key stakeholders such as administrators, instructional support
personnel, veteran and beginning teachers. In addition 80 beginning teachers first
thru third year teachers in a traditional one-to-one mentoring approach participated.
The data revealed that the following school culture characteristics contribute

vii
to an effective team approach that best supports beginning teacher development:
supportive and shared leadership; shared values and vision; collective learning and
application of learning; supportive conditions; and shared personal practices. The
data suggestions that future research studies need to focus on multiple and
longitudinal case studies in collaborative school environments in order to make
further generalizations and enable schools to benchmark their successes. The
research implications for this study point to providing school leadership teams with
current research on developing positive school cultures, collaborative practices,
effective leadership styles, and educational change. School district personnel must
provide professional development to these key individuals in order to meet the needs
of beginning teachers.

1
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Introduction
Many new teachers leave the educational profession within the first five years of
teaching (Hope, 1999; Darling-Hammond, 2003). The loss of teachers due to attrition
destabilizes the “positive sense of community among families, teachers, and students
that has long been held by education researchers to be one of the most important
indicators and aspects of successful schools” (Ingersoll, 2001, p. 526). The impact of
this high attrition rate affects the entire educational system especially in low-income
communities (i.e., Title I Schools). The rate of attrition is 50 percent when compared
to affluent community schools (Darling- Hammond et. al, 2001). Trends in attrition
indicate that, “new teachers in urban districts exit or transfer at higher rates than their
suburban counterparts” (Darling-Hammond et. al, 2001, p. 8).
Attrition rates drain both human and financial resources (Vail, 2005). School
districts must set aside considerable budget allowances to recruit, hire, and support
highly qualified teachers. The cost of attrition is as high as “$329 million a year, or at
least $8,000 per teacher who leaves the first few years of teaching” (Darling-
Hammond, 2003, p. 8). This enormous monetary investment could be wisely
invested elsewhere within our public school system.
Reasons for leaving the classroom
There is a plethora of reasons that contribute to teachers leaving the classroom.
Teachers leaving the teaching profession have cited the following reasons for their
flight: non-supportive school environments (Eggen, 2002; Quinn, & Andrews, 2004),

2
lack of administrative support (Hope, 1999; Quinn, & Andrews, 2004), difficulties in
differentiating the curriculum, time management issues, lack of classroom
management strategies, and inability to fully communicate with parents and other
adults (Darling-Hammond et. al., 2001; Darling-Hammond, 2003; Meister et. al.,
2003; Quinn, & Andrews, 2004; Renard, 2003; Robertson et. al., 2006).
A non-supportive environment is one in which the culture of the school is not only
unproductive but also toxic (Peterson & Deal, 1998). Peterson and Deal (1998)
describe toxic schools as “places where negativity dominates conversations,
interactions, and planning; where the only stories recounted are of failure, the only
heroes are antiheroes” (p. 28). These types of environments leave little room for
collaborative and collegial practices to emerge. As a result, beginning teachers do not
feel part of the decision-making process (Ingersoll & Smith, 2003) and feel
unsupported as they struggle through their first year teaching.
In addition, a non-supportive environment includes lack of administrative support
(Hope, 1999; Ingersoll, 2001; Ingersoll & Smith, 2003; Quinn, & Andrews, 2004).
The perception is that site administrators such as school principals and assistant
principals are not providing or delegating the necessary support to assist beginning
teachers. An example is the unequal assignments beginning teachers receive. First
year teachers tend to be disproportionably placed in multi-grade classrooms, out-of-
field teaching assignments, or classrooms containing a disproportionate number of
struggling students that can be overwhelming (Ganser, 1999; Johnson, 2006; Vail,
2005). Teachers have also indicated that their school administrators did not provide

3
them with information on school or district policies and procedures (Quinn, &
Andrews, 2004).
Curricular issues are also a concern to beginning teachers especially with a
diverse student body. It is not unusual to find a diversified student population in a
California public school; more than 25 percent live below the poverty line, 20 percent
are English language learners (Ells), half of the student population is either a minority
or immigrant, and 10 percent have learning disabilities (Darling-Hammond et. al.,
2001). A diverse learner population along with an era of high stakes testing has made
it necessary to differentiate the instruction in order to meet the needs of all students.
Differentiated instruction encompasses a curriculum that utilizes instructional
strategies that “address student strengths, interests, skills, and readiness in flexible
learning environments” (Gartin, Murdick, Imbeau, & Perner, 2002, p. 8).
Differentiating the instruction is represented thru flexible student grouping, learning
centers, adjusting questions, thematic units, independent studies, and tiered
assignments (Lewis, & Batts, 2005). Some beginning teachers need guidance in “…
deciding what skills and knowledge to cover, designing lessons and implementing
them effectively, accurately assessing student understanding, and adjusting to student
needs” (Kauffman, Johnson, Kardos, Liu, & Peske, 2002, p. 274). Beginning
teachers need support in order to understand and apply the guiding principals of
differentiated instruction that include; “ongoing assessments, multiple teaching
strategies, varying student grouping, focusing on student strengths, recognizing
student learning modalities, considering student interests, and clearly articulating

4
work criteria and student expectations” (Lewis, & Batts, 2005, p. 31). Differentiating
learning experiences with a focus on student needs requires time and support.
Teachers invest a tremendous amount of work and personal time on curricular and
instructional issues.
As it relates to time management issues, managing the day-to-day tasks, activities,
and duties of a beginning teacher from the start of the school day to the dismissal bell
at the end of the school day can be overwhelming. The tremendous amount of
workload, mandatory meetings to attend, and extracurricular activities has left little
time for teachers to reflect on their teaching (Meister et. al., 2003). Furthermore, the
additional time allocated to classroom responsibilities infringes on a teacher’s
personal time. Frequently, beginning teachers stay long past their workday in order
to correct student work, complete required paperwork, work on classroom
environment, and prepare for the next day (Kauffman, et. al., 2002).
Lack of classroom management strategies is conversely cited by beginning
teachers as a reason for leaving the classroom (Cookson, 2007; Meister et. al., 2003;
Quinn, & Andrews, 2004). “Classroom management includes not only the physical
arrangements of the classroom, but the human qualities of a true learning community”
(Cookson, 2007, p.14). Challenging students are often given to beginning teachers.
Beginning teachers have indicated their frustration in dealing with student discipline
issues that were not present in the confines of a teacher preparation classroom
(Meister et. al., 2003). As student teachers, many were placed in ideal classroom

5
situations where there were little or no classroom management issues. There was an
apparent disconnect from the field experience to the actual practice.
Lack of communication skills is another reason teachers depart from the classroom
setting. Beginning teachers have indicated the lack of training in developing
communicative skills necessary for working with parents and other adults (i.e., school
faculty, administrators, and staff) especially in a diverse urban setting. Many novice
teachers have commented that they “did not feel they had acquired the
communication skills to deal with parents and to negotiate the different
communication styles and personalities of all the other adults in the school” (Meister
et. al., 2003, p. 88). Lack of well-developed communicative skills can prevent
beginning teachers from accessing school resources, which can in turn limit their
professional growth and increase feelings of isolation.
Statement of the Problem
Every year beginning teachers enter the teaching work force from a wide range of
educational experiences ranging from alternative education programs to traditional
teacher preparation programs. Despite the differences in teacher preparation
programs, all teachers are required to be “highly qualified” (Ed.gov, U.S. Department
of Education, 2002). No Child Left Behind Act (2002), a federal mandate, sets
explicit nation-wide teacher requirements. This federal law identifies “highly
qualified” teachers as possessing the following criteria: “(1) bachelor's degree or
better in the subject taught; (2) full teacher certification; and (3) demonstrates
knowledge in the subjects taught” (Ed.gov, U.S. Department of Education, 2002).

6
This era of high standards has lead to greater teacher accountability. Even when
meeting the “highly qualified” criteria some beginning teachers need support to avoid
feelings of being “lost at sea” (Kauffman, et. al., 2002). Many novice teachers need
the guidance to implement a differentiated standards-based curriculum, effective
assessment formats, and grade appropriate curriculum that will result in high student
achievement.
In the past when beginning teachers asked for assistance, it was interpreted as a
sign of weakness or a lack of preparation (Ganser, 2001). In many school districts
across the nation, beginning teachers are being provided with induction support
programs. The Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment (BTSA) program is one
of many induction program formats. The BTSA induction program provides
beginning teachers with the following: ongoing assessment of the participant,
instructional support, ability to work towards attaining the California Professional
(Clear) Teaching Credential, and individualized support via one-to-one mentors.
Darling-Hammond (2003) points out that, “well-designed mentoring programs raise
retention rates for beginning teachers by improving their attitudes, feelings of
efficacy, and instructional skills” (p. 11). Yet, as Ganser (2001) indicates more often
than not mentor teachers are themselves holding several key leadership positions
within the school. Mentor teachers are left with little time to provide quality one-to-
one support to beginning teachers. The question remains as to whom should provide
the necessary professional support.

7
A gap in the research exists with regards to knowledge related to the effectiveness
of varying mentoring approaches and formats (Feiman-Nemser, 1996; Garet, Porter,
Desmoine, Birman, & Yoon, 2001; Schlarge, Fusco, Koch, Crawford, & Philips,
2003). Review of studies on one-to-one mentoring has shown that mentoring alone
does not lead to teacher retention (Ingersoll & Kralik, 2004; Serpe, & Bozeman,
1999). Novel approaches rather than the traditional one-to-one mentoring may
present an effective support format. A collaborative team approach could be
considered as a possible alternative to retraining and providing support to beginning
teachers. However providing team assistance in the instructional environment
requires a specific context that needs to be addressed when considering this novel
approach. The actual day-to-day dynamics of a school culture must mesh with this
approach and provide the opportunity for it to occur. Analyzing the social dynamics
and the tone of the school and how its staff members work together provides a
foundation to understanding the “process of enculturation” (Feiman-Nemser, 2003) as
it relates to beginning teachers. Therefore, this research paper will study the
collaborative team approach to mentoring beginning teachers, and the context that
must exist in support of this holistic format.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to develop a deeper understanding of how school site
personnel might collaborate to promote a school culture that is collectively responsive
to the needs of beginning teachers. What will be determined is how all support staff
can be involved in the nurturing, guidance, and sustaining of beginning teachers.

8
How can a team approach to mentoring be carried out in a school setting? Could
beginning teachers thrive and become successful if they receive the support they need
from all stakeholders (i.e., administrators, instructional support personnel, and veteran
teachers)? Building a “coherent instructional guidance system” is vital to the
retention of beginning teachers (Kauffman et. al., 2002, p. 288). Active participation
from all members of the school administrative team, instructional support personnel,
and its faculty should be studied as a format for providing beginning teachers with the
support they need to remain and become successful in the classroom. This study will
examine the relationships and the roles of school site personnel in order to determine
the effectiveness of a one-to-one mentoring approach or a collaborative team
approach when working with beginning teachers. Ultimately, the purpose of this
study is to identify an effective school-site support paradigm that will support and
retain new teachers while simultaneously contributing to their professional growth
and their classroom students learning.
Research Questions
This research study is guided by the following two questions:
1. What school culture characteristics contribute to an effective collaborative team
approach that best supports beginning teacher development?
2. How does a team approach differ in effect from traditional beginning teacher
support?
Significance of the Study

9
Current and past research findings related to beginning teachers focus on effective
mentoring strategies in the context of the one-to-one relationship between mentors
and mentees. Research studies have suggested a list of what beginning teachers need
in order to thrive the first few years of teaching (Public Education Network, 2003;
Quinn & Andrews, 2004). None have discussed an actual case study of how these
components interact in a school setting. There is little known about how the actual
tacit role of each instructional support member effectively comes together to
encourage the development of beginning teachers. A collaborative team approach to
mentoring beginning teachers is not discussed in research articles from the point of
view of all the key stakeholders; it remains an under researched topic. It is expected
that this research study will articulate the process of how school leaders move from
the theoretical to the application stage, as well as how a collaborative team views
their role and how it may actually be carried out.
This study is significant in providing administrative teams with information in
order to create an internal support system within a school that will assist beginning
teachers. It will also provide insight into ways that colleagues can work together to
support the professional growth of beginning teachers during the first three years of
their teaching careers (Hope, 1999). This study will also assist school administrators,
instructional support personnel, and veteran teachers to implement effective practices
in schools to successfully retain and support beginning teachers. This in-depth case
study will provide an example of how a school sets out to create a positive school
culture and effective infrastructure that promotes collaboration among its staff

10
members aimed at developing a strong support system for all teachers to grow and
succeed.
Personnel, at the district level, will gain new information related to training new
and future school administrators to work towards building a nurturing and supportive
school paradigm by benchmarking the successes learned through this study. “Great
school leaders create nurturing school environments in which accomplished teaching
can flourish and grow” (Darling-Hammond, p. 13, 2003). Policymakers at the federal
and state level will not only be able to point out what constitutes “highly qualified”
teachers but also indicate an effective process by which to develop the structural
framework necessary to retain and support the growth of beginning teachers. The
result will be a better infrastructure that supports beginning teachers aimed at higher
student outcomes.
Limitations
The findings resulting in this study are intended to develop a deeper
understanding of the dynamics of a school setting, its personnel (especially as it
relates to beginning teachers), and the necessary support strategies that will promote
retention and professional growth. The findings may or may not be generalizeable to
other school settings. Further limitations to this study are identified in the proposed
surveys, interviews, and observations. Responses to the items in the survey can result
in projecting personal biases, beliefs, and affective attitudes. Furthermore, surveys
may be returned incomplete, or not at all resulting in a limited analysis of the
collected data. The limits in gathering interview data can result in “personal bias,

11
anger, anxiety, politics, …recall error reactivity of the interviewee to the interviewer,
and self-serving responses” (Patton, 2002, p. 306). Gathering observational data is
also limited to only the exterior rather than the interior thought process of individuals
(Patton, 2002). The normal behavior of teachers and staff members may potentially
be altered due to the feeling of being under the magnifying lens.
Delimitations
The sample under study will be selected for a specific purpose and will have
predetermined criteria, thus a purposeful sampling specifically criterion sampling will
be used. “Information-rich cases” (Patton, 2002, p. 46) are specifically selected for
the in-depth information that will provide data towards answering the research
questions in this study. The school selected for this case study was pre-selected. The
criteria used to pre-select the school included: School-wide Title 1, met Academic
Performance Index (API) and federal Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). Student
population included English language learners. The school was identified as a
California Distinguished School in 2006 and is recognized as a district model school.
The selected school also had the required key players (Principal, Assistant Principal,
Literacy Coach, Math Coach, veteran teachers, and beginning teachers).
Summary of Methodology
“Multiple sources of information are sought and used because no single source of
information can be trusted to provide a comprehensive perspective...(Patton, 2002, p.
306)”.

12
Multi methods such as surveys, interviews, and observations were used in this
study in order to gather the necessary data to answer the proposed research questions.
The collection of data via multiple instruments provided validity in analyzing the
data. Utilizing a case study approach provide in-depth understanding of the proposed
unit of study. The selected unit of study is one public urban elementary school. The
participants include administrators, instructional support personnel, veteran teachers,
and beginning teachers. Chapter three will provide further information on the
selected methodology that was used for the purpose of this study.
Definitions
For the purpose of this study the following key vocabulary words were defined:
1.) Administrator – An administrator is an educational leader such as the school
principal and the assistant principal. School administrators are responsible for
instructional practices, student achievement, professional development of
faculty, and play a role in the tone of the school climate (Austin, 1972; Cobb,
2005; Panyako & Rorie, 1987).
2.) Attrition – Attrition is the loss of beginning teachers from the field of
education (Darling- Hammond et. al, 2001; Ingersoll, 2001; Vail, 2005).
3.) Beginning Teachers – Teachers within the K-12 school system teaching within
their first three years of their career (Ganser, 1999; BTSA Policy).
4.) Collaborative School Culture – A school environment in which teachers,
administrators, and instructional support personnel work together to support

13
mutual professional development and student achievement (Freeman, 1993;
Gruenert, 2005; Idol, 2002; Roberst & Pruittp, 2003).
5.) Literacy Coach – A Literacy Coach is an instructional support staff focused on
monitoring the progress of students in Language Arts. Support is provided to
teachers on the implementation of the adopted Language Arts program (Cobb,
2005; Dole & Donaldson, 2006; Moxley & Taylor, 2006).
6.) Math Coach – A Math Coach is an instructional support staff focused on
monitoring the progress of students in Mathematics. Support is provided to
teachers on the implementation of the adopted Mathematics program (Reys, &
Fennell, 2003).
7.) Mentoring – Mentoring is the act of provided support and guidance to
beginning teachers by one or more veteran teachers (Galvez-Hjornevik, 1986;
Monaghan & Lunt, 1992; Smith, 2005).
8.) Mentor Teacher – A mentor teacher is a veteran teacher assigned to provide
support and guidance to beginning teachers (Anderson & Shannon 1988;
Monaghan & Lunt, 1992; Zimpher & Rieger, 1988).
9.) Professional Learning Community – A school environment in which faculty
share best practices and uphold the notion of the teacher as a professional
(Barth, 2002; Ganser, 1999; Lick, 2000; Roberts & Pruitt, 2003; Uhl & Pérez-
Sellés, 1995).

14
10.) Retention – Keeping teachers in the field of education as opposed to leaving
after a short period of time teaching (Huffman & Hipp, 2003; Johnson, 2006;
Warren, 1999).
11.) School Culture – More than just the environmental aspects of a school it
encompasses the written and unwritten ways people interact and relate to one
another, the language use, rituals, traditions, myths, norms, and the values
shared (Barth, R. S. 2002, 2006; Gruenert, 2005; Roach & Kratochwill, 2004;
Stolp, & Smith, 1995).
12.) Team Approach – Faculty and staff members work together as a team in
order to support all teachers including beginning teachers resulting in
academic achievement for students and professional growth for teachers
(Freeman, 1993; Gruenert, 2005).
13.) Transformational Leadership – A non-hierarchical leadership theory that
empowers and attempts to help others achieve to their fullest potential (a non-
unilateral form of leadership) (Bennis & Nanus, 2003; Downton, 1973;
Northouse, 2004; Rost, 1991).

15
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
This chapter begins with a review of the literature on the change process, school
culture, theories of leadership, instructional support roles, traditional mentoring
approach, and collaborative team approach to mentoring beginning teachers. This
review of the literature will provide valuable information that will help to clarify the
following research questions:
1. What school culture characteristics contribute to an effective collaborative
team approach that best supports beginning teacher development?
2. How does a team approach differ in effect from traditional beginning
teacher support?
The guiding theoretical framework for this research study is the change process.
Much of the literature on educational change has focused on people and the impact
change has on them. In 1980, J. Issac reviewed the literature (Bennis, Benne, &
Chin, 1970; Bowers, 1973; Jones, 1969; Strauss, 1976) on educational change and
labeled these types of studies as people-based. Current research studies (Collinson, &
Cook, 2000; Lick, 2000; Moroz, & Waugh; 2000; Rowan, & Miller, 2007) have also
focused on people and their experiences within the change process. This view of
change and its effect on individuals within an organization is critical, especially in a
school setting. Teachers in particular are key to successfully implementing a desired
reform or an educational innovation. The personal dynamics that are formed in
school settings are effected when change takes place. Change will undoubtedly affect

16
the formal and informal interpersonal relationships that are formed. “Fear of change
is an obvious human reaction as is suspicion… and defensiveness” (Kies, 1978, p.
179). Administrators and other instructional support staff play a critical role in
ensuring that positive change takes place. Positive change results in a productive
school culture, collaborative practices, shared leadership, professional growth and
development for teachers, and a focus on student success. Change does not happen
by accident or in isolation. Change must be planned (Bhola, 1966; Kies, 1978; Lick,
2000).
Random, unsystematic, and reactive change is the alternative to planned change
(Bhola, 1966). According to Lick (2000), “for school transformation and meaningful
reform to occur, we must not only determine what changes are required but must
implement an intentional, well-designed transition process to help deal with the
societal, organizational, and interpersonal barriers affecting schools” (p. 43).
Change Process
Institutional Background
Much of the data and information that we currently have on the change process
has roots in the corporate world. In their book, “Enlightened leadership: Getting to
the heart of change,” Oakley and Krug (1991) present data on effective ways to target
corporate organizational change. According to Oakley and Krug, (1991) the change
process has evolved from its traditional three-step approach which included
identifying the problem, hiring an expert to resolve the problem, and explicitly telling
people within the organization how to improve their performance. This approach

17
required a high investment of human and financial resources necessary to reduce
resistance from employees and to ensure that the solutions were effective for the
identified problem. This traditional approach to the change process lacked attention
to the human factor, such as the attitudes and personal commitment needed to
implement any change process.
Three Schools of Change
By tackling the issue of the process of change, the business world has enabled the
educational setting to gain an understanding of the change process. In, “A review of
the literature and debates in the field of change in educational organizations,” J. Isaac
(1980), identified three schools of thought on change which are based on a review of
change literature. Isaac (1980) labeled the first school of change as people-based
studies (Bennis, Benne, & Chin, 1970; Bowers, 1973; Jones, 1969; Strauss, 1976).
These studies focused on the people within the organization and their experiences
within the change process. The central idea is that change can only take place within
an organization if people’s behavior changes. It also focused on why individuals do
or do not choose to adopt innovative changes. The second school of change is termed
power-based studies (Ebbutt & Brown, 1978; Pugh & Hickson, 1968; Salaman &
Thompson, 1973; Turner, 1975). The literature recognizes this theory of change as a
result of a bureaucratic process. People that hold powerful positions within an
organization are at the forefront of the change process. This form of change within an
organization is seen as negotiated, bargained, and cohered. The third form of change
or the gradualist-based change theory (Dror, 1964; Etzioni, 1966; Lindblom, 1959;

18
Taylor, 1970; Walker, 1971) studies change as a gradual process. Change takes place
over time. It evolves from a gradual change in perspective and individual or group
assessment of needs to the actual implementation of necessary innovations and
strategies that can lead to positive and lasting results.
Overall, the change process has become difficult to study due to the different
definitions attributed to the word change. Also, according to Waugh and Punch
(1987) studies of the change process have been limited due to the various variables
involved and the length of time it takes from “adoption through implementation to
institutionalization as a permanent feature of the system” (p. 238). Despite these
drawbacks the authors, Gene E. Hall and Shirley M. Hord (1987), reviewed research
on the educational change process in their book, “Change in schools: Facilitating the
process.” Specifically, Hall and Hord (1987) reviewed fourteen years of research on
effective leadership, school principals, and their role in the change process. The
intent of the authors was to identify and describe procedures, methods, and practices
to be effective change agents. In order to carry out their goals the authors created the
Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM) as their guiding conceptual framework.
This framework puts the needs or concerns of teachers at the forefront instead of the
perceived needs of the change agent. “Not only is change viewed as a process, but
the personal side of change as experienced by teachers is taken into account” (Hall &
Hord, 1987, p. 17). This includes understanding the teacher’s needs and perceptions
of the change process. The authors present a chart, Levels of Use of the Innovation,
which has six levels. This chart enables change agents to determine the level of use

19
of the proposed innovative (new instructional program, teaching strategy, new
textbook, etc.,) change. Furthermore, the authors indicate that change should not be
viewed as an isolated event but rather a process that has different levels, steps, and
that is ongoing. The change process takes long-term commitment that ranges from
three to five years (Hall and Hord, 1987).
Factors Involved in Educational Change
Change process has elements that are viewed as necessary ingredients. Change
knowledge is thought to increase the probability of a successful change process.
Fullan, Cuttress, and Kilcher (2005) defined change knowledge as an overarching
concept as “understanding and insight about the process of change and the key drivers
that make for successful change in practice” (p. 54). In support of their assertions, the
authors reviewed literature on change and identified eight factors essential for long-
term change. The eight factors include: moral purpose, leadership, building capacity,
understanding the change process, school culture, self-assessment, coherence making,
and tri-level development.
The first critical element necessary to implement and sustain change is to “engage
people’s moral purposes” (Fullan, et al., 2005, p. 54). It is necessary to have people
understand the underlying reason that change is taking place. “Moral purpose in
educational change is about improving society through improving educational
systems and thus the learning of all citizens” (Fullan, et al., 2005, p. 54). The need to
close the achievement gap is an example of a moral purpose that drives educational

20
change. Closing the achievement gap between high and under performing students is
the fundamental reason behind educational mandates such as NCLB.
Taking the lead to promote a moral purpose requires a strong and effective
leadership style. Oakley and Krug (1991) identified this type of leadership as
enlightened leadership. Oakley and Krug (1991) defined enlightened leadership as ---
“leaders who not only have the vision but who have the ability to get the members of
the organization to accept ownership for that vision as their own, thus developing the
commitment to carry it through to completion” (p. 19). In “Leading change:
Overcoming the ideology of comfort and the tyranny of custom,” the author, James
O’Toole (1995), indicated that inclusive and effective leaders share commonalities
such that they “enable others to lead by sharing information, by fostering a sense of
community, and by creating a consistent system of rewards, structure, process, and
communication” (p. 70). Furthermore, the role of a leader is to motivate, inspire,
listen, nurture, and empower others within the organization (Fullan et al., 2005; Hall
& Hord, 1987; O’Toole, 1995). In his book, O’Toole (1995) compares effective
leaders from those depicted on Mount Rushmore. Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln,
and Roosevelt all possessed the required leadership qualities. These American
leaders possessed integrity, had the ability to establish trust, and gain respect from
others. O’Toole (1995) labels effective leaders as Corporate Rushmoreans.
Hall and Hord (1987) identified an effective leader as someone that facilitates
change. To be effective, leadership must be distributed (O’Toole, 1995). Fullan et
al., (2005) cite that “the main mark of a school principal at the end of his or her tenure

21
is not just that individual’s impact on student achievement, but rather how many
leaders are left behind who can go even further” (p. 57). In order to sustain change,
school leaders must posses change knowledge and the capacity for innovation. Cobb
(2005) indicates that effective school leaders “are knowledgeable about the change
process and realize that change will create resistance, but that they have the tools to
help others address concerns and commit to it” (p. 473). School leaders include
teachers, administrators, and students.
Fullan, et al., (2005), calls for nurturing leaders from within the school ranks
including the student body. Students are important in the change process since it is
their academic success that mainly propels change to take place. Wachholz (1994)
points out that, “although student achievement and their well-being have always
been--- at least rhetorically---the central issue of education, students themselves are
generally ignored as players in the school political arena” (p. 82). In many school
cultures, students are viewed with having little power to cause change. Wachholz
(1994) warns that, “until students are also invited into educational change, school
reform will fail” (p. 80). The educational change equation must involve students as
key players in the change process. Wachholz (1994), provides examples of how to
effectively involve students in the educational change process. Students from
Kindergarten thru 12
th
grade can work in teams to assess, plan, and work
cooperatively with teachers on goals that directly affect them. Wachholz (1994)
leaves us with a dire warning that “if students continue to be disenfranchised from the
process of change, most educational reform, indeed most education, will fail” (p. 82).

22
Another element of change knowledge involves building capacity. “Building
capacity, involves policies, strategies, resources, and actions designed to increase
peoples collective power to move the system [schools, districts, states] forward”
(Fullan, et al., 2005, p. 55). In order for change to come about the entire school
system must collectively participate to develop new knowledge, skills, and a shared
identity. Individuals must be motivated and committed to work together for a
common goal. It is believed that building capacity becomes problematic since a
diverse group of individuals must work as one entity in order for change to take place.
To be effective, building capacity must be on going. Teachers, administrators, and
staff must be willing to work together in order to develop and master new skills.
Building capacity is a “collective phenomenon” (Fullan, et. al., 2005, p. 55) it cannot
be accomplished by one individual.
Building capacity involves understanding the change process. Understanding the
variables that are involved in the change process is critical to a successful change
process. Fullan, et al. (2005) point out that, “making change work requires the
energy, ideas, commitment, and ownership of all those implementing improvement”
(Fullan, et al., 2005, p. 55). Focus should be given to the perceptions and concerns
teachers have over the change process. In a school setting, teachers are ultimately
responsible for carrying out instructional change. Therefore, it behooves school
leaders to focus on the concerns teachers have over change. Waugh and Punch
(1987) reviewed educational research on teacher receptivity to system-wide change in
the implementation stage. Waugh and Punch (1987) along with Fuller, Brown, and

23
Peck (1967) point out some areas that need to be considered during the
implementation stage of change as perceived by teachers: unrelated concerns, self-
concerns, task concerns, and impact concerns. Unrelated concerns focus on
everything other than teaching. Self-concerns have an egocentric focus. “Concerns
at this point have to do with feelings of potential inadequacy, self-doubts, about the
knowledge required, or uncertainty about the situation they are about to face” (Hall &
Hord, 1987, p. 57). Personal cost such as time commitment is an anxiety related to
self-concerns. Task concerns deal with on the job concerns that involve actual
practical applicability to classroom instruction. Impact concerns involve a reflection
of how well students are learning and how well teachers are teaching. The overall
focus is on the influence that change has on student learning. Hall and Hord (1987)
suggest that teacher concerns can be brought forth via open-ended questioning in
formal and informal conversations.
The culture of a school (Waugh & Punch, 1987) is another factor that needs to be
taken into account. The change process occurs when there is a school culture that
promotes learning especially from each other (Fullan, et. al., 2005). Learning from
colleagues within the school site is a step towards viewing the school site as a
professional learning community (Dufour, Eaken, & Dufour, 2005). Change will
remain superficial if the culture is not changed (Barth, 2002). Improving the school
culture, is often seen as “acts that violate the taboos of many school cultures, which is
why culture changing is the most important, difficult, and perilous job of school-
based reformers” (Barth, 2002, p. 8). A learning culture can implement the new

24
knowledge that can lead to positively affecting student achievement if it lends itself to
allowing teachers to air out their doubts, fears, and concerns as it relates to the change
process.
With everything in place to proceed with change, a systematic self-assessment
approach is necessary. Fullan, et al., (2005), discussed the need for a school culture
that is able to conduct self-assessments of the in-house learning that is taking place.
According to Fullan, et al., (2005) “a culture of evaluation must be coupled with a
culture of learning for schools to sort out promising from not-so promising ideas and
especially to deepen the meaning of what is learned” (Fullan, et al., 2005, p. 56). The
capacity to assess student performance from a wide range of data will enable school
leaders to modify or implement an action plan that targets student needs. The ability
to self-assess accomplishes two important goals. The first is to meet external
accountability. Stakeholders such as parents, school personnel, community, and
school districts need to be informed of student progress especially when financial
support provided to schools are tied to federal and state educational goals. For
example, schools have the responsibility to demonstrate Adequate Yearly Progress
(AYP) and show progress in the Academic Performance Index (API). The other
purpose for self-assessment is to inform educators of the practices that result in
positive student outcomes. Veteran and novice educators need to be able to assess
and interpret student data.
Self-assessment also involves the ability to determine the level of use of the
proposed innovative (new instructional program, teaching strategy, textbook, etc.,)

25
change. Hall and Hord (1987) present a chart, Levels of Use of the Innovation, which
has six levels. Level of Use 0, is the first level that is labeled non-use. At this initial
starting point, teachers have little knowledge of the actual change. Therefore, the
proposed innovative change is not being implemented. Level I, orientation, involves
providing teachers with the knowledge necessary for change to take place. At this
stage, teachers are provided with professional development in order to be able to
utilize the innovation. Level II, preparation, teachers are preparing to use the
innovation. Level III, mechanical behavior, this stage is a systematic approach to the
innovation that has yet to be internalized or automated. The result at this stage is
superficial therefore; reflection during this stage does not take place. Level IV-A,
routine, the innovation is stable but there is little or no modification that takes place.
Level IV-B, refinement, changes to the innovation is made based on the desired long-
term effect to students. Modifications are made based on the greatest positive results.
Level V, integration, teachers are improving the innovation by collaborating with
colleagues to make a greater impact. At this level, there is an obvious commitment to
utilize the innovation school wide. Level VI, renewal, teachers reevaluate the
innovation to determine if it needs to be modified or changed altogether.
Accordingly, the Levels of Innovation Use help to provide insight into how teachers
are faring in the change process as well as to provide information on student
achievement. Hall and Hord’s (1987) Level of Use Chart is an example of how to
assess where teachers are in the change process it is an indicator that is not intended
to be static but fluid in its approach. School leaders and support personnel can

26
intervene to assist teachers in the use of the change process being that, change affects
everyone at different times and in different ways (Hall & Hord, 1987). Tying all the
necessary elements of the change process together and making sense of it involves
coherence making.
Fostering coherence making “is a never ending proposition that involves
alignment, connecting the dots, being about how the big picture fits together” (Fullan,
et al., 2005, p. 57). Yet, before the big picture can be aligned individual pieces such
as the soft issues must be addressed. The soft issues or the human issues as termed by
Oakley and Krug (1991) affect the change process. Individual performance is
affected by attitudes (positive and negative) and an individuals state of mind.
According to Oakley and Krug (1991) “our general mental and emotional well-being,
self-image, self-esteem, values, beliefs, and feelings about the world and our place in
it all affect our state of mind” (p. 45). The affective human factor is an important
area that must be addressed in order to move on to the heart of the change process.
To form a cohesive school culture the following elements of change knowledge are
necessary: building capacity from within the school site, effective school leaders, and
a culture of evaluation are necessary to implement the needed change. Change needs
to make sense to all those involved. Long and short-term goals must be clearly
articulated and clarified so that everyone involved knows the steps and can see the big
picture.
Fullan, et al. (2005) cites tri-level development as the last change knowledge
element necessary for change process to occur. Simply, changing individuals is not

27
sufficient, system-wide change is necessary. Change needs to take place from the
educational reforms at the governmental level to the policies at the immediate school
sites. Changing the educational system, its organizations and its educators must be
done simultaneously.
The field of education needs further data that will help in understanding the
change process and how it directly applies to school settings. Change leaders need
studies that focus on specific case studies that provide vital information that has a
foundation on more than just theory-based rhetoric. The study’s role of individuals,
when part of a collaborative group, is important to understanding the constraints,
limitations, and potential changes their roles and responsibilities can contribute to the
change process. This is particularly important when developing a healthy school
culture that supports the learning of all.
School Culture
School Culture Defined
Research literature on school culture (Barth, R. S. 2002, 2006; Gruenert, 2005;
Stolp, & Smith, 1995) has indicated that every school has its unique culture.
Literature on school culture has made it possible for school personnel to understand
the elements that are necessary to create, nurture, and sustain a healthy school culture
that promotes the growth and learning of its students and teachers. School culture has
been defined as “the way we do things around here” (Barth, 2002; Roach &
Kratochwill, 2004). A school culture involves the observable and unwritten ways
people interact and relate to one another (Gruenert, 2005). “The observed patterns of

28
behavior, such as how teachers interact in the staff room, the language they use, and
the rituals they establish” (Gruenert, 2005, p. 44) make up the culture of a school.
Ceremonies, traditions, myths, (Barth, 2002; Roach & Kratochwill, 2004; Vail, 2005)
norms, and the values shared via a school’s mission statement (Barth, 2002; Gruenert,
2005) are other components of a school culture. Every year beginning teachers are
indoctrinated into the cultural ways of individual schools. Beginning teachers have to
learn “the [written and] unwritten policies and procedures… in order to get along in
the school or their department” (Gruenert, 2005, p. 44).
What does a productive school culture look like?
A productive school culture is a shared responsibility. “It begins with
commitment from every staff member--from the principal to the custodian--that
learning is what is valued, and that every effort will be made to keep learning at the
center of school activities” (Cobb, 2005). Barth (2002) lists the following as
components of a productive school culture:
• Collegiality – a working relationship that allows for teaching and learning
to take place between peers that produces positive end results
• Experimentation – the ability to explore innovative strategies, or ways of
teaching free from restrictive confines
• High expectations – shared by all (faculty, administration and students)
• Trust – an integral component that allows teachers to share concerns,
successes, failures and to question each other’s practice

29
• Confidence – displayed by faculty and staff, apparent in their ability to
learn, teach, question, and lead
• Tangible support – administrators and peers provide support through
materials, knowledge, and sharing of information
• Reaching out to the knowledge bases – knowledge is sought from within
and outside the school setting
• Appreciation and recognition – individual and group effort is
acknowledged
• Celebration and humor – an environment that is professional but
welcoming (knowing when not to take everything so seriously)
• Involvement in decision making – administration and faculty are equally
involved in the decision making, everyone is empowered
• Traditions – rituals are shared and held by those in the school site
• Honest and open communication – allowing everyone to speak truthfully
on issues that directly affect instruction, student, and teacher learning
As previously mentioned central to a productive school culture are the relationships
that are formed. Collegial relationships (Barth, 2006; Waters, Marzano, & McNulty,
2004) enable teachers to work together as professionals by providing the time to share
expertise and knowledge base.
Open communication is evident within a healthy school culture as it involves the
ability to discuss the “nondiscussables” a term used by Barth (2002; 2006) to refer to
issues that are loaded with fear, anxiety, and not openly discussed in staff meetings.

30
The “nondiscussable” is the proverbial white elephant in the room that is ignored at all
cost. “To change the culture of the school, the instructional leader must enable its
[teachers and faculty] to name, acknowledge, and address the nondiscussables----
especially those that impede learning” (Barth, 2002, p. 8). An environment in which
teachers feel safe to ask questions, inquire, and explore without fear of negative
repercussions is representative of a productive school culture. Barth (2002) states that
the condition for membership in this type of school community is to support the
learning of everyone (students, teachers, parents, and the community). The goal is to
create “a professional learning community [that] is built on continual discourse about
important work---conversations about student evaluations, parent involvement,
curriculum development, and team teaching” (Barth, 2002, p. 11).
Central to a productive school culture are the administrators in leadership
positions. Gruenert (2005) points to the need for leaders to assist schools to move
away from the traditional culture of education which “holds to the value of autonomy
and individualism” (p. 43). Gruenert (2005) points out that in traditional school
cultures, teachers are often isolated within their classroom having little or no contact
with other educators. Fullan (2002) points out that “to accomplish lasting reform, we
need leaders who create a fundamental transformation in the learning cultures of
schools and of the teaching profession itself” (p. 18). The literature calls for fearless
leaders that are aware of the dynamics of a school culture in order to facilitate change.
Theories of Leadership
To lead, one must follow. Lao-tzu

31
The New Oxford American Dictionary (2001) defines leadership as “the action of
leading a group of people or an organization” (p. 968). This definition does little to
clarify the extent to which leadership roles are established, sustained, and displayed.
In “Leadership for the twenty-first century”, Joseph C. Rost (1991) clarifies the
definition of leadership. His definition is more inclusive of the essential elements of
leadership. Rost (1991) defines leadership as, “an influence relationship among
leaders and followers who intend real changes that reflect their mutual purposes” (p.
102). The difference in this definition is the added component of influence as
multidirectional and non-coercive. Another difference is the mutual intentions held by
all for real change to take place.
There are different leadership approaches and theories that have been discussed in
the literature such as: trait approach, skills approach, contingency theory, transactional
leadership, and transformational leadership (Griffith, 1999; Northouse, 2004). The
trait approach (Bass, 1990; Jago, 1982; Northouse, 2004) to leadership attempted to
determine which innate leadership traits, qualities, and characteristics are necessary to
become effective leaders. There was a commonly held belief that great leaders were
born. Differences between leaders and followers are distinguished by traits that each
possessed. The skills approach to leadership takes the opposing view of leadership as
compared to the trait approach. The skills approach focuses on “skills and abilities
that can be learned and developed” (Northouse, 2004, p. 35). In a study conducted by
Mumford, Zaccaro, Connelly, and Marks (2000) three main skills were identified as
key to developing effective leadership; problem-solving, social judgment, and

32
knowledge. In this approach, people can learn the necessary skills to potentially
become great leaders. The contingency theory, expounds that a “leader’s effectiveness
depends on how well the leader’s style fits the context” (Northouse, 2004, p. 109).
The situation or context determines where a leader is effective. Transactional theory
(Kuhnert, 1994; Northouse, 2004) proposes that there are interactions and exchanges
that take place between leaders and followers. A give and take relationship exists
between leaders and followers.
After a review of the different leadership styles, transformational leadership best
represents leaders that create a positive school culture while leading the change
process. Transformational approach has been researched since the 1980’s. The term
was first used by Downton in 1973. The literal definition of this leadership style is the
process of change and transformation of individuals, which include leaders and
followers (Northouse, 2004; Rost, 1991). Transformational leadership “is concerned
with emotions, values, ethics, standards, and long-term goals…and treating them as
full human beings” (Northouse, 2004, p. 169). This particular type of leadership
approach attempts to help its followers to achieve their fullest potential.
In their book Leaders: The strategies for taking charge, Warren Bennis and Burt
Nanus (2003) distinguish between managers and leaders “managers do things right
while leaders do the right thing” (p. i). In their second edition, Bennis and Nanus
revisit their initial factors and expand the competencies that contribute to effective
transformational leaders. In an unstructured interview with 60 top corporate CEO’s
and 30 leaders from the public sector the following themes were identified:

33
• Strategy I: Attention through vision – Leaders purported to have an agenda
with clear outcomes. Their vision was clearly articulated and shared by all.
Bennis and Nanus (2003) point out that a leaders “vision animates, inspires,
and transforms purpose into action” (p. 29).
• Strategy II: Meaning through communication – Leaders communicate meaning
in a variety of forms (visual representations, models, and metaphors) not just
through oral articulation. “Leaders articulate and define what has previously
remained implicit or unsaid; then they invent images, metaphors, and models
that provide a focus for new attention” (Bennis & Nanus, 2003, p. 37).
Leaders are considered “social architects” (Bennis & Nanus, 2003, p. 103) in
that they understand, organize, and shape an organization’s culture. Leaders
are able to transmit norms and values of the organization in order to bind and
bond others to stand behind the shared vision.
• Strategy III: Trust through positioning – Leaders through their actions and
positions (of what is right and necessary) demonstrate that they can be trusted.
According to Bennis and Nanus (2003) accountability, predictability, and
reliability are displayed by effective leaders. A trusting relationship is one that
shares mutual trust, respect, competency, and integrity.
• Strategy IV: The deployment of self through (1) positive self-regard and (2) the
Wallenda factor – Having a positive self-regard moves away from narcissism
and egocentrism. A positive self-regard begins by leaders recognizing their
self-worth and possessing self-respect. Leaders are able to identify their

34
strengths and compensate for weaknesses (Bennis & Nanus, 2003). On a
continual basis, these leaders work towards developing and improving their
abilities. Effective leaders are able to “discern the fit between one’s strengths
and weaknesses and the organization’s need” (Bennis & Nanus, 2003, p. 58).
Positive self-regard is projected to others by holding high expectations and
confidence in others. The Wallenda factor was derived from the notions that if
you project your thoughts and energy to an idea or goal it will most likely
happen. Bennis and Nanus (2003) named this notion after Karl Wallenda, a
tightrope walker. Karl Wallenda projected his energy on not falling from a 75-
foot high wire instead of projecting his energies on walking the tightrope as a
result he fell to this death. “The Wallenda factor has less to do with one’s
judgment about self-efficacy than it does about the judgment of the outcome of
the event” (Bennis & Nanus, 2003, p. 72).
In referring to transformative leadership Bennis and Nanus (2003), state that, “the
new leadership under discussion is not arbitrary or unilateral but rather an impressive
and subtle sweeping back and forth of energy, whether between maestro and players or
CEO and staff” (p. 30-31). In a school setting, the principal moves away from a
hierarchical leadership to one that shares the power among school personnel in order
to ensure the school’s success (Bowen-Childs et al., 2000). Thus, this leadership
approach allows the collaborative approach to emerge. “Effective leadership takes
risks---it innovates, challenges, and changes the basic metabolism of the
organizational culture” (Bennis & Nanus, 2003, p. 49). Leaders can change the school

35
culture by “acting as coaches or advisors while trying to assist individuals in becoming
fully actualized” (Northouse, 2004, p. 177).
Leadership Roles
At the top of the list of school site leadership are the administrators, which
include the school principal and assistant principal. The traditional role of principals
has been that of manager (Cobb, 2005; Griffith, 1999). According to Cobb (2005)
“management encompassed a wide range of tasks, including but not limited to
developing schedules, maintaining budgets, meeting with parents and other
community groups, and evaluating certified and non-certified staff” (p. 472). On the
other hand, the role of assistant principal (AP) or vice principal was initially
developed at the turn of the century at the secondary school level as a result of high
student enrollment (Mertz, & McNeely, 1999). The assistant principal was the
answer to relieve the increased responsibilities of the secondary school principals.
Therefore, this position grew out of practicality rather than careful planning (Mertz,
& McNeely, 1999). As a result, there has been limited literature on assistant
principals (Hartzell, 1993; Marshall, & Hooley, 2006) especially at the elementary
school level. This is evident in the title of Hartzell’s (1993) article that states, The
assistant principal: neglected actor in practitioner leadership. The studies that have
been conducted focused on the responsibilities of assistant principals and found that
the major job component included student discipline, attendance, supervision, and
dealing with crisis situations (Austin, 1972; Panyako & Rorie, 1987).

36
In LAUSD elementary schools there are two types of assistant principals, Generic
and Elementary Instructional Specialist (AP-EIS). Elementary schools must have an
AP-EIS and may have one or two generic assistant principals based on student
enrollment. The difference between these two positions is the scope of responsibility.
Whereas the generic APs are involved in day-to-day student discipline, conducting
professional development, teacher evaluations, program assessments, curriculum, and
instruction, the AP-EIS may share the duties of the generic AP with an added focus of
being in charge of special education, coordinating the Individualized Educational
Program (IEP) and monitoring special education compliance issues.
Due to changes in the educational setting (i.e., high teacher attrition rates, state
and federal educational mandates), the role of principals and assistant principals have
changed into a “multi-dimensional role” (Calabrese, 1991, p. 52). School
administrators are called to move beyond the managerial role to that of instructional
leaders (Cobb, 2005; Colley, 2002; Hall & Hord, 1987), culture builders (Colley,
2002), and change agents (Fullan, 2002). In a review of instructional leadership
conducted by Cotton and Savard (1980), the common prevalent behaviors
demonstrated by effective school administrators included the following:
“(1) frequent observation and/or participation in classroom instruction; (2)
communicating clearly to staff what is expected of them as facilitators of the
instructional program; (3) making decisions of the instructional program; (4)
coordinating the instructional program; (5) being actively involved in
planning and evaluating the instructional program; and (6) having and

37
communicating high standards/expectations for the instructional program” (p.
43).
Other than the transformational leadership approach, educational literature
(Bowen-Childs et. al., 2000; Cobb, 2005; Cotton & Savard, 1980; Fink, & Resnick,
2001; Ginsgerg et. al., 2002; Griffith, 1999; Vail, 2005) provides us with a list of
characteristics and responsibilities that effective principals display in their day-to-day
role. A primary characteristic that was discussed was the interpersonal skills that
administrators display when they relate to others. According to Fink and Resnick
(2001), effective principals are able to develop interpersonal relationships by
possessing emotional intelligence. Emotional intelligence signifies that a leader is
able to “show empathy, sensitivity, and respect” (Vail, 2005, p. 11) towards others.
“Being empathic, recognizing and appreciating good work, validating efforts,
appreciating a well-done job, helping people develop new strengths” (Vail, 2005, p.
11) these are some ways effective leaders nurture and support teachers.
Administrators that are actively involved in day-to-day school activities conduct
walkthroughs. As opposed to planned formal required yearly teacher evaluations
walkthroughs are unscheduled classroom visits intended to observe students rather
than teacher performance (Cobb, 2005). In the brief visits to classrooms,
administrators are able to observe instruction, classroom environment, and student
engagement. The intent of walkthroughs is to establish a shared responsibility
between teachers and administrators (Cobb, 2005). Feedback from walkthroughs is
essential when it is specific and constructive (Cobb, 2005). With the added

38
component of feedback, “frequent, brief, unscheduled walkthroughs can foster a
school culture of collaborative learning and dialogue” (Ginsgerg et. al., 2002, p. 34).
As culture builders, principals “play a critical role in organizing and facilitating
shared leadership” (Cobb, 2005, p. 473). Effective school administrators utilize
individuals and groups within the school setting to make the necessary changes that
directly affect the culture of the school (Fullan, 2002). “Only principals who are
equipped to handle a complex, rapidly changing environment can implement the
reforms that lead to sustained improvement in student achievement” (Fullan, 2002, p.
16). Change agents are able to transform the school culture to produce lasting
positive change within a school site (Fullan, 2002).
Assistant principals are also seen as instructional leaders, change agents,
motivators, ethical models, and innovators (Calabrese, 1991). Currently, assistant
principals must be knowledgeable in all “aspects of school management, school law,
and educational and psychological measurement, staff supervision and evaluation, as
well as effective communication with students, parents, and the general public”
(Panyako & Rorie, 1987, p. 7). Other knowledge displayed by assistant principals
includes curriculum planning, instruction, assessing, and identifying student needs.
There are many different ways in which school principals and assistant principals
facilitate the professional growth of beginning teachers. Teachers, especially
beginning teachers, benefit from the support that administrators provide. Tom
Carroll, president of the National Commission of Teaching and America’s Future,
points out that “if a teacher is struggling without support, it undermines quality”

39
(cited in Vail, 2005, p. 5) resulting in a lasting negative effect on student learning.
The research study conducted by the Public Education Network (2003) states that a
supportive principal can make a difference between the success and failure of a first
year teacher. Therefore, administrators provide support to beginning teachers by
facilitating release time for mentors and mentees to meet (Ganser, 2002). Ganser
(2002) recommends that school administrators become familiar with the fundamental
principals of “effective new-teacher mentoring programs” (p. 27). The study, The
voice of the new teacher, conducted by the Public Education Network (2003) on the
perceived needs of beginning teachers identified the following characteristics that
their school principals exhibited as helping them their first year teaching which
included; accessibility, providing assistance, and guidance. As it relates to
accessibility Hope (1999) suggests that principals allocate time to initiate
conversations with beginning teachers on instructional issues in order to develop a
level of comfort sufficient enough to encourage beginning teachers to feel confident
in seeking assistance on their own. Principals should also provide assistance and
guidance to beginning teachers by explaining the evaluation process, its frequency,
the purpose, and how it directly affects them (Hope, 1999). This will enable
beginning teachers to self-assess and reflect on their own instructional practices.
Other instructional leaders that provide support in the school setting are the
content experts in Language Arts and Mathematics. Coaches that have specific
expertise in a subject matter are often placed in schools to provide support for all
teachers. In LAUSD schools two types of coaches exist, Literacy and Math coaches.

40
Instructional Support Roles
Language Arts (reading, writing, listening, and speaking) and Mathematics are
fundamental subject areas taught in American public and private schools. Federal
mandates and states initiatives have focused on improving student achievement in this
two subject areas. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965
Title I was the first federal initiative enacted to “establish funding for compensatory
education in U.S. schools” (Dole, 2004, p. 462). ESEA of 1965 focused on schools
below the poverty line and targeted at-risk students. In 2000, Congress reauthorized
ESEA with exception of three changes the fundamental goals remained the same,
academic achievement for all students (Dole, 2004). Following are the three changes
which included: requiring teachers to be “highly qualified” to teach reading and math
in order to reduce intervention referrals; using instructional strategies and programs
that are scientifically based in research data; and “effective and efficient informal
assessment techniques should inform instruction and assist teachers in monitoring the
progress of each child” (Dole, 2004, p. 463). Today ESEA is known as the No Child
Left Behind (NCLB 2002) Act. NCLB requires each state to make Adequately
Yearly Progress (AYP) in reading and mathematical student proficiency levels.
LAUSD and other school districts have created specialist or coach positions in
literacy and mathematics to support teachers in these content areas.
A literacy coach is defined as “the teacher-leader who has the responsibility to
promote and enhance literacy instruction with the ultimate goal of improving student
achievement as measured by reading, writing, and content learning” (Moxley &

41
Taylor, 2006, p. 8). Literacy coaches (Cobb, 2005; Dole & Donaldson, 2006) have a
variety of roles within the elementary, middle, and secondary school levels (Moxley,
et al., 2006). They work with Kindergarten thru 12
th
grade teachers teaching gifted
students, English language learners (ELL), and special education students. Although
a recently new position in school sites, their roles include managing instructional
materials, providing professional development, and building collaborative
relationships. On the managerial side, they are responsible for ordering, distributing,
and organizing reading materials. In the professional developmental role, coaches
provide non-evaluative (Buly, Coskie, Robinson, & Ega, 2006) support via feedback
from classroom observations and conversations with teachers (Dole, et al., 2006).
Feedback that is constructive and detailed is viewed as necessary to inform teachers
of their teaching practices (Dole, et al., 2006). Another role that literacy coaches play
is to model lessons. Lesson demonstrations provide teachers with an opportunity to
observe an instructional strategy before it is implemented. Lessons and strategies
used by coaches are based on current learning theories. It is the responsibility of the
coach to inform teachers of these theory-based instructional strategies in order for
teachers to understand the rational behind the use of these teaching strategies and
techniques (Dole, 2004). Literacy coaches also conduct ongoing professional
development meetings with individuals, small groups, and whole groups. An
example of a professional development topic is how to differentiate English
Language Arts curriculum in order to meet the needs of students at different reading
levels (Moxley, et al., 2006). According to the National Council of Teachers of

42
English (2006) a literacy coach: “is a highly trained and qualified individual; assists
teachers in developing strategies to improve student literacy; and forms long term
partnerships with teachers and school districts” (NCTE website- ncte.org). The
leadership role of a literacy coach is to develop collaborative and collegial
relationships (Buly, et al., 2006) by providing teachers with direct classroom support
and assistance (Dole, et al, 2006). In-class coaching is necessary since “research
indicates that unless learning occurs---in part---where teachers do their work, it will
not be effective or transfer to their classroom work” (Dole, et al, 2006, p. 488).
The qualification to becoming a literacy coach varies from possessing a reading
specialist certification to a master’s degree (Meyer, et. al., 2004). To be effective,
“reading coaches have to have a greater level of reading expertise than the teachers
they are coaching” (Dole, 2004, p. 468). Reading expertise enables literacy coaches
to diagnose and provide immediate intervention for students that are struggling in
Language Arts (Moxley et al., 2006). Furthermore, the majority of the literature
(Dole, 2004; Dole, et al., 2006; Meyer, et al., 2004) reveals the need for literacy
coaches to possess a wide range of theory-based background knowledge. Literacy
coaches must also be “reflective about their own instructional practice” (Dole, 2004,
p. 469). This will ensure that coaches are able to self assess their own knowledge
especially when their lessons do not go as planned. “Coaches must have flexibility in
their thinking and must be able to automatically assess a teaching and learning
situation and make suggestions quickly to keep pace with teachers’ fast-paced days”
(Dole, 2004, p. 469). Literacy coaches share many similarities with math coaches.

43
Math Coaches are considered teachers “whose interest and special preparation in
mathematics content and pedagogy are matched with special teaching or leadership
assignments” (Reys, & Fennell, 2003, p. 277). The position of math coaches is
relatively new in school settings as a result it is an under-researched area in the
educational research community. In LAUSD, elementary math coaches provide
teachers in Kindergarten thru 5
th
grade with the support needed to implement an
effective and rigorous mathematical program (Local District 8 Website). Math
Coaches work directly with teachers for the majority of the instructional day in a non-
evaluative manner. Math coaches are also responsible for “promoting standards-
based instruction by providing demonstration lessons, focused observations, grade
level meetings, and professional development on instructional strategies and research
based classroom practices” (LAUSD, District 8 website, Job Description).
Specifically, LAUSD has a literacy and math coach selection criteria and hiring
process. LAUSD requires candidates to have three years of teaching experience,
satisfactory yearly Stull evaluations, permanent teaching status, and a valid California
teaching credential. Potential Literacy and Math Coach candidates are interviewed
and hired by the school district and placed in school sites. The main duties of a
literacy and math coach include conducting professional development for teachers,
parents, and paraprofessionals (teacher assistants) as well as providing direct support
to teachers. Coaches work with teachers to diagnose and provide appropriate reading
and math intervention for all learners (i.e., Ell, gifted, special education). They assist
teachers in a non-evaluative manner in order to monitoring student progress utilizing

44
district adopted reading programs Open Court Reading and Foro Abierto as well as
the math program, Scott-Foresman California Mathematics.
More research is needed to provide results on the outcomes of content experts and
their coaching results. Data will need to correlate to student achievement in order to
determine the degree students are affected. Case studies of actual on site school
literacy and math coaches is essential in understanding the dynamics of their role in a
school’s culture.
Aside from administrators and coaches, veteran teachers are other sources of
support for beginning teachers. Every school has veteran teachers who become
mentors to beginning teachers. This form of support becomes systematic and
structured in the form of a mentoring program such as BTSA.
Traditional Mentoring Approach
The traditional one-to-one mentoring approach can be traced back to the 1970’s
(Ganser, 2002; Ganser, 1999; Healy & Welchert 1990) apprenticeship system.
Before mentoring was evident in the educational school system it was utilized in the
business and medical fields. Monaghan and Lunt (1992) describe mentoring as
“incorporating apprenticeship, friendship, and peer support that includes all these
relationships but going beyond them” (p. 249). In the field of education, mentoring is
often described as a relationship between a veteran teacher and a beginning teacher
(Galvez-Hjornevik, 1986; Monaghan & Lunt, 1992; Smith, 2005). Mentoring
relationships as other relationships undergo cycles and stages. Phillips (1977)
identifies different stages that a mentoring relationship can undergo: “mutual

45
admiration, development, disillusionment, parting, transformation, and reflecting …”
(p. 20). In this type of relationship, meeting the needs of beginning teachers requires
a deeper understanding of human needs. Abraham Manslow, indicated that if our
hierarchy of needs such as physiological, safety, belongingness and love, and esteem
are not met then it becomes difficult to learn and grow (Smith, 2005). Individuals
cannot undergo self-actualization, a term that Manslow defined as “the need to
develop potential, to become what one is capable of becoming” (Dembo, 1994, p.
205). On a practical level mentoring programs, help beginning teachers during the
first teaching years as well as meet the necessary requirements for clearing their
teaching credential (Ganser, 1999). Ultimately the goal of mentoring is two-fold, to
improve teacher instruction and to produce student achievement.
Mentors and mentees have different needs, responsibilities, and roles. Mentor
teachers have often been referred to as cheerleaders (Smith, 2005), coaches, positive
role models, protectors, sponsors, leaders, guides, and counselors (Zimpher &
Rieger, 1988). As we know, every school has veteran teachers therefore it is only
reasonable to expect that mentors are those that have experience teaching. The
position of mentor entails responsibilities that go beyond the regular classroom duties.
Literature on mentoring (Anderson & Shannon 1988; Monaghan & Lunt, 1992) cite
the following as mentor responsibilities: “role model, nurturing, teaching, sponsoring,
encouraging, counseling and befriending; focus on professional and personal
development; and ongoing caring relationship” (Monaghan & Lunt, 1992, p. 256-
257). According to Borko (1986), in order to successfully carryout the

46
responsibilities of mentorship, veteran teachers need “content-oriented preparation
from effective teaching literature, classroom organization and management, teaching
and learning styles, problem solving process, and process-oriented preparation such
as techniques for working with beginning teachers” (Zimpher & Rieger, 1988, p.
178). Veteran teachers also need to have preparation and knowledge in key areas.
The literature points to five knowledge domains necessary for mentors to possess:
“1.) assessing the needs of beginning teachers, 2.) interpersonal skills through
knowledge of adult development, 3.) understanding classroom processes and school
effectiveness, 4.) utilizing instructional supervision, observation, and feedback
capacities, and 5.) inquiry and reflectivity” (Zimpher & Rieger 1988, p. 178 – 179).
To work with beginning teachers, mentors also need to possess “interpersonal
sensitivity” (Healy, & Welchert, 1990; Monaghan & Lunt, 1992) or interpersonal
skills (Monaghan & Lunt, 1992). Interpersonal sensitivity comes into use when
mentors provide psychological support (Ganser, 1999) that include introduction to the
school culture, encouragement, self-reflection, and sound coping mechanisms.
Mentors exhibit interpersonal skills when they listen and effectively communicate
with beginning teachers in order to meet their needs. Mentors must work to move
beyond mentees’ self-preservation which can lead to defensiveness. “Individual
defensiveness in critiquing teaching practice seems to get in the way of the kind of
professional objectivity necessary to observe and give feedback about teaching”
(Monaghan & Lunt, 1992, p. 177 – 178). Since it is necessary to provide novice
teachers with feedback mentors need to have an understanding of observational skills

47
that provide mentees with “information about their teaching that is objective, non-
threatening, and responsive to their needs” (Ganser, 1999, p. 9).
The literature often utilizes the following terms to describe mentees: protégé
(Healy & Welchert, 1990; Monaghan & Lunt, 1992), inductees (Ganser, 1999),
apprentice, (Ganser, 1999; Monaghan & Lunt, 1992) and neophyte (Zimpher &
Rieger, 1988). Mentees are beginning teachers with one to three years of teaching
experience. These beginning teachers come from a variety of teacher preparation
programs and their needs vary. Thus, the support that they need should be
individualized. In a study conducted by Ganser (1999), beginning teachers were
asked to describe their first teaching experience. Beginning teachers used the
following analogies to describe their first teaching experience; “balancing on the edge
of a steep cliff, bungee jumping, driving down a strange highway at night going 60
miles per hour, traveling in a foreign land and not knowing the language, and learning
to walk again on a pair of backward-facing feet” (Ganser, 1999, p. 11).
Two different studies look at beginning teachers and their first year teaching
experiences. The first study, The struggle of first-year teachers: Investigating support
mechanisms, was conducted by Quinn and Andrews (2004). In this study, the
researchers gathered data via questionnaires and phone interviews. First year teachers
in one school district were mailed a questionnaire. The first ten items on the
questionnaire analyzed the perceived support first year teachers received from their
school principal. The remaining twenty questions inquired over other areas that have
been identified as important in supporting beginning teachers. Areas include:

48
o Curriculum and instruction (Darling-Hammond et. al., 2001; Darling-
Hammond, 2003; Ganser 1999; Meister et. al., 2003; Quinn & Andrews,
2004; Renard, 2003; Robertson et. al., 2006)
o Personal and emotional support (Ganser, 1999; Odell, 1986; Public Education
Network, 2003; Whitaker, 2000)
o Access to materials, supplies, and resources (Brewster & Railsback, 2001;
Odell, 1986; Whitaker, 2000)
o Information about school and school district procedures and policies (Ganser
1999; Odell, 1986; Reiman & Theis-Spinthall, 1997; Whitaker, 2000)
o Help with classroom management and discipline (Darling-Hammond et. al.,
2001, Darling-Hammond, 2003; Meister et. al., 2003; Quinn & Andrews,
2004; Renard, 2003; Robertson et. al., 2006)
o Suggestions for dealing with parents or parent conferences (Darling-
Hammond et. al., 2001, Darling-Hammond, 2003; Meister et. al., 2003; Quinn
& Andrews, 2004; Renard, 2003; Robertson et. al., 2006)
Data results indicate that 65 of 106 beginning teachers rated the support they received
from their principal has eight or higher on a ten point Likert scale. The twenty
remaining items were analyzed via descriptive statistics and the mean for each item
ranged from 3.992 to 4.97 on the Likert scale. The mean for all items was “greater
than the Likert scale’s midpoint (3.5)” (Quinn & Andrews, 2004) which points to
teachers perception of being supported. Phone interviews correlated the
questionnaire findings.

49
The other study, The Voice of the New Teacher, was conducted by the Public
Education Network (PEN, 2003). 211 beginning teachers in four states (Tennessee,
New York, Washington, and Virginia) participated in interviews, surveys, and focus
group discussions. Teacher certification status varied with 62% permanent, 32%
provisional, and 6% uncertified. Participants came from low socioeconomic middle
and high school communities. Beginning teachers were asked to provide their
personal point of view of their induction program, their first year of teaching, and the
support they received from their school and school district. Of the surveyed
beginning teachers, 27% indicated that they did not collaborate with their peers (PEN,
2003). Classroom visitations and observations were also limited. Specifically, 36%
of beginning teachers did not have the opportunity to observe veteran teachers teach.
Teachers in this study indicated that despite working in school districts that had
mentoring programs only 67% had assigned mentors. “A concern cited by teachers
was that mentors did not meet with them regularly or observe their teaching---
problems the teachers attributed to the heavy workload of their mentors or to lack of
organization in the mentoring program” (PEN, 2003, p. 35). School principals also
did not allocate sufficient time for teacher observations, feedback, and guidance.
Surprisingly, 46% of beginning teachers indicated that they did not have regular
contact with their principals (PEN, 2003, p. 28). As a result, inattention to the needs
of beginning teachers is one cause for high attrition rates. “The desire to enlist
mentors in optimizing career development and more recently in promoting excellence

50
in education has inspired a flurry of research and development projects on mentoring”
(Healy, & Welchert, 1990, p. 17).
Induction Programs
Currently, in California and specifically in LAUSD the Beginning Teacher
Support and Assessment (BTSA) induction program is a required support program for
beginning teachers. In 1992, BTSA was established as a result of California state
legislation. BTSA is a beginning teacher induction program in which mentoring is a
sub-component. Literature (Curran & Goldrick, 2002) on induction programs has
identified the following characteristics necessary for effectively supporting beginning
teachers:
• universal participation for beginning teachers from traditional and
alternative preparation programs;
• use experience teachers as mentors;
• provide mentor preparation;
• facilitate release time or reduced teaching loads for beginning teachers
and mentors;
• have funding;
• clear standards;
• input from beginning teachers and veteran teachers actively sought
out;
• assess beginning teachers’ performance;
• have a subject-specific focus;

51
• extend through the school year and beyond the first year of teaching;
and
• provide teachers with working conditions which include placement in
subjects that they are qualified to teach, placement with students who
are not the most challenging, opportunities to participate in targeted
professional development, and opportunities to observe and be
observed by veteran teachers (p. 3 - 4)
As previously mentioned, mentoring is a component of induction programs.
Little (1990) conducted a review of the mentor trend and found that “in principal,
mentoring seems a sensible response to the present inadequacies of teacher induction”
(p. 330 - 331). As a result, the role of mentor has become formalized in order to have
more “institutional control” (Little, 1990, p. 305) within induction programs.
Furthermore, Little (1990) states that mentor programs are favored by districts and
states in place of other alternatives (i.e., reduced work load, peer group support,
formally structured staff development, etc.).
Mentoring Programs
Mentoring programs can have promising effects when the mentor and mentee
developed a collegial relationship (Ganser, 1999; Muer & Zimmerman, 2000). Mauer
and Zimmerman (2000) point out that “effective mentoring programs can help novice
survive their stressful beginnings and emerge as confident and successful team
players” (p. 28). This collegial relationship can lead to the professional development
of both parties (Ganser, 1999). Beginning teachers get the benefit of the “veteran

52
teachers’ craft knowledge, expertise, and wisdom, while simultaneously enriching the
careers of those veterans” (Ganser, 1999, p.9). Veteran teachers are able to reassess
and reflect on their own instructional practices as they work with beginning teachers.
As Ganser (1999) points out mentoring helps to “minimize the sometimes lonely and
traumatic ‘sink or swim’ experiences of beginning teachers and to maximize
conditions that enable to become effective teachers quickly” (p. 8). Both parties are
transformed (Healy & Welchert, 1990). The strength of this relationship is key to
encourage schools to become professional learning communities (Ganser, 1999).
Ganser (1999) leaves us with a reminder that “without systematic guidance,
temporary and sometimes undesirable measures seize upon by beginning teachers to
make it through the year---or even through the day---may soon become permanent”
(Ganser, 1999, p. 8). Support for effective mentoring is necessary to assist teachers to
navigate the intricate educational system beginning with the classroom setting.
As school systems along with federal and state educational agencies implement
mentoring programs, research studies (Ganser, 1999; Monaghan & Lunt, 1992;
Zimpher and Rieger, 1988) have shown that there are essential areas that need to be
considered. For a mentoring program to be effective, it must involve training and
support for the mentor teacher (Ganser, 1999; Monaghan & Lunt, 1992). Mentoring
programs must support an infrastructure that also meets the needs of mentor teachers.
Even excellent teachers need the added support, “especially if the intended goals of
mentoring extend beyond providing emotional support and information about policies
and procedures” (Ganser, 1999, p. 9). Excellence in the classroom does not

53
necessarily translate success as a mentor without the necessary preparation and
support. Mentoring is a complex role for veteran teachers. Mentor teachers not only
need the additional support but they also need allocated time during the instructional
day to build a collegial partnership (Ganser, 1999). Time out of their regular
classroom duties will allow mentors to visit their mentees’ classroom for further
observations, peer coaching, modeling, and necessary constructive feedback.
Another important area to consider involves the process by which mentors and
beginning teachers are paired. Mentoring partnerships tend to be successful when
they share similar subject areas, grade levels, and even proximity (Zimpher and
Rieger, 1988). Another area to bear in mind is the views held by the rest of the
school faculty as it pertains to the role of a mentor. Many schools hold the view of a
mentor as the ‘fix it’ person (Ganser, 1999) when in reality many mentors do not have
direct responsibility over factors that directly affect their mentees (Ganser, 1999).
“Even though they may be well-prepared and effective, mentors usually have little
direct control over central features of beginning teachers’ work assignments (e.g.,
number of preparation, types of courses, schedule, duty assignment, ‘floating’ or
‘carting’ between multiple classrooms)” (Ganser, 1999, p. 10).
Monaghan and Lunt (1992) analyze the possibility of one person carrying out the
role of a mentor. They concluded that it takes more than one person to fulfill this
important role. “Moreover a teacher exists as a part of a larger unit, the school and a
subset of the school staff can collectively be mentors” (Monaghan & Lunt, 1992, p.
261). Ultimately it is necessary for all educators to consider that “having mentors

54
does not negate the professional obligation of all teachers to assist newcomers in
making a smooth transition from outsider to insider” (Ganser, 1999, p.10).
Collaborative Team Approach
“The ‘era of solo teaching in isolated classrooms is over.’ The more contact there is
between the principal, staff, and new teachers, educators agree, the more beneficial
the professional relationship will be and the longer teachers will stay.”
----- (National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future, NCTAF)

The collaborative approach shares the same fundamental principals as that of the
mentoring program but on a larger scale. Administrators, faculty, and staff members
work together as a team in order to support teachers especially beginning teachers
resulting in student achievement and professional growth for teachers. This has a
potential for higher teacher retention. Each stands to benefit from working
collaboratively as opposed to working individually (Freeman, 1993). According to
Gruenert (2005), a collaborative school culture is defined “as a school where teacher
development is facilitated through mutual support, joint work, and broad agreement
on educational values” (p. 43) this is the ideal climate for teacher and student learning
to take place. In a collaborative school culture, the underlying belief is that all
members are learners (Roberts & Pruitt, 2003).
In her book, Creating collaborative and inclusive schools, Idol (2002) describes
collaboration rather than providing a definition. One characteristic of a collaborative
school is that the school site determines to a large degree the quality of education
students receive. Another characteristic of a collaborative school is that “instruction
is most effective in a school environment characterized by norms of collegiality and

55
continual improvement” (Idol, 2002, p. 11). Teachers are viewed as professionals
and are accountable for student achievement. Teachers are also involved in the
decision-making process as equal participants. Collaboration provides a basis in
which teachers are involved in creating school goals and the conditions and structures
to achieve them (Idol, 2002). Administrators and teachers must work together to
establish structures and practices that facilitate school improvement.
There are conditions that promote this type of collaborative school environment.
De Costa, Marshall, and Riordan (1998) examined the development of one Canadian
elementary school implementing school-wide collaborative structures initiated by the
school principal as a result of district mandates that calls for site-based management
rather than district management. Their case study focused on a Canadian urban
elementary school, its faculty, and administrative staff. The purpose of this study was
to: “(a) further develop theory regarding how principals and their staff can work
together to achieve common goals, and (b) to develop practical suggestions to nurture
and enhance the collaborative relationships that are increasingly required of principals
and staff as they address ever-more complex educational issues” (De Costa, et. al,
1998, p. 3).
To gather the necessary data De Costa, Marshall, and Riordan (1998) employed
interviews and observations. The interviews were conducted with 15 participants and
observations were inclusive of the school faculty and school principal. An analysis of
two semi-structured interviews and observations of the school identified teachers’
perception that the more control and decision making power over the instruction of its

56
students the better able they were to meet their needs. The leadership style of the
principal, Jane (a pseudonym), was also perceived by the staff and faculty as
necessary to developing an effective collaborative school culture. Her leadership
style involved teacher observations, an interest in the success of students, and a
“leadership approach that could best be described as demanding of excellence and
hard work---but not any more demanding than she was of herself” (De Costa, et al.,
1998, p. 9). Faculty perceptions were divided when it came to the decisions that
directly affected the school site. “Jane’s approach regarding which decisions were
hers, which she wanted input on, and which she would delegate was appreciated by
many of her staff, however, some staff perceived that their input was token on some
issues” (De Costa et. al., 1998, p. 11). The opportunity for teachers to work in teams
was also seen as valuable by teachers that indicated having a close personal
friendship. When asked to describe their collaborative practices teachers indicated
that they coordinated classroom activities, reviewed student work, and exchanged
classes. Collaboration did not focus on pedagogical issues. Lacking in the overall
culture of the school was the school vision statement. Teachers were unable to
uniformly articulate the goals held at the school site. “This philosophical statement
could serve to direct staff in; (a) guiding their collaborative activities to benefit pupils
and (b) interacting with one-another with tolerance” (De Costa et. al., 1998, p. 15).
This research identified negative results when a collaborative process is implemented
too quickly and when change was initiated by the school district rather than by its
teachers, staff, and administrators. In summary, social pre-conditions such as an

57
empowered school site, collegiality, perceived principals’ leadership style, and a
shared school vision were seen as necessary in order for collaboration to take place.
Newell and Buchen (2004) in their book, “Democratic learning and leading:
Creating collaborative school governance” echo de Costa, Marshall, and Fiordan’s
(1998) findings. Newell and Buchen (2004) point to site-based management,
principal-teacher partnerships, distributed leadership, leadership and learning school
councils, teacher leadership, and teacher ownership as key to creating democratic
collaborative schools. Further studies (Campo, 1993; Uhl & Pérez-Sellés, 1995) also
verify that time and commitment from stakeholders is essential in creating a
collaborative school culture.
For a collaborative culture to emerge the egg-crate ecology (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001) or the notion of a cellular structure (Feiman-Nemser & Floden,
1986) must be eradicated. These terms refer to the idea that teachers spend the
majority of the instructional day isolated in their classrooms. There is minimum
contact, discussion, or sharing of ideas among professionals. Research on
collaborative schools (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Little, 1982; Roseholtz, 1989)
has indicated that when the cellular structures of these classrooms are permeated
collaborative practices can emerge. The shift from isolated classroom to
collaborative schools is called reculturing, a term used by Fullan (1993; 2000).
Fullan (2000) defines reculturing “as the process of developing professional learning
communities in the school, i.e., going from a situation of limited attention, to

58
assessment and pedagogy, to one where teachers and others routinely focus on these
matters and make associated improvements” (p. 582).
Research data (Barth 2002; Gruenert, 2005) has indicated that a collaborative
school culture promotes student achievement. Furthermore, Gruenert’s (2005) study
indicates that a school with a strong collaborative culture does in fact result in higher
levels of student achievement as measured by standardized test scores. Steve
Gruenert (2005) conducted a survey of 81 schools in Indiana that held the tenets of
collaborative culture and found elements that point to a strong correlation to student
achievement as measured by language arts and math standardized test scores. The
findings of the 35-item survey indicate that collaborative schools are more likely to
have higher student achievement. The gap found in this study was the intense focus
on test scores rather than focusing holistically on students. Nonetheless, Gruenert, S.
(2005) concludes by stating that “school leaders that shape their cultures to become
more collaborative should reap the benefits of greater teacher performance and
satisfaction and greater student performance” (p. 43).
The school principal is the primary individual that through leadership is able to
nurture and empower staff members to create and sustain a collaborative culture.
According to Bowen-Childs, Moller, and Scrivner (2000), historically the deficit
model of leadership holds the principal in a hierarchical position wilding all the
power and decision-making thus public school systems are bureaucratically structured
and do not allow for such collaboration to take place (Uhl & Pérez-Sellés, 1995).
Principal must move towards a model in which their role is that of “leader of leaders”

59
(Bowen-Childs et. al., 2000, p. 27) and “bridge builders” (Rubin, 2002, p. 14).
Collaborative leaders bridge the needs and interests of those involved with the needs
of the school/ organization. Rubin (2002) points to the following as dimensions of
collaborative leadership: visionary, strategic thinker, professional credibility,
consensus building, interpersonal communication skills, diplomacy, psychosocial,
and integrity.
According to Bower-Childs (2000) a “successful organization depends on
multiple sources of leadership working collaboratively for school change” (p. 27).
Sources of leadership may be derived from school principals, assistant principals,
literacy coaches, math coaches, veteran teachers, and beginning teachers. According
to Lick (2000), “people work together to generate a total result that is greater than the
outcome of their separate efforts” (p. 46) each member works together to generate
new ideas, practices, and knowledge which leads to the formation of a common goal
and vision (Uhl & Pérez-Sellés, 1995).
Professional Learning Communities
A collaborative school environment has the potential to create professional
learning communities (Roberts & Pruitt, 2003). Roberts and Pruitt (2003) indicate in
their book that the collaborative approach is best represented in professional learning
communities. Lick (2000), defined professional learning communities as “a learning
organization one in which the organization itself is committed to individual growth,
learning, and creativity as a path to institutional growth” (p. 48). In this particular
type of school environment faculty discuss and share best practices (Uhl & Pérez-

60
Sellés, 1995). At the center of the professional learning community is the idea of “the
teacher as professional” (Uhl & Pérez-Sellés, 1995, p. 259).
In Reculturing schools as professional learning communities the authors, Jane B.
Huffman and Kristine K. Hipp (2003), provide in-depth descriptions of five essential
dimensions of professional learning communities (PLCs) which include: supportive
and shared leadership; shared values and vision; collective learning and application of
learning; supportive conditions; and shared personal practice. Huffman and Hipp’s
(2003) intent is to attempt to document strategies and practices that are being
implemented in emerging PLCs schools. Data was gathered in the span of three years
from six pre-kindergarten thru 12
th
grade schools. 64 interviews were conducted with
teachers, staff, and administrators the duration was between 30 to 60 minutes. The
selected school sites encompassed a diverse range of socioeconomic levels including
rural, suburban, and urban school settings. Furthermore, the authors provide a
literature review of the leadership displayed in PLCs. Huffman and Hipp (2003) also
present five case studies that “provide evidence of the progressive development of a
PLC from initiation to implementation using exemplars and non-exemplars that either
hinder or facilitate creating and sustaining PLCs” (p. 19).
Bowen-Childs, et al., (2000), Huffman and Hipp (2003) identified five attributes
that are shared by professional learning communities.
A. Supportive and shared leadership: Power, authority, and decision-making
are evenly distributed between administrators and faculty. Leadership and
responsibility is shared between administrators and teachers. School

61
administrators promote, nurture, and sustain leadership among faculty and
staff members.
B. Shared values and vision: Shared values guide behaviors and
implementation within the school about teaching, learning, and instruction.
Shared values are displayed in teachers’ daily instruction and interaction. A
shared vision helps to create and aligns policies, procedures, and strategies
that promote future goals (Huffman & Hipp, 2003). “An effective vision
presents a credible yet realistic picture of the organization that inspires the
participants to reach for a future goal” (Huffman & Hipp, 2003, p. 7). A
school’s vision is created by stakeholders through a collaborative process in
order to be held by all.
C. Collective learning and application of learning: Information sharing is the
norm among faculty, staff, and administrators. Everyone works
collaboratively to plan, solve problems, and improve learning (Huffman &
Hipp, 2003). Professional developments are “job-embedded” which means
teachers reflect on their instruction, assess their own learning, and share new
insight. Huffman and Hipp (2003) point that teacher leadership is a positive
outcome of collaborative learning. In a collaborative learning environment
teachers share responsibility for there own professional growth as well as their
colleagues growth. Teacher leadership has many potential benefits such as
teacher retention, commitment to change efforts, teacher accountability, and
teacher efficacy (Huffman & Hipp, 2003, p. 11).

62
D. Supportive conditions: A school must have the necessary conditions to
support a community of learners that include physical and structural aspects.
Providing time for faculty and administrators to meet, communicate, plan, and
discuss is an essential condition in a learning community. “Structural change
that is not supported by cultural change will eventually be overwhelmed by
the culture, for it is in the culture that any organization finds meaning and
stability” (Schlechty, 1997, p. 136). A healthy school culture and its
conditions value risk taking, innovations, and peer collaboration.
E. Shared personal practice: Only when there is a supportive environment and
conditions can teachers begin to share instructional practices. Trust and
respect enables teachers to deprivatize their practice, a term coined by Louis
and Kruse (1995). The deprivatization of practice allows teachers to open
their classroom doors to colleagues as well as share their student work as a
basis to highlight evidence of quality of instructional practices.
Another attribute of professional learning communities identified by the literature
is school-wide collegiality. A positive collegial relationship opens lines of
communication and trust (Riordan & da Costa, 1998). For example, positive collegial
relationships enable peer observations to take place. Barth (2006) indicates that there
is no more “powerful way of learning and improving on the job than by observing
others and having others observe us” (p. 11). Observation alone is not as effective as
the dialogs and discussions that come before and after the observation takes place.
Cooperative learning is an example of an instructional strategy that calls for

63
collaboration and collegiality (Freeman, 1993). Cooperative learning fosters “goals
of … collaboration such as appreciation of multiple perspectives and the development
of tolerance” (Freeman, 1993, p. 36). Portin, Alejano, Knapp, & Marzolf, (2006) in
their report on Redefining roles, responsibilities, and authority of school leaders,
identified other structures such as curriculum teams, critical friends groups, lesson
study teams, technology teams, and team teaching that promote collaboration and
teamwork. Coherence, consistency, (Cobb, 2005) “open communication, trust and
rapport, and continuous inquiry and improvement of work” (Bowen-Childs, et al.,
2000, p. 29) are key to a professional learning community. Collegiality, has the
potential to positively affect the overall school culture (Hope, 1999, p. 55).
Collaboration and collegiality have an important role in transforming the school
culture.
Literature Based Rational for Methodology
The literature presented in this chapter will assist in creating research frameworks
that will guide the development of the data collection instruments and analysis of the
data collected. The instruments used to collect data include a teacher survey,
interview protocols, and an observation protocol. The literature review on
Traditional Mentoring Approach and Collaborative Team Approach including the
research by Huffman and Hipp (2003) provided the basis for the survey. In their
study, Huffman and Hipp (2003) administered questionnaires to “assess perceptions
about the school’s principal, staff, and stakeholders (parents and community
members) based on the five dimensions of a professional learning community and the

64
critical attributes” (p. 69). To further clarify this questionnaire the literature review
provided information on mentors, mentees, and mentoring programs as well as a
description of a collaborative school environment. The literature points to the
following attributes as necessary factors in professional learning communities which
include: supportive and shared leadership, shared values and vision, collective
learning and application of learning, supportive conditions, and shared personal
practices. The literature review on the Change Process, School Culture, Theories of
Leadership, Traditional Mentoring Approach, and Collaborative Team Approach
provided the basis for the interview and observation protocols. Interview questions
were developed from knowledge gleamed from these sections. The attributes
identified in collaborative practice and professional learning communities (i.e.,
supportive and shared leadership; shared values and vision; collective learning and
application of learning; supportive conditions; shared personal practice) formed the
basis for the research framework for this study. Further elaboration of the
methodology selected for this study will follow in chapter three.
Summary
The literature presented in this chapter will provide background knowledge on the
necessary school environment that nurtures and supports beginning teachers.
Literature in the first section, “School Culture”, identified the following components
of a productive school culture; collegiality, experimentation, high expectations, trust,
confidence, tangible support, reaching out to the knowledge bases, appreciation,
recognition, traditions, celebration, humor, involvement in decision making, honest

65
and open communication. The second section, “Change Process” examined change
as a process that has different levels, steps, that is ongoing, and that takes long-term
commitment. In addition, literature on change identified eight factors essential for
long-term change. The eight factors include: moral purpose, leadership, building
capacity, understanding the change process, school culture, self-assessment,
coherence making, and tri-level development. The third section entitled “Theories of
Leadership” focused on transformational leadership as empowering, shared, and an
encompassing. Literature identified transformational leaders as having a vision,
highly developed communicative skills, able to earn trust, and having a positive self-
regard. This section also reviewed literature on the role and responsibilities of school
personnel such as the principal, assistant principal, literacy coach, and mathematics
coach. Attention was paid to the vital contributions they make to the professional
development of teachers. In the fourth section, “Traditional Mentoring Approach”
literature on mentoring (i.e., mentors and meentes) was reviewed. The act of
mentoring was identified as a limited source of support to beginning teachers since
there are many factors that are beyond the control of mentors. The final section,
“Collaborative Team Approach” focused on school collaborative and collegial
practices that promote learning for all teachers. A review of the literature focused on
the attributes found in professional learning communities which include: supportive
and shared leadership, shared values and vision, collective learning and application of
learning, supportive conditions, and shared personal practices. In sum, the review of
the literature presented in this chapter has provided information that point to the

66
possibility that collaborative school practices can be an effective new paradigm to
supporting beginning teachers.

67
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Introduction
Teacher attrition is a problem faced by schools and school districts especially in
urban areas. The need to retain teachers via a strong support system is vital to the
success of beginning teachers and their students. It is important to understand and
investigate the structural supports that are in place in schools for beginning teachers.
With this in mind, the selected framework for this case study will be basic research.
Patton (2002) states that, “basic researchers’ purpose is to understand and explain” (p.
215). Therefore, the intent of this case study is to better understand and explain the
phenomenon of teacher retention by studying the elements necessary to nurture and
support beginning teachers.
Furthermore, this chapter will describe the sample, population, instrumentation,
data collection, and data analysis for this research study. The purpose of this case
study is to investigate how school site personnel might collaborate to promote a
school culture that is collectively responsive to the needs of beginning teachers. The
focus is to examine the roles of key school personnel involved in the nurturing,
guidance, and sustaining of beginning teachers and how a team approach to
mentoring can be carried out in a school setting. One urban elementary school was
selected in order to assist in answering the following two research questions that
guided this study:
1. What school culture characteristics contribute to an effective collaborative team
approach that best supports beginning teacher development?

68
2. How does a team approach differ in effect from traditional beginning teacher
support?
This study utilized a multi-methods approach in gathering data but the focus
remained a qualitative case study approach in order to provide depth of understanding
in the area of beginning teacher support. Yin (1994) defines a case study as “an
empirical inquiry that: investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life
context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not
clearly evident" (p. 13). In this case, the phenomenon refers to the collaborative
practices that are shared among the faculty in the context of a school setting.
To carry out a case study research it is necessary to have multiple sources of data
to better understand the phenomenon under study. Therefore, surveys, interviews,
and observations were used to collect data and analyze findings. A survey was
selected to enable the researcher to collect data related to the perceived levels of
support provided to beginning teachers during their first thru third year teaching.
This survey format was selected in order to gather data from a large number of
participants (80 beginning teachers in their first thru third year teaching in 56 LAUSD
elementary schools) in a standardized and objective manner. Interviews were
selected to “allow the researcher to enter into the participants perspective” (Patton,
2002, p. 341). Interviews allowed the researcher more control over the line of
questioning (Creswell, 1994). According to Patton (2002), three fundamental
strengths support conducting field observations. The first reason is to provide the
researcher with the opportunity to record information as it occurs in context.

69
Observations allow the researcher to be “inquiry driven, discovery oriented, and
inductive because, by being on site, the observer has less need to rely on prior
conceptualizations of the setting, where those prior conceptualizations are from
written documents or verbal reports” (Patton, 2002, p. 262). Field observations may
provide the researcher with an opportunity to discover new insights.
The following table will provide an overview of the methodology utilized in this
study.

70
TABLE 1: Overview of Methodology
Type of
Method
Method of
Analysis
Rational Function Implementation Research
Questions
Addressed
Survey

* Descriptive
statistics
analysis was
conducted

* Triangulation of
data
* Surveys allowed
researcher to
analyze data via
quantitative means
* Establishing a rich
foundation of data
describing
beginning teacher
experiences as they
perceive the support
they receive
* To understand
perceived
perceptions of
beginning teacher
support with a
traditional one-to-
one mentoring
approach.
* 80 beginning teachers in
their first thru third year
teaching from 56 LAUSD
elementary schools were
given the survey
* The surveys were handed
out by school coordinators.
Surveys were returned in a
sealed pre stamped return
address (P.O. Box)
envelops.
* 15 min. to complete
* Implemented in April
and May
Research
question 2
Interviews

* Interviews
were
transcribed
and coded to
reveal themes,
patterns,
concepts, and
insights
* Triangulation of
data
* Interviews allow
researcher to collect
more in depth data
that cannot be
derived from other
instrumentation.
* To collect data
related to
participants’ beliefs
and attitudes on
school culture,
leadership,
mentoring, and
collaborative
practices
* The following 10 people
were interviewed:
---Administrative Staff:
Principal (1), & Assistant
Principal (1)
---Instructional Support
Staff: Literacy Coach (1),
Math Coach (1),
---Veteran Teachers (3),
and Beginning Teachers
(3)
* 1 hr. long interviews
* Audio-taped if permitted
by participant
* All participants work in
1 public elementary school
* Implemented in May and
June
Research
question 1 &
2
Observations

* Strategies
for analysis
included: ---
unique case
orientation,
---holistic
perspective, --
-context
sensitivity,
---voice,
perspective,
and reflexivity
(Patton,
2002).
* Triangulation of
data
* Observations
allowed researcher
to collect data of the
environment and
participants as they
exist
* To collect data
from a school where
collaborative
approach to
mentoring exists.
* Observations took place
during grade level
meetings.
* This school site has 2
administrators, 2
instructional support staff,
10 beginning teachers, and
17 veteran teachers.
* 5 observations took place
for 1 hour (each)
* Implemented in April,
May, and June.
Research
question 1 &
2

Sample and Population
The unit of analysis was one public elementary school (Kindergarten thru fifth
grade). Patton (2002) states, “one or more groups of people are selected as the units
of analysis when there is some important characteristic that separates people into

71
groups and when that characteristic has important implications for the program” (p.
228). The groups are composed of administrators (principal and assistant principal),
instructional support personnel (Literacy and Math Coaches), and teachers (veteran
and beginning). The characteristics that place the selected individuals into groups are
based on their positions and responsibilities within the school setting as well as the
types of support they provide beginning teachers. The data was analyzed with regard
to attitudes, beliefs, and point of views from each group as they work together to
nurture and support beginning teachers. It was my hypothesis that the data from this
case study would provide a depth of understanding of the structural framework that
supports the retention of beginning teachers.
The sampling strategy used in this study was purposeful sampling. “Information-
rich cases” (Patton, 2002, p. 40) are specifically selected for the in-depth information
that would provide data towards answering the research questions in this study.
According to Patton (2002), “information-rich cases are those from which one can
learn a great deal about issues of central importance to the purpose of the research,
thus the term purposeful sampling” (p. 46). The school site selected for this case
study and the beginning teachers selected for the surveys were purposefully sampled.
There was a specific reason for their selection. The school was selected due to the
following factors: required participants present on campus (i.e., administrators,
instructional support personnel, veteran, and beginning teachers); recognized
characteristics of collaborative school culture; and recognized for academic
excellence by the California School Recognition Program (CRP) as a California

72
Distinguished School in 2006. The CRP identifies and pays tribute to excellent
public schools in California. Schools voluntary participate in the selection process
where only a few schools across the state are recognized. Following is an abbreviated
list of criteria that schools must meet in order to receive this prestigious recognition
which is valid for four years (California Department of Education, 2006):
• High academic expectations for all students based on California’s state-
adopted standards and performance levels
• Visionary and collaborative school leadership committed to excellence
and high expectations for all students
• Varied teaching strategies that provide challenging learning experiences
for all students
• Academically competent and caring teachers, and strong professional
development that is aligned to standards-based instructional materials and
evaluated based upon student progress
• Safe school culture that supports the inclusion of all students and promotes
positive character traits, such as caring, citizenship, fairness, respect,
responsibility, and trustworthiness; and proactive policies and programs
that prevent bullying
• Well-maintained learning environment that communicates the importance
of education in our society
• Meet AYP and API expectations

73
Many of the criteria used to identify distinguished school are also present in a
collaborative school environment as well as in professional learning communities.
The characteristics (De Costa, Marshall, & Riordan, 1998; Idol, 2002; Newell &
Buchen, 2004) include the view of teachers as professionals. As such, teachers are
involved in the decision-making process and share leadership roles and
responsibilities such as deciding which instructional curriculum and strategies to
implement. The school environment facilitates collaborative and collegial
relationships to flourish. The school site is empowered to make the decisions that
directly affect the professional development of teachers and the academic success of
its students. These types of schools have in-place the necessary structures, vision,
values, norms, and conditions that support school-wide collaborative practices.
Administrators are at the forefront in facilitating a healthy school culture.
School District Description
Data was collected from schools within Los Angeles Unified School District
(LAUSD). LAUSD is composed of 691 elementary schools, 199 middle schools, and
244 high schools. These schools are divided into eight geographic local school
districts. Local District 8 was purposefully selected to administer the teacher survey
to their beginning teachers. Local District 8 is composed of 56 elementary schools.
80 beginning teachers in the 55 elementary schools were given the survey. Interviews
and observations were conduct at Dynasty Elementary School (a pseudonym) within
Local District 4.
Overview of the School

74
Dynasty Elementary School is located in an urban city in a predominately
minority community. Due to the low socio-economic level of the community, this
school qualifies as a Title I school-wide. Thus, 91.8% of students qualify for free and
reduced meals. The school calendar is traditional from September to June serving
536 Pre-Kindergarten thru fifth grade students in a single-track system. The diverse
student population is composed of African-Americans, American Indians, Asians,
Filipinos, Hispanics, Pacific Islanders, and Whites. There is a 49.1% student
population identified as English language learners (Ell). To help support their
language needs Dynasty Elementary School provides students with a Structural
English Immersion (SEI) instructional program. SEI supports Ell students in
becoming proficient in English by allocating 30 to 40 minutes during the instructional
day to provide English Language Development. Table 2 provides demographic
information of students attending Dynasty Elementary School.

75
Table 2: Dynasty Elementary School Student Information

School Administrator Descriptions
Due to student enrollment Dynasty Elementary School has two administrators,
which include one school principal and one assistant principal. The school principal
has been in her current position for the past two years. She has worked at Dynasty
Elementary School in various capacities including as a classroom teacher and
coordinator. She has invested many years at Dynasty, which has enabled them to
gain background knowledge of the stakeholders, community, and school
environment. The assistant principal is an AP-EIS. The AP-EIS has been in his
current position for the past two years. Both administrators were interviewed and
observed.
Instructional Support Personnel Descriptions
Dynasty Elementary School Student Information
Number of Students % of school enrollment
Total Student Enrollment 536 100%
English Learners 263 49.1%
Language of ELs
• Spanish

244

45.5%
• Filipino (Tagalog) 14 2.6%
• Cantonese 4 0.7%
• Vietnamese 1 0.2%
Student Ethnicity
• African-American

5

0.9%
• American Indian 3 0.6%
• Asian 9 1.7%
• Filipino 28 5.2%
• Hispanic 483 90.1%
• Pacific Islander 1 0.2%
• White 6 1.1%
Free/Reduced Meals 492 91.1%
Title 1 Yes, (school-wide) 100%

API Growth from 99 – 07
1999: 497 2002: 652 2005: 765
2000: 536 2003: 725 2006: 788
2001: 594 2004: 754 2007: 823

76
Dynasty Elementary School has two instructional support personnel. There is a
Literacy Coach and a Math Coach. The Literacy Coach has been in her positions for
the past five and a half years. The Math Coach has worked in Dynasty Elementary
for four years. Both instructional support personnel were interviewed and observed.
Teacher Descriptions
Three veteran teachers were interviewed. The veteran teachers were randomly
selected. The selected veteran teachers have been teaching at Dynasty Elementary
School from eight, ten, and fifteen years. One of the veteran teachers is a BTSA
mentor teacher. For the purpose of this study, three beginning teachers were also
interviewed. The beginning teachers were also randomly selected. Two of the
selected beginning teachers have been teaching at this school for two years and the
third beginning teacher has taught at this school for 1.5 years. Two of the beginning
teachers are general education teachers and one is a special education teacher. The
selected six participants were also part of the teachers that were observed.
Teacher (overall) Descriptions
Following is a table depicting faculty and staff information:

77
Table 3: Dynasty Elementary School Faculty and Staff Information
Dynasty Elementary School Faculty and Staff Information
Number of Teachers
Fully Credentialed 17
Beginning Teachers 10
Self-Contained Classrooms 26
Special Education Classrooms 1
Other 2
Total Number of Teachers 27
Teacher Ethnicity
• Asian

2
• Filipino 1
• Hispanic 9
• African-American 1
• White 14
Clerical Staff 5
Administrators 2
Instructional Support Personnel 2
Beginning Teachers (1-3 yrs) 10
Veteran Teachers 17
Teacher Assistants 14

Instrumentation
For each of the proposed research questions a data collection instrument and
research framework was created. The data collection instruments and the research
frameworks were created based on information presented in the literature review.
Research Framework for Research Question One
Question one states the following 1.) What school culture characteristics
contribute to an effective collaborative team approach that best supports beginning
teacher development?
The research framework developed is derived from the following researchers,
Bowen-Childs et al., (2000) and Huffman & Hipp (2003), which identified five
attributes that are shared by professional learning communities. Based on the
literature review the five attributes are also present in collaborative schools. These
five attributes are evident in a supportive school system. The five attributes are:

78
1.) Supportive and shared leadership
2.) Shared values and vision
3.) Collective learning and application of learning
4.) Supportive conditions
5.) Shared personal practices
This research framework presents five attributes identified in collaborative
schools and professional learning communities. Furthermore, this table indicates how
the attributes of a collaborative school affect the roles and responsibilities shared by
school administrators, instructional support personnel, veteran teachers, and
beginning teachers. The research framework, which was informed by the literature
reviewed, has been used as the basis for creating the interview and observation
protocols. The research frameworks guided in coding the data collected from the
interviews and observations.

79
Table 4: Research Framework for Research Question One
Attributes of a
Collaborative
School
Beginning Teachers

Instructional Support Personnel
& Veteran Teachers
Administrators

1.) Supportive
and Shared
Leadership

* Teachers are empowered by
being involved in the decision-
making process as equal
participants (Cobb, 2005;
Huffman & Hipp, 2003; Idol,
2002)
* Are involved in broad-based
decision making that reflects
commitment and accountability
(Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Are empowered and involved in
the decision-making process as
equal participants (Cobb, 2005;
Huffman & Hipp, 2003; Idol, 2002)
* Due to their quasi-administrative
positions they are also responsible
for promoting, nurturing, and
sustaining leadership (Fullan, 2005;
Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Are involved in broad-based
decision making that reflects
commitment and accountability
(Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Empower and involve
faculty and staff in the
decision-making process as
equal participants (Cobb,
2005; Huffman & Hipp,
2003; Idol, 2002)
* Promote, nurture, and
sustain leadership among
its faculty
(Fullan, 2005; Huffman &
Hipp, 2003)
* Are involved in broad-
based decision making that
reflects commitment and
accountability (Huffman &
Hipp, 2003)

2.) Shared
values and
vision

* Teachers hold high
expectations for their students
and themselves (Cobb, 2005;
Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Receive feedback from
administrators during regular
unscheduled walkthroughs
(Cobb, 2005)
* Shared values guide
behavior, teaching, learning,
and instruction (Gruenert,
2005; Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Involved in creating the
vision and goals for the school
(Idol, 2002; Uhl & Pérez-
Sellés, 1995)
* Teachers are seen as
professionals (Idol, 2002; Uhl
& Pérez-Sellés, 1995)
*High expectations for all (Barth
2002; Cobb, 2005; Gruenert, 2005;
Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Provide teachers with non-
evaluative feedback (Cobb, 2005;
Dole, et al., 2006)
* Shared values guide behavior,
teaching, learning, and instruction
(Gruenert, 2005; Huffman & Hipp,
2003)
* Involved in creating the vision for
the school (Idol, 2002; Uhl &
Pérez-Sellés, 1995)
* Teachers are viewed as
professionals (Idol, 2002; Uhl &
Pérez-Sellés, 1995)
*High expectations for all
(Barth 2002; Cobb, 2005;
Gruenert, 2005; Huffman
& Hipp, 2003)
* Provide teachers with
feedback during regular
unscheduled walkthroughs
(Cobb, 2005)
* Shared values guide
behavior, teaching,
learning, and instruction
(Gruenert, 2005; Huffman
& Hipp, 2003)
* Involved in creating the
vision for the school (Idol,
2002; Uhl & Pérez-Sellés,
1995)
* Teachers are viewed as
professionals (Idol, 2002;
Uhl & Pérez-Sellés, 1995)

3.) Collective
learning and
application of
learning
* Teachers feel confident in
seeking information and
knowledge from within and
outside of the school setting
(Cobb, 2005)
* Teachers know that their
individual and group efforts are
appreciate and recognize
(Cobb, 2005; Huffman & Hipp,
2003)
* Information is shared
(Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Working collaboratively to
plan, solve problems, and
improve learning (Huffman &
Hipp, 2003)
* Information and knowledge is
sought from within and outside of
the school setting (Cobb, 2005)
* Appreciate and recognize
individual and group effort (Cobb,
2005; Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Information is shared (Huffman
& Hipp, 2003)
* Working collaboratively to plan,
solve problems, and improve
learning (Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Enables others to seek
information and
knowledge within and
outside of the school
setting (Cobb, 2005)
* Appreciate and recognize
individual and group effort
(Cobb, 2005; Huffman &
Hipp, 2003)
* Information is shared
(Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Working collaboratively
to plan, solve problems,
and improve learning
(Huffman & Hipp, 2003)

80
Table 4: Continued

4.) Supportive
conditions

* There is collegiality among
staff and faculty (Cobb, 2005)
* Caring relationships are
established (Huffman & Hipp,
2003)
* Teachers feel confident in
experimentation and risk taking
(Cobb, 2005; Huffman & Hipp,
2003)
* Trusting relationships are
formed (Cobb, 2005; Huffman
& Hipp, 2003)
* Teachers receive tangible
support such as resources,
materials, time, etc. (Cobb,
2005; Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* The communication system
is open and honest (Barth,
2002; Cobb, 2005; Huffman &
Hipp, 2003)
* Teaches feel supported by the
administrative staff,
instructional support personnel,
and veteran teachers
* There is collegiality among staff
and faculty (Cobb, 2005)
* Caring relationships are
established (Huffman & Hipp,
2003)
* Teachers feel confident in
experimentation and risk taking
(Cobb, 2005; Huffman & Hipp,
2003)
* Trusting relationships are formed
(Cobb, 2005; Huffman & Hipp,
2003)
* Provides teachers tangible
support such as resources,
materials, time, etc. (Cobb, 2005;
Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* The communication system is
open and honest (Barth, 2002;
Cobb, 2005; Huffman & Hipp,
2003)
* Support is provided as well as
received (Ganser, 1999; Monaghan
& Lunt 1992)
* Facilitate collegiality
among staff and faculty
(Cobb, 2005)
* Caring relationships are
established (Huffman &
Hipp, 2003)
* Encourages
experimentation and risk
taking (Cobb, 2005;
Huffman & Hipp, 2003)

* Trusting relationships are
formed (Cobb, 2005;
Huffman & Hipp, 2003)

* Provide faculty and staff
tangible support such as
resources, materials, time,
etc. (Cobb, 2005; Huffman
& Hipp, 2003)
* The communication
system is open and honest
(Barth, 2002; Cobb, 2005;
Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Ensures that faculty and
staff feel supported
(Ganser, 1999)

5.) Shared
personal
practice

* There is collegial
relationships which enable
teachers to work together as
professionals by providing the
time to share expertise and
knowledge base (Barth, 2006;
Waters, Marzano, & McNulty,
2004)
* Instructional practices are
deprivatized (Louis & Kruse,
1995)
* Receive coaching and
mentoring (Huffman & Hipp,
2003)
* Peers visit and observe to
offer encouragement,
knowledge, and skills
(Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Receive feedback to improve
instructional practices
(Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Involved in sharing outcomes
of instructional practices
(Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* There is collegial relationships
which enable teachers to work
together as professionals by
providing the time to share
expertise and knowledge base
(Barth, 2006; Waters, Marzano, &
McNulty, 2004)
* Help in ensuring that
instructional practices are
deprivatized (Louis & Kruse, 1995)
* Encourages peers visits and
observations to offer
encouragement, knowledge, and
skills (Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Provide feedback to improve
instructional practices (Huffman &
Hipp, 2003)
* Involved in sharing outcomes of
instructional practices (Huffman &
Hipp, 2003)
* There is collegial
relationships which enable
teachers to work together
as professionals by
providing the time to share
expertise and knowledge
base (Barth, 2006; Waters,
Marzano, & McNulty,
2004)
* Help in ensuring that
instructional practices are
deprivatized (Louis &
Kruse, 1995)
* Facilitates peers visits
and observations to offer
encouragement,
knowledge, and skills
(Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Provides feedback to
improve instructional
practices (Huffman &
Hipp, 2003)
* Facilitate and involved in
sharing outcomes of
instructional practices
(Huffman & Hipp, 2003)

Research Framework for Research Question Two
The second research question states, 2.) How does a team approach differ in
effect from traditional beginning teacher support?

81
In order to answer this research question it was necessary to have a research
framework that provides understanding of the team approach and the traditional
beginning teacher support (i.e., one-to-one mentoring) as indicated by the literature.
This research framework provides a side-by-side view of the team approach and the
traditional beginning teacher support as well as the needs of beginning teachers. The
following variables were derived from the literature:

Table 5: Research Framework for Research Question Two
Team
Approach
Mentors: one-to-one mentoring Beginning Teachers

1.)
Supportive
and Shared
Leadership
* Viewed as role models, nurturing, teaching,
sponsoring, encouraging, counseling, befriending,
focus on professional and personal development and
ongoing caring relationship” (Monaghan & Lunt,
1992; Zimpher & Rieger, 1988)
* Are involved in broad-based decision making that
reflects commitment and accountability (Huffman &
Hipp, 2003)
* Promote, nurture, and sustain leadership among its
faculty (Fullan, 2005; Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Are viewed as protégés (Healy & Welcher,
1990; Monaghan & Lunt, 1992), inductees,
(Ganser, 1999), apprentice (Ganser, 1999;
Monaghan & Lunt, 1992), and neophyte
(Zimpher & Rieger, 1988).
* They need to be empowered by being
involved in the decision making process as
equal participants (Cobb, 2005; Huffman &
Hipp, 2003; Idol, 2002)
* Need to be involved in sharing power,
authority, and responsibility (Huffman & Hipp,
2003)

2.) Shared
values and
vision
* Provides teachers with non-evaluative feedback
(Cobb, 2005; Dole, et al., 2006)
* Shares values that guide behavior, teaching,
learning, and instruction (Gruenert, 2005; Huffman
& Hipp, 2003)
* Are involved in creating the vision and goals for
the school (Idol, 2002; Uhl & Pérez-Sellés, 1995)
* Holds high expectations for their students and
themselves (Cobb, 2005; Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Need information about school and school
district procedures and policies (Ganser 1999;
Odell, 1986; Reiman & Theis-Spinthall, 1997;
Whitaker, 2000)
* Need to receive non-evaluative feedback
(Cobb, 2005; Dole, et al., 2006)
* Need to be involved in creating the vision and
goals for the school (Idol, 2002; Uhl & Pérez-
Sellés, 1995)
* Must hold high expectations for their students
and themselves (Cobb, 2005; Huffman & Hipp,
2003)

3.)
Collective
learning
and
application
of learning
* Knowledge domains necessary for mentors to
posses:
1.) assessing the needs of beginning teachers, 2.)
interpersonal skills through knowledge of adult
development, 3.) understanding classroom processes
and school effectiveness, 4.) utilizing instructional
supervision, observation, and feedback capacities,
and 5.) inquiry and reflectivity (Zimpher & Rieger
1988, p. 178 – 179)
* Feels confident in seeking information and
knowledge from within and outside of the school
setting (Cobb, 2005)
* Appreciates and recognizes individual and group
efforts (Cobb, 2005; Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Shares information (Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Works collaboratively to plan, solve problems,
and improve learning (Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Need suggestions for working with parents
(i.e. parent conferences) and communicating
with other adults (Darling-Hammond et. al.,
2001, Darling-Hammond, 2003; Meister et. al.,
2003; Quinn & Andrews, 2004; Renard, 2003;
Robertson et. al., 2006)
* Need to feel confident in seeking information
and knowledge from within and outside of the
school setting (Cobb, 2005)
* Need to know individual and group efforts are
appreciated and recognized (Cobb, 2005;
Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Needs to work collaboratively to plan, solve
problems, and improve learning (Huffman &
Hipp, 2003)

82
Table 5: Continued

4.)
Supportive
conditions
* Provides psychological and emotional support
(Ganser, 1999)
* Have interpersonal sensitivity (Healy, & Welchert,
1990; Monaghan & Lunt, 1992) and interpersonal
skills (Monaghan & Lunt, 1992).
* Provides teachers with tangible support such as
resources, materials, time, etc. (Cobb, 2005;
Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Establishes trusting and caring relationships
(Cobb, 2005; Huffman & Hipp, 2003; Monaghan &
Lunt, 1992)
* Establishes collegiality among staff and teachers
(Cobb, 2005)
* Teachers feel confident in experimentation and
risk taking (Cobb, 2005; Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Establishes an open and honest system of
communication (Barth, 2002; Cobb, 2005; Huffman
& Hipp, 2003)
* May need personal and emotional support
(Ganser, 1999; Odell, 1986; PEN, 2003;
Whitaker, 2000) and some one to listen to their
needs (PEN, 2003).
* Need access to tangible support such as
materials, supplies, and resources (Brewster &
Railsback, 2001; Odell, 1986; Whitaker, 2000)
* Need trusting and caring relationships (Cobb,
2005; Huffman & Hipp, 2003; Monaghan &
Lunt, 1992)
* Needs collegial relationships with staff and
faculty (Cobb, 2005)
* Need teachers to feel confident in
experimentation and risk taking (Cobb, 2005;
Huffman & Hipp, 2003)

5.) Shared
personal
practice
* Have observational skills to provide objective,
non-threatening, and responsive feedback to
improve instruction (Ganser, 1999)
* Ensures that instructional practices are
deprivatized (Louis & Kruse, 19995)
* Provides opportunities to observe and be observed
(Barth, 2006)
* Provides coaching and mentoring (Huffman &
Hipp, 2003)
* Encourages peer visits and observations to offer
encouragement, knowledge, and skills (Huffman &
Hipp, 2003)
* Provides feedback to improve instructional
practices (Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Involved in sharing outcomes of instructional
practices (Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Need support in curriculum (differentiating
curriculum) and instruction (Darling-Hammond
et. al., 2001; Darling-Hammond, 2003; Ganser
1999; Lewis, & Batts, 2005; Meister et. al.,
2003; Quinn & Andrews, 2004; Renard, 2003;
Robertson et. al., 2006)
* Need to work with more experienced teachers
on a daily basis (PEN, 2003)
* Need help with classroom management and
discipline (Cookson, 2007; Darling-Hammond
et. al., 2001, Darling-Hammond, 2003; Meister
et. al., 2003; Quinn & Andrews, 2004; Renard,
2003; Robertson et. al., 2006)
* Need opportunities to observe and be
observed (Barth, 2006)
* Need coaching and mentoring (Huffman &
Hipp, 2003)
* Need peer visits and observations that offer
encouragement, knowledge, and skills
(Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Need feedback to improve instructional
practices (Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
* Need to be involved in sharing outcomes of
instructional practices (Huffman & Hipp, 2003)

In the first column, Team Approach, the attributes of a collaborative approach and
professional learning community are listed. Based on the literature review the second
column, Mentors: one-to-one mentoring, provides a list of the role, responsibilities,
and knowledge that mentors need to successfully support beginning teachers. The
third column, Beginning Teachers, provides the areas in which beginning teachers
need support. The overarching inter-related element is the school culture since

83
mentoring and collaborative practices take place in a school setting. It is important to
remember that a positive school culture plays a role in supporting beginning teachers.
This research framework guided the selection of the survey that beginning
teachers were asked to complete. The survey inquires over the perceived support
beginning teachers experienced their first, second, and third year teaching. This
research framework guided the coding of the data collected from teacher surveys.
Validity
“Triangulation strengthens a study by combining methods” (Patton, 2002, p. 247).
In other words using varied methods has the potential to corroborate and add validity
to understanding the collected data. Therefore, the validity of and confidence in the
findings in this study used triangulation of multiple data sources. Utilizing data from
surveys, interviews, and observations, provided validity in answering the research
questions. The use of multiple data sources limited the possibility of error in any
given single research method. The intent of utilizing multiple data sources is that
“different types of data provide cross-data validity checks” (Patton, 2002, p. 248)
thus, providing a stronger case for validity within this research study.
Data Collection Instruments
The literature reviewed assisted in creating a research framework. In turn, the
research frameworks guided the development of the data collection instruments.
Surveys
The surveys were administered to 80 beginning teachers in their first thru third
year teaching. These beginning teachers in LAUSD Local District 8 received the 45-

84
item survey. Based on their personal experiences and perceptions participants
selected one option based on the following: 1 (Strongly Disagree- SD), 2 (Disagree-
D), 3 (Agree- A), and 4 (Strongly Agree- SA). Survey items asked teachers to rate
their perception about their school principal, staff, and stakeholders based on the five
identified attributes of a professional learning community. The survey took
approximately 15 minutes to complete. Permission from LAUSD IRB has been
approved in order to conduct the surveys within Local District 8 Elementary Schools.
Beginning teachers were informed that their participation is voluntary. Participants
were also informed and assured that their responses would remain anonymous. The
surveys were handed out by school coordinators, Categorical Program Advisors, Title
I, and Bilingual Coordinators. Each school has a coordinator that is aware of the
teaching experience of its faculty. There is no conflict of interest since school
coordinators are not responsible for supervising or evaluating teachers. They only
handed out the surveys and the information sheet along with a stamped envelop with
a return address (P.O. Box) of the researcher. The anonymity of the participants was
ensured since the surveys were collected in sealed envelopes. The survey utilized in
this case study can be found in Appendix A. The research framework for this survey
was derived from the literature review. Survey items were created by Huffman and
Hipp (2003). To provide construct validity the authors Huffman and Hipp (2003)
convened a panel of expert educators to review the survey statements. They
determined the items were practical occurrences taking place in a school setting. For
the purposes of this research a panel of current educators which included a principal,

85
assistant principal, literacy coach, and five teachers reviewed each survey items and
found them to be necessary in understanding beginning teacher perceptions about
their school sites and the level of support they receive.
Interviews
Each interview was conducted by the researcher and was one hour in duration.
The interviews were audio taped once permitted was given by participants. The
research framework guided the creation of the interview questions. A panel of
experts read and responded to the interview questions thereby providing content
validity. Changes made to the interview questions included making modifications to
the use of vocabulary, for example, changing school culture to school environment
and school vision to mission. With minor changes panel experts agreed that questions
in the interview protocol would provide data sought to answer research questions.
Two different interview protocols were created, one used to interview
administrators, instructional support personnel, and veteran teachers and the other
interview protocol was used to interview beginning teachers. The purpose for two
interview protocols was to gather the perspectives from two distinct groups of
educators. Probe questions were included to obtain a richer interview response.
During the actual interview process it was unlikely that all the probe questions were
asked. Both interview protocols can be found in Appendices B and C.
A total of 10 participants were interviewed:
• Administrators
o 1 Principal

86
o 1 Assistant Principal
• Instructional Support Personnel
o 1 Literacy Coach
o 1 Math Coach
• 3 Veteran Teachers
• 3 Beginning Teachers
Observations
One school site was selected in LAUSD to conduct this case study. A total of five
observations were scheduled to take place during grade level meetings. A research
framework was created from the literature review in order to identify the areas that
would best generate data (see description of alignment on page 68). Codes for
observational analysis were constructed to remain consistent with the research
framework. The codes include: support and shared leadership; shared values and
vision; collective learning and application of learning; supportive conditions; and
shared personal practices. These were in alignment with the attributes of
collaborative schools presented in the research framework. Protocols for
observations were created to guide the collection of data. The observation protocol
can be found in Appendix D.
Data Collection
Before collecting data, the researcher received approval from the Institutional
Review Board (IRB) at the University of Southern California and then the Los
Angeles Unified School District IRB. Contact was then made with the principal from

87
Dynasty Elementary School to ask approval to conduct this case study. The purpose
for this case study as well as the interviews and observations where discussed. A
schedule was generated in order to collect the required data. The researcher then
contacted Local District 8 coordinators during an April coordinator’s meeting. The
researcher presented the information sheet and discussed the study. Surveys were
handed out in pre-stamped return envelopes to school coordinators.
Data was collected from April 2008 thru July 2008. The surveys were conducted
in April and May. Surveys were distributed to first thru third year teachers by school
coordinators. Individual interviews were conducted in May and June beginning with
the school Principal, Assistant Principal, Literacy Coach, Math Coach, Veteran
Teachers, and Beginning Teachers. Observations took place April, thru July. Five
observations took place during Grade Level Meetings (GLM). GLMs were
conducted on a weekly basis Monday thru Friday unless school functions were taking
place (i.e. Back to School, Parent-Teacher Conferences). Teachers met for 1 hour
based on their assigned grade levels. While grade level teachers met, their students
participate in psychomotor (physical fitness activities). Topics discussed in GLMs
included sharing instructional practices, planning, scheduling, evaluating student
progress, discussing grade level concerns etc. The five observations assisted in
gathering data on the description of: supportive and shared leadership; shared values
and vision; collective learning and application of learning; supportive conditions; and
shared personal practices. The protocol for interviews and observations were
discussed and explained prior to their use.

88
Table 6: Gantt Chart Illustrating Schedule for Data Collection

April May June July August
Surveys
-------- --------
Interviews
-------- --------
Observations
-------- -------- -------- --------
Review of Surveys
--------
Review of Interviews
-------- --------
Review of Observations
-------- --------

Data Analysis
“The themes, patterns, understandings, and insight that emerge from the fieldwork
and subsequent analysis are the fruit of qualitative inquiry” (Patton, 2002, p. 5).
Data was gathered in the form of teacher surveys, interviews, and observations. A
statistical analysis was conducted on the word alignments assigned to the survey.
Item mean and standard deviation were identified under each of the themes.
Interviews were transcribed in order for data to be properly analyzed. The transcribed
interview data was coded. The research questions guided the themes, patterns, and
concepts that were revealed. A computer software program, Hyperresearch, was
utilized to assist in analyzing the data. This program facilitated the analysis and
organization of the 10 interviews by coding and chunking the data. Finally, data from
the school site observations provided further information on how collaborative
approaches support beginning teachers. Observational data on the characteristics of a
collaborative school culture also helped in answering the research questions.
Strategies used to analyze observation data include unique case orientation, holistic

89
perspective, context sensitivity, voice, perspective, and flexibility (Patton, 2002, p.
41). Possible coding themes glimmed from the collected data include:
• school characteristics
• role of administrators, instructional support personnel, veteran teacher in
supporting beginning teachers
• stakeholder interactions (Patton, 2002, p. 516)
Summary
Chapter three presented the research methodology utilized in this case study. This
chapter also provided the following: the sample, the population, instrumentation, data
collection, and the processes to analyze the data collected.

90
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
Introduction
In this chapter, the findings and analysis of the data collected for this research
study will be presented. The purpose of this research study was to develop a deeper
understanding of how school site personnel might collaborate to promote a school
culture that is collectively responsive to the needs of beginning teachers. The focus is
to examine the roles of each support staff member involved in the nurturing,
guidance, and sustaining of beginning teachers and how a team approach to
mentoring can be carried out in a school setting.

Table 7: Summary of Methodology
Type of Instruments Participants Research Question
Addressed
Interviews Interview two school administrators (Principal and
Assistant Principal
Research questions 1 & 2
Interviews Interview two instructional support personnel,
(Literacy Coach and Math Coach)
Research questions 1 & 2
Interviews Interview three teachers (two veteran teachers and one
BTSA mentor)
Research questions 1 & 2
Interviews Interview three beginning teachers Research questions 1 & 2
Observations Observe five grade level meetings (K through 5
th

grade)
Research questions 1 & 2
Likert-scale Survey

80 beginning teachers in their first thru third year
teaching from 56 LAUSD elementary schools were
given the survey
Research question 2

Research Question One
The purpose of this research question is to identify the necessary attributes of a
collaborative approach that effectively supports beginning teachers.
Interviews and Observations

91
Interview and observation data were coded using the following identified
attributes of a collaborative school environment: 1.) supportive and shared leadership;
2.) shared values and vision; 3.) collective learning and application of learning; 4.)
supportive conditions; and 5.) shared personal practices. These codes are further
broken down into smaller analysis sections based upon concepts from pertinent
literature.
Supportive and shared leadership:
Interviews
Interviews conducted with key faculty, administrators, and instructional support
personnel attributed their school’s success in part to the support and leadership
displayed by their administrators, specifically the school principal. Through her
actions, the school principal models the behaviors shared among the faculty and staff
at Dynasty Elementary. When asked to describe the school environment participants
shared the following:
The math coach stated, “For teachers, the school environment is supportive
because of our principal. The way we do things here is very consistent, fair, and
supportive. The leadership here is part of why we are doing so well”.

A veteran teacher remarked that the principal is very personable. In her opinion,
the principal’s leadership has shaped the school’s culture into a comfortable and
friendly environment. She recalls: “I was here when we had a different principal
and it’s night and day. This principal is supportive, friendly, and she really
challenges us in a good way to become better and better teachers”.

One beginning teacher commented: “As a new teacher, I was scared to approach
my principal because I didn’t really know her. But during my second week, I was
called into her office to talk about a math lesson she observed. We talked and I
felt that she was actually interested in what I had to say. She made me feel at
ease”.

92
Another beginning teacher mentioned that the support she received from the
principal is in the form of materials, feedback on her teaching, and support in
learning the ropes. She stated: “My principal makes me feel part of the school.
She comes into my class at least once a day and she gives me positive comments”.

As a result of the supportive leadership described above a sense of shared
leadership is felt among the faculty at Dynasty. The interview question that
specifically probes the area of teacher leadership is: What structures are in place for
teachers to take on leadership roles in this school? All of the interviewees
commented on the numerous leadership positions that teachers regardless of their
teaching experience can hold such as adjunct assignments (i.e. student council,
gifted/honor roll, social committee, field trips, arts prototype, and technology), grade
level chairs, school site council representative, UTLA representative, and action team
leaders. These leadership positions vary in responsibility and scope.
The literacy coach points out that the responsibilities are not just superficial but
rather are strategic teacher leadership positions that are part of school governance.
Teachers in these positions run many of the professional development and grade level
meetings. They receive guidance and support from the principal, assistant principal,
coaches, coordinator, and SB65. It is assumed and expected that as teacher leaders
they are also instructional leaders. The assistant principal stated that teacher leaders
guide discussions regarding instruction and instructional programs (i.e., math,
literacy, science, art etc.). School governance is another area that teacher leaders are
involved such as leadership positions on the school site council. According to district
and state guidelines, this council shares responsibilities with teachers, parents, and

93
community members on decisions having to do with school budget, spending, and the
allocation of district, state, and federal funds. The Principal reiterates the following:
“There’s a lot of structures actually embedded within our strategic plan. There’s
the potential for any teacher who wants the challenge to be a team leader. There’s
seven teams, seven action teams each focusing on a different aspect of the school.
One team for example is the academic achievement team and they are working on
CST goals for the school. One team is creativity and they work on art goals for
the school. So there’s the potential there for seven leadership opportunities for
teachers to jump in and do that. Then we also have grade level chairs so a teacher
could take on that responsibility of leading their grade level through our
professional development. Also, if I see the desire and the potential I always
encourage the teachers to get their administrative credential. In the last two years
I’ve mentored seven potential administrators. So, I have had seven teachers get
their Admin credential. I think that’s great! So maybe that would be something
that they will go into later but even if they don’t the strategies and techniques that
they learned in those classes they can apply it in the classroom or working with
peers and parents or understanding the bigger picture in school operations”.

With the reported support provided by the principal and the leadership shared
among the faculty and staff, the researcher wanted to find out if in fact teachers felt
empowered. The following interview question was asked to all ten Dynasty faculty,
administrators, and support personnel: In your professional opinion, do you think
teachers in this school feel empowered? To this question, all but two unanimously
answered in the affirmative.
A veteran teacher replied: “Yes, teachers here feel empowered. We’re given the
power to make decisions on the way we teach, choosing topics for our grade level
meetings, and even basic day–to-day school problems”.

However, another veteran teacher shared a slightly different view. She
comments: “I don’t necessarily feel 100% empowered. What I mean is that I
don’t often feel empowered outside of my classroom. In my classroom, I make
changes that benefit my students but outside of my class it’s a whole different
matter”.

94
It is important to point out that two beginning teachers commented on a sense of
empowerment that is directly related to their classroom similarly to the veteran
teacher.
Another beginning teacher indicated: “Absolutely, I feel empowered in my
classroom. I feel that I can take a risk when I use new materials, strategies, or
something that I learned when I student taught. My principal treats me as a
professional, and it makes me feel confident in my teaching”.

One beginning teacher stated that she did not feel empowered. There was no
comment since she declined to elaborate. However, she did mention that as a special
education teacher her experiences are different then her colleagues.
Observations
The researcher found that the leadership at Dynasty was supportive and shared
across school faculty. For this reason the following focused observations were
conducted: Who is conducting the GLM? Are administrators and instructional
support personnel encouraging and involving all teachers? When decisions need to
be made who is involved?
In three of five GLMs Dynasty teachers conducted the grade level meetings. In
two meetings, the principal, the assistant principal, and the literacy coach opened the
meeting and handed over the discussion to the teachers. In four of five GLMs the
principle, assistant principal, math coach, and literacy coach involved all the teachers
in the discussion. There were neither administrators nor support personnel present in
one meeting. One of the ways that was observed in which teachers were involved in
the discussion was by asking open-ended questions such as in the first meeting the
Principal asked teachers, “What will we see and hear students doing if they are

95
proficient with this skill? What student samples and data will you share today?”
Teachers had time to present and discuss student samples to the group. A question
asked by the literacy coach was the following: “What successes do you want to share
with the group today?”
In three of the five GLMs teachers were involved in decision-making. For
example, in the first GLM the principal, literacy coach, and teachers were involved in
determining if the established goals where met and if not what further actions need to
be taken. Together they developed a timeline, strategies, activities, and scaffolds to
support their predetermined goals. In the third GLM, teachers decided on the
overarching concepts and activities for Open Court Literature Unit 5. In the fifth
GLM teachers scheduled their curriculum in preparation for the upcoming school
year. For example, teachers decided which science and social science units will be a
focus for the next school year.
Shared Values and Vision:
Interviews
The mission statement of the Dynasty school community is to effectively educate
all students in a collaborative environment so that each will contribute to and
benefit from our diverse society. ---Dynasty Elementary School

The above mission statement is prominently displayed on walls in the main office,
hallways, and classrooms. The researcher wanted to fully understand what this meant
and the level of awareness that participants had related to the school’s mission.
Therefore, all ten participants were asked the following questions: Who created the

96
school’s mission? Is the school’s mission shared school-wide? What is the school’s
mission for its teachers and students?
Participants were asked if they knew who had created the school’s mission. All
ten participants cited that the mission was created by school stakeholders. Yet, only
two (the principal and the math coach) were actually present during the initial
development of the mission. The math coach described the following referring to the
creation of the mission:
“It was a big deal when the mission was created. It was created by stakeholders it
wasn’t just teachers. It was office staff, the assistant principal, cafeteria staff,
custodial staff, students, parents, us [coaches] and we spent a full day developing
this to start off our strategic plan”.

A veteran teacher recalled: “I took part in writing the school mission. Our
previous principal wanted everyone to focus on the vision for our school. She
wanted us to write our ideals, aspirations, and goals for our students and for us.
This happened in one of our PDs before the start of the school year ”.

Three beginning teachers indicated that they knew who was involved in the creation
of the mission because they were informed in a meeting by the administrators,
instructional support personnel, veteran teachers, or their mentors.
A beginning teacher comments: “I wasn’t here when the mission was first created
but during our new teacher orientation we were told that it involved the entire
school”.

Responding to the second question, Is the school’s mission shared school-wide?
all ten participants acknowledged that the school mission is shared and articulated
with all stakeholders. The principal, assistant principal, math coach, literacy coach,
veteran teachers, and two beginning teachers indicated that the mission is revisited at
the beginning and end of the school year.

97
The math coach stated: “At the beginning of the year, one of our Buy-Back days
is devoted to a renewal of the mission. I believe that discussing the mission
guarantees that we are all on the same page. It also makes us conscientious
throughout the year of what our school goals are”.

A new teacher commented that revisiting the school mission at the beginning of
the year helped to focus her instruction. She stated: “Talking about the mission
was useful because I learned the school’s purpose and expectations for me as a
new teacher”.

A veteran teacher recalled: “We have an end of the year celebration and each of
the action team leaders tells us how we’re doing in meeting the school mission
and goal”.

All participants in varying forms provided the researcher with an interpretation of
the mission statement.
For example, the literacy coach pointed out that she had not memorized the
mission statement but gave the researcher the following interpretation: “…To
educate our students and we want them to be life long learners and we want them
to understand diversity we want to have a safe environment for them and all those
words are there in our mission somewhere”.

The assistant principal explained that the school’s mission is to prepare students for
the future.
A veteran teacher looked over to the mission statement posted on her closet door and
read it aloud.
A beginning teacher adds: “Our mission is to teach our students in a collaborative
way so that they can contribute and benefit from our society. So, teachers have to
teach students to live and learn in our changing world”.

Another beginning teacher stated: “To have all of our students progress, to be
high achievers. The mission for teachers is to work hard together to give our kids
all the tools they need to be high achievers”.

According to De Costa et al., (1998) having a school mission is important because
it helps to guide collaborative practices, and allows faculty to interact with a focus in

98
mind. Furthermore, literature on productive school cultures point to the need of
having norms and values shared via the school’s mission statement (Barth, 2002;
Gruenert, 2005).
Another key issue that was apparent in the interview data included the high
teacher and student expectations that are shared by Dynasty faculty, administration,
and support personnel. The following questions were asked to all ten interviewed
participants: What expectations do teachers have for their students? For themselves?
The math coach replied: “For students it’s to do their best and to give 100%. Not
only to do their best academically but also as a good citizen of the school and also
socially. For themselves [teachers], to be able to help students to get to that point
that I mentioned earlier and to also be part of the team. I think we are successful
here because we have gone up about 325 API points. The reason why we have
gone up and this is my opinion is the high expectations that we have here. The
high expectations are not only the teachers expecting from the kids, but the kids
expecting, and also the parents knowing that this is what we expect”.

When prompted to elaborate on the increase of API points and its correlation to high
expectations the math coach stated that school-wide achievement expectations are
part of the mission statement.
She read the achievement goals: “By June 2009, the percentage of students
scoring Proficient/Advanced on the CST in Language Arts will increase by 10%,
and the percent of student scoring Proficient/Advanced in Math will increase by
5%. 1.) Each grade level will use standards-based assessments to group students
for differentiated instruction. 2.) Each grade level will set clear expectation goals
by using/posting: student friendly standards, criteria charts, and rubrics to
measure student progress”.

The literacy coach reiterated that students are held to the highest expectations
academically and socially. According to the literacy coach, Dynasty Elementary has
school-wide academic and behavior expectations. Students are expected to interact
with their peers in a socially conscious manner. She further stated that every minute

99
of the instructional day must be used in the pursuit of the established goals. She
believes that along with high expectations there is also the pressure to succeed.
The literacy coach states: “There’s also a level of pressure because we are not
ever entirely comfortable and I think its kind of the nature of many of the people
who stay here at Dynasty. That there is always going to be a little bit of tension
about those high expectations because we feel accountable to each other”.

A veteran teacher states: “We are all challenging and pushing our kids to be better
and better. We make sure that they [students] are meeting the grade level
standards and our school expectations”.

A beginning teacher points out that teachers expect from themselves to give each
of their students the “skills and knowledge to be successful by looking at the
standards and making sure that students gain mastery of the skills and knowledge
at their grade level”.

Another beginning teachers stated: “High achievement is what we expect from
our students and for us as teachers. I work with my grade level to make sure that
I’m doing what I need to be doing so that my students can meet grade level
standards”.

Observations
The researcher gained information as to the Dynasty shared values and vision.
The following questions were observed during GLMs: Does the verbal interactions
reflect the vision of the school? What vocabulary is used to describe students?
All five GLMs involved different aspects of the school’s vision and beliefs. The
verbal interactions involved achievement, accountability, creativity, teamwork, and
respect for diversity. The school principal provided the researcher with the following
vision and belief statements created by the faculty and staff at Dynasty Elementary
School:
• Achievement - We believe that all stakeholders are accountable for providing
and achieving a quality education program with measurable results.

100
• Accountability - We believe that all stakeholders are accountable for
providing and achieving a quality education program with measurable results.
• Creativity - We believe that fostering creativity instills the motivation
essential to develop each stakeholders potential.
• Life-Long Learning - We believe that lifelong learning is accomplished by all
stakeholders modeling the characteristics of risk-taking, persistence, and a
passion for knowledge.
• Teamwork - We believe in the spirit of fairness, mutual respect, and
cooperation as we work together for the benefit of the school community.
• Respect for Diversity - We believe that respect for diversity is accomplished
by creating a safe accepting environment where differences of all stakeholders
are continually addressed, respected, and valued.
• Technology (just recently incorporated as a belief)

During the course of the GLMs a variety of vocabulary was used to describe
Dynasty students. The terms used included: my kids, my students, my 3
rd
graders, my
4
th
graders, our 5
th
graders, and our children. When teachers discussed student
performance the following vocabulary was used: strategic, benchmark, intensive,
proficient, and high-middle-low readers.
Collective Learning and Application of Learning:
Interviews
Participants were asked the following questions to identify the type of learning
and sharing taking place among teachers: When do mentors and mentees meet to
discuss instructional practices? What topics of conversations are discussed at these
meetings?
Interview data collected from key faculty, administrators, and instructional
support personnel revealed that the majority of formal opportunities for teachers to
work and learn together take place during grade level and professional development
meetings. Grade level meetings (GLMs) take place once a week in small groups

101
(grade level specific) and professional development meetings take place on Tuesdays
in whole group (entire faculty, general). The literacy coach revealed that in her
opinion beginning teachers work well in grade level meetings.
She stated: “Teachers are used to working together and they talk to each other
peer to peer…they are equal partners in the action teams too in terms of
environment and feeling like they are part of this school and contributing to what
we are doing”.

A beginning teacher stated the following: “When we have grade level meetings
we talk about how our kids are doing and the literacy coach helps us when we
have questions or need help”.

Another beginning teacher pointed out that she meets with her mentor to discuss
instructional practices before school, recess, lunch, and after school. Yet another
beginning teacher indicated that she meets with her mentor at least once a month or
once a week as needed. All three beginning teachers added that these meetings
increase depending on their need.
A beginning teacher commented, "My mentor and I, we’ve both had subs that
covered our classes so that we could plan the entire day”.

Veteran and beginning teachers cited effective teaching practices, classroom
management, subject matter, and delivery of subject matter as topics discussed in
grade level and professional development meetings. The math coach shared that she
works with teachers during GLMs or on an individual basis to plan short and long
term math lessons. She indicated that these opportunities to meet enable her to gauge
a teacher’s level of need and comprehension. The literacy coach also found these
meetings informative. The discussions taking place provided her with ideas of areas
in Language Arts that needed to be covered and reviewed.

102
She also indicated the following: “Meeting topics vary in range, from anything
that teachers might need help to navigating through all the required
documentation and paperwork”.

A veteran teacher stated: “We meet during grade level to discuss what is going
on, what we are doing, and the progress taking place in our classes. We
conference with the principal and its sometimes formal like when we talk about
our evaluations or informal when we talk about a lesson that she observed”.

According to the interviews from the literacy coach, assistant principal, and a
beginning teacher the discussions that take place when teachers come together is vital
to the overall instruction students receive. They explained the collaborative
partnership taking place among first grade teachers. A beginning teacher explained
that first grade teachers are co-teaching and their students are grouped according to
their ability. Each teacher focuses on a specific group of students (intensive,
strategic, benchmark, and proficient) for one hour a day during Independent Work
Time (IWT). The assistant principal pointed out that teachers worked together with
the guidance of the literacy coach to create this instructional intervention. All of the
first grade teachers decided to use pre and post OCR assessments to monitor their
students in order to determine the effectiveness of the intervention.
The assistant principal further stated: “It has made a big difference in student
performance their test scores have definitively improved”.

According to the literacy coach, this approach is effective because problems are
“dealt thru a community that they feel like they can rely on each other to help
each other with their students”. Furthermore, the literacy coach stated that
innovations, strategies, and programs are effectively adopted if teachers have the
opportunity to “ revise it, refine it so that it meets their needs better, it meets the
needs of their students better and their parents”.

All three beginning teachers articulated that they find helpful planning and
working together with colleagues on instructional issues.

103
Furthermore, a beginning teacher stated: “Meeting together and planning grade
level goals for OCR and math is helpful because I get to hear what other teachers
are doing and I also get to share what works for me”.

Another beginning teachers cited other topics discussed: “Our meetings go over
classroom management, things that are on my mind, daily questions that come up,
what ever I need is covered… Also ways to include art in the curriculum and
ways to manage our time.”

Two beginning teacher stated that their mentors help them complete CFAST
requirements. One beginning teacher indicated that she is not in the BTSA program
because she is a special education teacher. Yet, she stated that she has a mentor
assigned to her by the principal.
This beginning teacher stated: “She [mentor] gives me a lot of suggestions on
how to help my students meet their IEP goals”.

Observations
The researcher found that Dynasty faculty and staff participated in collective
learning and application of learning. The following observations and questions were
noted: Nonverbal Patters of Communication- body language, direct eye contact,
nodding, and smiling. Does the grade level meeting focus on teaching and learning?
and Does the staff engage in dialogue that reflects respect for diverse ideas?
The participant’s body language indicated an attention to the speakers. Direct eye
contact, nodding in agreement, and encouraging smiles were ways that teachers
demonstrated their interaction to the speakers. In these GLMs teachers,
administrators, and instructional support personnel sat in close proximity to each
other. The tables were either circular, rectangular, or kidney shaped making it
feasible for everyone to position himself or herself towards the speaker. These

104
nonverbal patterns of communication took place frequently in three out of five
meetings. GLMs three and five had fewer frequencies of observed patterns of
nonverbal communication. GLM three involved teachers planning activities for OCR
unit 5 and GLM five involved teachers preparing for the next school year. Teachers
were not able to frequently give direct eye contact to the speaker, nod, or smile since
they were required to take notes of the activities related to OCR Unit 5 and planning
for next academic school year. For accountability purposes, a copy of the teacher’s
notes must be given to the principal and to the literacy coach.
Five out of five GLMs focused on teaching and learning. The first GLM involved
teachers discussing instructional goals based on fifth grade standards. They also
discussed instructional practices used to meet the established goals such as direct
instruction, use of regalia, and graphic organizers. Teachers also learned from each
other ways that they individually approached the target goals. The second GLM
involved teachers sharing their teaching strategies as it applied to specific
instructional groups. Each teacher focused on a target group of students during
Independent Work Time (IWT). This innovative intervention approach was created
by first grade teachers with the guidance of the literacy coach. The third GLM
involved teachers brainstorming an overarching big idea and from there generated
activities that will help students understand OCR Unit 5 content. The teaching
component of the fourth GLM involved having teachers reflect and share the types of
instructional practices that they currently use to prepare students for the next grade
level. For example, teachers discussed strategies they used for letter and sound

105
recognition. The learning aspect involved teachers learning from each other aspects
that they need to work on to better prepare their students. For example, teachers
learned that it would benefit students in Kindergarten if they were introduced and
exposed to journal writing and math graphs. A teacher made the following comment,
“Its always useful for me as a Kindergarten teacher to know if I’ve prepared my kids
to meet the expectations for first grade”. The final GLM discussion focused on
planning the subject matter that will be covered for the following school year.
Learning took place as teachers discussed ideas and brainstormed big ideas or
overarching concepts for each subject. For instance, teachers in planning the
sequence of the curriculum debated how to sequence the sciences units so that the
concepts matched literacy units.
Five of the five meetings involved discussions that reflected respect for diverse
ideas. The dialog demonstrated a level of respect even when there was a difference of
opinion. In the first GLM the discussions remained professional and focused on the
topic. Everyone was given time to share in the discussion. The second GLM the
principal, teachers, and literacy coach demonstrated respect for each other by
allowing different views to be heard and acknowledged. In the third GLM the fourth
grade teachers listened attentively to each other. As ideas were proposed they were
discussed to determine if it coincided with the general big idea. The activities
generated were debated and selected based on the availability of resources,
practicality, and time. The ideas shared in the fourth GLM were received with
positive comments. Kindergarten and first grade teachers shared their perspectives

106
and suggestions to improve the preparation of their students without making negative
or hurtful comments. In the fifth GLM, teachers shared ideas on how to sequence and
schedule curriculum. The discussion was rapid, energized, and it allowed teachers to
participate in sharing their opinions and experiences. When ideas were not selected,
participants discussed the reason why it may not apply to their curriculum. This was
done in a professional rather than in a negative way.
Supportive Conditions:
Interviews
All of the interviewees indicated that time was provided for teachers to meet and
discuss instructional issues. According to a veteran teacher, one hour a week students
do physical education via a psychomotor program and teachers are able to meet by
grade level. Furthermore, recess and lunch schedules promote dialog since teachers
in the same grade level share the same schedule. The school’s traditional calendar
further promotes dialog since all teachers are on track at the same time. The assistant
principal adds that many teachers meet on their own time. One beginning teachers
pointed out that she meets formally with her mentor once a month and the other two
beginning teachers meet with their mentors once a week. Informally all three meet
with their mentors whenever questions or concerns arise.
To get a deeper understanding of the overall school conditions the interviewer
asked the following questions: How would you describe your school environment?
How does the school environment support the learning of teachers and students?

107
What type of support structures and conditions are in place in this school that
supports collaborative practices?
The math coach used the word collaborative to describe the school environment.
She added the following: “The reason I would say that is because we have grade
level meetings which teachers really share their work. Really share ideas and they
work together and they help each other and welcome new ideas. Teachers here
are receptive to working together”.

The math coach provided the following example of ways the school environment
promotes and supports the learning of teachers and students: student assemblies
(perfect attendance, Remarkable Reader, Principal’s Pal, academic excellence,
student of the month), and grade level meetings. Another support structure
highlighted by the math coach is the end of the year celebration that acknowledges
the accomplishments of each action team. Teachers are also able to build friendships
by participating in a diversity festival. The math coach attributes the principal for
creating a supportive environment.
She also added: “The teachers and staff had the opportunity to learn a rock and
roll dance from the 50’s choreographed by one of our parents. Many people
participated and just rehearsing in the mornings and afternoons kind brought
people together when you do something fun like this. I think these activities bring
our staff and faculty together”.

The literacy coach described the school environment as a “pressurized
environment” but at the same time supportive. She stated: “I think its a fairly
supportive environment because we have structures in place to help that along like
allowing time for grade levels to work together. Also, being flexible with dates
and times helps teachers feel part of the team too when they have input and it’s
not just supposed to be directed from top down”.

The assistant principal used the following words to describe the school
environment, “tight unit”. He further elaborated by stating: “We are a very
teamwork oriented school where everyone works as a team from the office people
to the janitors”.

108
A veteran teacher described the school environment as more relaxed when
compared to when the previous principal was at Dynasty Elementary. When
prompted to elaborate she stated: “It’s hard to explain but it just feels very
different. I like it now it’s so much better”.

Another veteran teacher further stated that the school environment supports the
learning of teachers and students by the sharing school-wide expectations. According
to this veteran teacher, teachers are challenging their students and themselves to be
better and better. GLMs and the SST process are cited as structures that help both
teachers and students. Another veteran teacher indicated that the school environment
was supportive because she felt that priority was given to student and teacher needs.
She remarked: “I feel supported. It’s a great place to work”.

A beginning teacher stated that the school environment is supportive. She
indicated that she was been a recipient of collegial support ranging from help posting
a hallway bulletin board for the first time to receiving instructional resources.
Another beginning teacher declared: “This school is very friendly, warm, all the
teachers get together and we know each other very well, its very family oriented”.

The third beginning teacher interviewed echoed the other teacher response and added
that the school environment felt very “safe”. She felt safe trying out a new ELD
strategy learned in a training workshop.
In addition, beginning teachers were asked the following question: How does the
school environment support your professional growth? A beginning teacher cited that
shared school-wide goals aid in her professional development. She indicated that
school-wide goals help to focus resources where they are need.
She further remarked: “I know what is expected of me and working together with
other teachers really helps”.

109

A beginning teacher concurs with this observation. She believes that a campus that
shares similar goals helps to ensure everyone is working towards the same end-
results. Another beginning teacher declared that she is supported by the school
environment via weekly grade level and professional development meetings. She
mentioned that this school is receptive in viewing teachers as learners. So much so,
that she has had the opportunity to attend workshops, trainings, and conferences. In
terms of support structure all three beginning teacher identified grade level meetings,
action teams, and committees as structures that support collaborative practices.
A beginning teacher added the following, “We also have nice mini celebrations or
fun activities through out the school year”.

Each of the interviewed administrators and instructional support personnel
acknowledged that they provide support in different capacities to the faculty. Data
was revealed from the following questions: What is your role/responsibility in
supporting beginning teachers? Who else assists in mentoring beginning teachers
(other than BTSA mentors)?
The math coach indicated that she helps teachers in short and long term lesson
planning. As it pertains to beginning teachers, the math coach indicated that she
provides support based on teacher need. All math coaches are expected to provide
the same amount of support to all teachers.
Yet, she acknowledged that: “The needs of beginning teachers are different from
the rest of the teachers so in many ways the support is differentiated”. She
defined her role based on the job description provided to LAUSD math coaches,
which she read, “the main function of the math coach is to provide service and
support to help teachers achieve proficiency in delivering mathematics instruction
that is balanced with conceptual learning, problem solving, and procedures”.

110

The literacy coach specified that she conducts lesson demonstrations and
classroom observations. She stated that she spends more time with beginning
teachers than with veteran teachers.
She further elaborated by stating: “It varies it kind of depends on what that
beginning teacher feels they need if they are coming in brand new to our school or
new to teaching in general. I spend time with them in service of our Open Court
program because that’s one of my duties to make sure that they are implementing
the program the best way they can. We sit down and basically go through the
components of the reading program and make sure that I can answer any
questions. I always offer to come into their room and observe if there’s
something they want me to observe in particular or if they want to observe me
doing a lesson with their students. I also help them with materials to make sure
they know what materials are available which might help make their job a little bit
easier”.

The principal stated that in the mornings, she supervises students and once safely
inside their classrooms she visits and observes classroom instruction on a daily basis.
She also attends and holds meetings throughout the day with parents, teachers, and
students.
In terms of supporting beginning teachers, the principal stated the following: “I
think that it’s my responsibility not to let new teachers flounder and fall behind. I
think that it’s my role to bring them into the climate here. I think that it’s also my
role not to cuddle them because I think sometimes it can lead them to think, ‘I’m
a new teacher you know I don’t know how to do that.’ My philosophy has always
been, you’re in the classroom with 20 kids and the 20 kids shouldn’t suffer
because you’re new. So, when you get your credential the state of California says
that you are ready and you should be ready. Its two fold my responsibility, one is
to push them and support them but also not let them have too many excuses in
other words to help them be accountable for the learning of their students and
their own”.

The assistant principal indicated that on a daily basis he supervises students, visits
classrooms, meets with teachers, parents, and students. He also conducts and
oversees the special education program at Dynasty Elementary. His role in

111
supporting beginning teachers entails observing classroom instruction to determine
teacher needs. He specified classroom management as an area that beginning
teachers struggle.
He stated that his role is to: “Go into classrooms to provide new teachers with
ideas that they can try, strategies that they can do. I also give them the
opportunity to visit other classrooms. My role is to be a support for our teachers
and to make sure that they feel comfortable doing what they are supposed to be
doing”.

A veteran teacher stated that she supports new teachers that are currently in her
grade level. She remarked: “In my grade level there are two new teachers and I
support them the best way that I can. I am very open and I think approachable. I
like to share ideas and materials with my grade level even if they are not new
teachers”.

This veteran teacher attributes her willingness to share with colleagues to her own
personal experience. She disclosed that when she was a beginning teacher, she was
greatly supported by other veteran teachers. Now she feels that it is her turn to return
the favor. Another veteran teacher pointed out that she enjoys sharing materials and
ideas with her grade level regardless if they are beginning or veteran teachers.
One beginning teacher indicated the following: “There are many people in this
school that help me like my principal and other teachers ”.

Another beginning teacher declared: “Everybody at school helps me”.

She also stated that the beginning teacher academy supports her professional growth.
She mentioned the open door policy of the administrators and instructional support
personnel. She pointed out that their open door policy has encouraged her to reach
out for support.
The third beginning teacher recalled: “For the past two years I have been
fortunate to receive support from pretty much everyone at Dynasty”.

112
The interview data revealed that Dynasty Elementary has support structures
currently in place for beginning teachers. The following question helped to
illuminate this finding: What structures and conditions are in place in this school that
support beginning teachers?
The math coach reveled that when students and teachers need help they
participate in the Student Success Team (SST) process.
She elaborated by stating: “If a student has a need then we’ll have an SST. We
really encourage teachers to look at the student who might need to be brought to
the SST. The attendance rate for SST for the parents is also pretty good. When
they show up there is a lot of people in the room. There is the administrator, an
SB65 person, the literacy coach is always there, last year the math coach was
always there, the coordinator, the child, and the RSP teacher. Sometimes you will
have eight people in the room so that kind of shows something to the parents that
we are all together as a team. If we didn’t have this level of collaboration then it
would make it that much harder for our students to succeed. I think that’s part of
our success”.

The literacy coach acknowledged that funding is made available to continue
established programs or for the purchase of instructional materials that would aid in
the academic success of students.
She further declared that: “Money is spent really deliberately to support what we
are doing with our students”.

In addition, she stated that portions of funds are allocated for teachers to meet after
school to discuss instructional matters. She pointed out that the principal supports the
role of mentoring by providing release time and substitute days for teachers to work
with beginning teachers.
All of the interviewees with the exception of the literacy coach mentioned a
beginning teacher academy, a supportive Dynasty Elementary structure. The

113
principal acknowledged that she spearheaded this program to support beginning
teachers. She informed the interviewer that the new teacher academy is lead by
BTSA providers, veteran teachers, and supported by school administrators.
She stated the following: “We brainstorm with new teachers areas of need they
have. This year it’s classroom management and differentiating instruction. So,
those are the two topics that we devoted a majority of our resources too. We held
meetings just for the new teachers on those topics. They got release time so that
they can go into other classrooms to look at strategies being used by the more
senior teachers. Then we gave them literature to read. As a learner, it’s important
that they get the to see the application, have hands-on approach, as well as up-to-
date educational literature. We also, listened to concerns that they are having in
their own classrooms. Kind of like its own little team, a new teacher team”.

The assistant principal stated that the reason for establishing the academy was to
ensure that their beginning teachers start their careers successfully. From his personal
experience, he believes that not many schools have such a supportive program for
beginning teachers.
One veteran teacher became involved in the academy because it met a
requirement for her Tier 1 administrative credential program. She attended meetings
in which topics centered around classroom management. She indicated that
beginning teachers were separated into three groups to observe different classroom
management techniques in veteran teacher classrooms. According to this veteran
teacher, beginning teachers regrouped to discuss what was observed.
In her opinion she stated: “This is a very good program that really helps new
teachers”.

Another veteran teacher stated that as a BTSA support provider she is part of the
new teacher academy.

114
She remarked: “I work closely with the coaches, administrators, and experienced
teachers to support our new teachers. This new teacher academy covers topics
that are of interest to our teachers”.

Two beginning teachers also mentioned attending the new teacher academy
meetings. A beginning teacher stated that they were provided with psychomotor time
to meet with the principal, assistant principal, two BTSA mentors, and a couple of
veteran teachers. On various occasions, they observed classroom management
techniques of veteran teachers. Other topics covered in these new teacher meetings
included: instructional programs, managing behavioral problems, scheduling daily
instruction (time management), and instruction.
Another beginning teacher mentioned the following: “I feel comfortable asking
questions in these meetings. They really focus on what I need as a new teacher”.

The third teacher mentioned that since she was a special education beginning teacher
she did not participate in the new teacher academy.
Observations
The interviewer gained further data and it was determined that Dynasty had
supportive conditions. The following questions were observed during the GLMs:
Description of Context: Physical description of the grade level meeting (environment)
is it clean? Inviting? Who is participating and providing input (administrators,
instructional support personnel, veteran & beginning teachers)? Is there recognition
and celebration for outstanding achievement? and Is time provided for teachers to
work together in grade level meetings?
Four of the five GLMs took place in classrooms (1
st
grade, 3
rd
grade, 4
th
grade,
and 5
th
grade). The classroom environments in the 1
st
, 4
th
, and 5
th
grade classrooms

115
were clean and inviting. The school mission was prominently displayed in the front
bulleting board along with student work, student friendly standards, and rubrics. The
classroom environments were print-rich except for the GLM that took place in the 3
rd

grade classroom, which was bare of student work. This classroom was being
prepared for the next school year. Teachers were told to take down all materials in
order for the walls to be cleaned. The fourth GLM took place in the school library.
Teaches needed more room to be able to sit and discuss Kindergarten and first grade
concerns. The library was filled with books, tables, chairs, computers, and student
projects were displayed on top of the bookshelves.
In different GLMs the administrators, instructional support personnel, veteran,
and beginning teachers participated and provided input in the discussion. In the first
GLM, veteran and beginning teachers were able to share their knowledge about
effective instructional practices. The principal and the literacy coach provided
teachers with the opportunity to reflect on their instructional practices by using the
discussion format RoARR (Reflect on/ Analyze/ Reflect/ Refine). Veteran and
beginning teachers shared their successes as well as their struggles in meeting the
established goals per student group (benchmark, strategic, intensive, and proficient).
In the second GLM, there were various observable opportunities for each person to
participate in the discussion. The principal participated by asking questions,
providing input, and encouraging the flow of discussion. The literacy coach
explained the results of week 24 OCR student assessments and encouraged teachers
to comment on their class results. She also made a chart that displayed assessment

116
results for three consecutive years (05/06, 06/07, and 07/08). A veteran teacher
shared her successes, challenges, and even asked the group of teachers to provide her
with strategies that might help her work with her particular group of students.
Beginning teachers also felt comfortable with discussing their successes and
challenges. In the third GLM, a veteran teacher began the discussion and asked
others, “What do you think about using Braille materials to demonstrate different
modes of communication?” This question brought responses from the participants.
In the fourth GLM, all of the teachers and the principal participated in the discussion.
In the fifth GLM, veteran and beginning teachers participated in the discussion. The
principal, literacy and math coach came in during the discussion to inquire if they
could be of assistance. During this GLM, teachers were able to work collaboratively
and did not need assistance from an administrator nor instructional support personnel.
In three of the five GLMs there was recognition and celebration for outstanding
achievement. For example, in GLM 1, each teacher met more than one established
goal and were applauded and congratulated for their hard work. In GLM 2, teachers,
administrators, and the literacy coach celebrated the fact that the OCR assessment
data has shown growth across the different student groups (benchmark, strategic,
intensive, and proficient). The literacy coach told teachers to give themselves a pat
on the back for a job well done. Teachers cheered and clapped at this announcement.
In GLM 4, the first grade teachers thanked the Kindergarten teachers for the highly
prepared students they received this school year. First grade teachers recognized the
hard work that Kindergarten teachers do to prepare their students for the next grade

117
level by clapping and cheering. A teacher stated, “Good job you guys!”. GLMs 3
and 5 did not involve recognition nor celebration for outstanding achievement.
Five out of five GLMs teachers were provided time to work together. The GLMs
were specifically utilized to provide teachers with time to collaborate and work on
key curricular issues.
Shared Personal Practices:
Interviews
As part of the math coach responsibilities, teachers have the opportunity to observe
her modeling math lessons.
She stated: “Sometimes new teachers approach me or I approach them to do
demos in their classrooms. Last week, I modeled a lesson on fractions in a 5
th

grade class. Now it’s the turn of that teacher to model a similar lesson for me”.

Several interviewees revealed that beginning teachers are provided opportunities via
the new teacher academy to observe veteran teachers.
The assistant principal stated: “We bring our more veteran teachers to present
their classroom management system to our new teachers. After their
presentations they [beginning teachers] visit classrooms so they can see the
practice at work. Teachers then debrief after the observation”.

A beginning teacher stated: “I learn a lot from observing other teachers. We
observe and then talk about what we saw”.

Another beginning teacher indicated that observing veteran teachers add to her
professional development. She remarked: “I get pretty good ideas when I observe
other teachers”.

Another beginning teacher stated: “I don’t really observe other teachers because
they are all regular classes and my class is special education. I’m also not part of
the new teacher academy”.

118
The literacy coach stated that the best support for beginning teachers are GLMs
since teachers discuss and receive feedback from their colleagues on issues directly
related to their instructional grade level. An example that was shared was the
collaboration among first grade teachers. First grade teachers met during GLMs to
plan and carryout a reading intervention. According to the literacy coach, this
intervention enabled teachers to provide feedback and support to each other as they
work with their student target groups.
The principal added that teachers seek feedback from colleagues informally and
formally: “Informally as walking down the hall and say, ‘Hey what should I do
with this standard? I’m having trouble getting my kids to understand it?’ or It
could be that they are meeting formally where they say that they need a substitute
to meet with their mentor. I know that they meet a lot on their own after school”.

A beginning teacher shared that meeting by grade levels to discuss OCR goals is
helpful since she gets to listen to what other teachers are doing and at the same time
she gets to share what works for her.
As it relates to beginning teachers, the literacy coach indicated the following:
“Each one of the new teachers that is serviced by BTSA has had at least more
than one full day release time where they are sitting down doing some planning
and collaboration with their provider. Teachers are also released from their
classroom to observe other teachers or their own BTSA providers classroom or
what ever might be needed”.

The school principal pointed out that she mentors BSTA providers and key
teachers in leadership positions. She stated that she holds leadership trainings at the
beginning of the year with grade level chairs, action team leaders, and mentors to help
them facilitate meetings, work with different personalities, instructional support, and
to help establish mentoring goals.

119
She further elaborated that “we talk about how the biggest challenge for a leader
is knowing when not to do everything themselves”.

The assistant principal added that the principal, the coaches, coordinator, veteran
teachers, and himself are all involved in the mentoring process of new teachers. He
also pointed out the collaboration that takes place between first grade teachers.
He further stated that: “The teachers got together and with the guidance of the
literacy coach they designed the program. How they were going to work, what
they were going to work with, and how they were going to monitor students using
a pre and a post test assessment to determine whether you know what they were
going worked. It’s made a big difference as far as the test scores are concerned”.

A veteran teacher stated that because of her positive experience with her past
mentors she now mentors beginning teachers. She further stated that she enjoys
sharing ideas and materials with teachers specially beginning teachers. She pointed
out the following as topics of conversation among teachers in grade levels and in the
new teacher academy, which included curriculum, discipline, differentiation of
instruction, and everyday classroom concerns. Another veteran teacher pointed out
that beginning teachers were able to observe different classroom management
techniques via the new teacher academy. She indicated that group discussions
followed each observation.
A beginning teacher pointed out that she feels supported by the teachers at
Dynasty Elementary. While this interview was being conducted, a veteran teacher
walked in to tell her that the main hallway bulletin board was ready for her to display
her students writing samples. The veteran teacher asked if she needed help in setting
up her first bulletin display. This particular veteran teacher was not her BTSA
mentor yet she took the time to assist her.

120
The beginning teacher further points out: “Everyone here actually has been really
encouraging and really supportive”.

In regards to her BSTA support provider, she says the following: “She is very
supportive and she has given me lots of good tips”.

Another beginning teacher stated that she does not have a BTSA mentor. She has
a mentor assigned to her by her principal. Referring to her mentor she declared,
“My experience with her is very good, she is a very big help to me. I really love
her, she is sweet and has given me so much”.

Interview data revealed that Dynasty school environment is supportive which is
essential for the professional growth of beginning teachers and teachers in general.
The interviewees used the following words to describe their school environment:
teamwork oriented, strong sense of team and commitment, supportive, tight unit, and
collaborative. This coincides with Uhl & Pérez-Sellés (1995) study, which found that
when people work collaboratively it generates new ideas, practices, and knowledge,
which in turn help to create a common goal and vision. Barth (2006), Walters,
Marzona, and McNulty (2004) have cited the importance collegial relationships are in
enabling teachers to work together as professionals. Providing time for teachers to
meet and share their expertise and knowledge base provides opportunities for
beginning teachers to receive necessary feedback. GLMs, formal and informal
meetings are indicated as opportunities for beginning teachers to receive feedback,
encouragement, and support. Huffman and Hipp (2003) have indicated the
importance of receiving feedback is to improve instructional practices. Furthermore,
opportunities for beginning teachers to observe veteran teachers aid in deprivatizing
instructional practices as stated by Louis and Kruse (1995).
Observations

121
The researcher found that Dynasty displayed shared personal practices when
conducting GLMs. The following questions focused the observation: Are teachers
sharing instructional practices, expertise, knowledge, and/or information? What are
the levels of engagement (actively paying attention, involved in the
discussion/activity), number of times beginning teachers share in small and whole
group discussions? Are the faculty and staff collaboratively reviewing student work
(Huffman & Hipp, 2003)?
Yes, teachers are sharing instructional practices, expertise, knowledge, and
information in the GLMs. In the first GLM, the teachers used the RoARR (Reflect
on/ Analyze/Reflect/Refine) format. This discussion format was provided to the
researcher by one of the teachers. The format includes:
First we Reflect on what we’ve done with our students… (What instructional
actions did I take to address this goal? What did I not do that I wish I had done?);
Next, we share and Analyze our evidence… (Are the students proficient in this
area? How do you know?); Then we Reflect on progress as a grade level… (Did
we meet our goal? How can we support each other to improve achievement?);
Finally, we Refine our plan… (Does this continue to be an area of need for us
and our students? What are our next steps?).

Since it was a small group, veteran and beginning teachers were able to share their
perspective as it relates to their own classroom practice. In the second GLM, the
literacy coach began the conversation by providing first grade teachers with
information on the most current OCR week 24 assessment results. She also asked
teachers questions geared towards their instructional practices such as, “In your
particular group of students what instructional support have you seen that best meets
their needs? What are the areas that your students have made improvement? What

122
are the areas that your students need more help?” The principal asked questions and
shared her experience gained as a former teacher. She asked teachers if there were
resources they need that might help them in their instructional practice. Veteran and
beginning teachers shared instructional practices as it regards to their IWT student
group. The teacher that focused on the intensive group discussed dictation and
phonetic awareness. The strategic group teacher discussed blending and decodable
practice. The teacher that focused on the proficient group discussed fluency (timed
practice with grade level passages) and comprehension skills (questioning skills using
current reading selections). The advanced group teacher discussed fluency (timed
practice with advanced passages) and the writing process (focused on main ideas and
details). A veteran teacher felt comfortable to share her classroom challenges.
She stated: “I’m having problems with writing. I want to make it more interesting
for my students”.

This comment was validated by the principal and literacy coach when they discussed
a selection of books that students can use to write book reports. Another teacher
suggested that students research a particular topic and use the computer lab to work
on it. In the third GLM, teachers shared practices that previously worked for them
when they taught OCR Unit 5. A teacher presented her colleagues with a student
sample of a pop-up storyboard that she used last year. Another teacher presented her
peers with a book report on different modes of communication that her students
created last year. GLM number 4 also involved teachers sharing instructional
practice, expertise, knowledge, and information. The K-1 articulation revealed
current instructional practices taking place in these grade levels. Teachers shared

123
information on how they were preparing their students for the following grade. In the
fifth GLM, teachers shared ideas and concepts that worked for them last school year.
A teacher brought out materials that she used to teach Language Arts and Science.
Another teacher shared her planning sheet and lesson planner from last school year.
Yet, another teacher shared specific strategies that helped her students meet the grade
level standards in math.
There was a high level of engagement in the GLMs. Administrators, instructional
support personnel, beginning, and veteran teachers were actively paying attention and
involved in the discussion. The data gathered in the next observation question
revealed that despite the high levels of engagement beginning teachers took fewer
opportunities to actually participate in the overall discussion as compared to veteran
teachers. A tally mark was taken to determine the number of times, veteran and
beginning teachers shared in the GLM discussion. Data revealed that beginning
teacher participation frequency was half the time compared to veteran teachers.

Table 8: Frequency of Participating in GLM Discussion
Number of
Veteran
Teachers
Number of Times
Veteran Teachers
Shared
Number of
Beginning
Teachers
Number of Times
Beginning Teachers
Shared
GLM 1 3 41 2 29
GLM 2 3 39 1 15
GLM 3 2 53 1 24
GLM 4 5 76 3 41
GLM 5 2 67 2 33
Total 15 276 9 142

Three of the five GLMs involved reviewing student work. Student work involved
writing samples, student created books, graphic organizers, and student assessments.
Reviewing student work was not applicable in two of the GLMs.

124
Following is a chart that summarizes the five observed grade level meetings. The
first column lists the GLM topics that were discussed in each of the five observations.
The next column indicates the length of the GLM. The next column shows the date
that the GLM took place. The next three columns indicate the amount of teachers,
administrators, and support personnel present during each of the grade level meetings.
Table 9: Grade Level Meetings
GLM Topic Time Date # of
Teachers
Present
# of Administrators
Present
# of Support
Personnel
Present
Revisiting
Established Goals
1:20 –
2:20 p.m.
04/09/08 5 Principal &
Assistant Principal
(2)
Literacy Coach
(1)
Revisit
Independent Work
Time (IWT)
1:20 –
2:20 p.m.
04/14/08 4 Principal (1) Literacy Coach
(1)
Planning for OCR
Unit 5
1:20 –
2:20 p.m.
04/29/08 3 0 0
K-1 Articulation 1:20 –
2:20 p.m.
05/16/08 8 Principal (1) 0
Preparing for Next
School Year 08/09
1:20 –
2:20 p.m.
06/17/08 4 Principal (1) Literacy Coach
& Math Coach
(2)

Data Summary Analysis for Research Question One
Interview and observation revealed data for each of the identified themes. Within
the supportive and shared leadership theme, the data collected supported the
following codes: A) supportive administrative leadership style; B) availability of
school leadership positions; and C) sense of teacher empowerment.
Transformational leadership (Bennis & Nanus, 2003) is revealed as a style
displayed by the administrators, specifically the school principal. Northouse (2004),
points out that transformational leadership seeks to enable followers to achieve their
fullest potential. This is the exact sentiment expressed by the principal when she

125
stated that via mentoring she could help teachers “realize their full potential in the
classroom and their potential as leaders”. The interviewees indicated that their school
principal provided the support necessary to become effective teachers (i.e., feedback,
materials, motivation, instructional strategies, and mentoring). Supporting the growth
of beginning teachers aids in their retention especially during the first three years of
their teaching careers. This is especially true since beginning teaches have cited lack-
of administrative support (Hope, 1999; Quinn & Andrews, 2004) as a reason for
leaving the educational field.
There is also a sense of teacher empowerment, which is evident in the interview
response from the principal, assistant principal, literacy coach, math coach, three
veteran teachers, and two beginning teachers. Teacher empowerment through a
variety of leadership opportunities is what Bennis and Nanus (2003) refers to
leadership that “is not arbitrary or unilateral but rather an impressive and subtle
sweeping back and forth of energy” (p 30-31). This suggests that the availability of
teacher leadership positions at Dynast Elementary is vital to the continuation of a
supportive school culture. As stated by all ten interviewees, leadership and power is
shared across the school rather than held by the administrator. Bowen-Childs et al.,
(2000) stated that in order for a school to succeed power must be distributed rather
than a hierarchical leadership style. O’Tool (1995) concurs with this finding that in
order to be effective leadership must be distributed. Fullan (2005), Huffman and
Hipp (2003) cite the importance of promoting, nurturing, motivating, and sustaining
leadership among its faculty. The availability of leadership roles in the school site is

126
a way to promote and nurture teacher leaders. The literature reviewed (Cobb, 2005;
Huffman & Hipp, 2003; Idol, 2002) has cited the importance in empowering teachers
by having them actively involved in the decision-making process as equal
participants. The data collected via interviews concur with this perspective.
However, one beginning teacher indicated that she did not feel empowered. In the
true sense of the word, empowerment must be shared by all stakeholders.
Teachers are empowered to lead their grade level meetings as observed in three of
five GLMs. Beginning teaches need to be directly involved in their instructional
practice in order to develop as professionals. Furthermore, administrators and
instructional support personnel participate in GLMs by encouraging and involving all
teachers in the discussion. Involving teachers in the discussion ensures that their
opinions and decisions are heard. Bowen-Childs et al., (2000) stated the need for
teachers to be involved in school leadership. For example, Dynasty teachers are able
to make decisions that directly affect their own classrooms. Idol (2002) points out
that a collaborative school environment actively involves teachers in the decision-
making process. In addition, Newell and Buchen (2004) stated that principal-teacher
partnerships, distributed leadership, teacher leadership, and teacher ownership is
critical for collaborative practices to take place.
The data collected under the theme shared values and vision reveled the following
themes: A.) creation of the mission; B.) school mission shared school-wide; and C.)
high expectations.

127
Literature on productive school cultures point to the need of having norms and
values shared via the school’s mission statement (Barth, 2002; Gruenert, 2005). De
Costa, Marshall, and Riordan (1998) study concurs with this finding. They point to
the necessity of schools having a shared vision statement. This perspective was
described through interviews by Dynasty Elementary School faculty and staff where
there was engagement and awareness of the school’s shared mission. Also, Grunert
(2005), Huffman and Hipp (2003) point that beginning teachers and teachers in
general believe that shared values guide behavior, teaching, learning, and
instructional practices. The mission statement was prominently displayed in the main
office, hallways, and in classrooms. The interviewees were able to articulate the
tenets of the schools mission.
As it pertains to school leadership, transformational leadership is apparent in the
interviews conducted. For example, as identified by Bennis and Nanus (2003) there
was “attention through vision”. Bennis and Nanus (2003) define “attention through
vision” as a leaders vision that “animates, inspires, and transforms purpose into
action” (p. 29). According to the interviews the school’s mission is shared by all
stakeholders and reviewed intermittently to determine its appropriateness. The vision
for Dynasty has clear outcomes since the administrators, faculty, staff, parents, and
students created beliefs statements and goals that articulated the mission. To further
clarify the mission statement Dynasty faculty, administrators, support personnel, and
staff created action teams. These action teams lead by teachers are responsible for
meeting the established goals each year for each of the six beliefs. Meaning through

128
communication is a theme identified by Bennis and Nanus (2003) as an important
aspect of a transformational leader. The principal at Dynasty modeled through her
behavior and actions what she expects from her faculty and staff. Additionally,
Bennis and Nanus (2003), state that leaders are able to transmit norms and values of
the organization in order to bind others to stand behind the shared vision. Another
component of a productive school culture are the high expectations shared by all
(Bath, 2002; Cobb, 2005; Huffman & Hipp, 2003). Interview data also revealed the
high expectations shared by Dynasty faculty, administrators, and support personnel.
These expectations are represented in the goals developed under each of the action
teams (achievement, accountability, creativity, life-long learning, teamwork, respect
for diversity). Veteran and beginning teachers at Dynasty shared that they held high
expectations for theirs students as well as for themselves.
Interview and observation data revealed that verbal interactions reflect the vision
of the school. The mission beliefs were reflected in the dialog and discussion taking
place during GLMs. There is a sense of shared values and vision that focus the
instruction taking place at Dynasty Elementary School. Gruenert (2005), Huffman,
and Hipp (2003) stated that behavior, teaching, learning, and instruction is guided by
shared values. Beginning teachers and teachers in general need a school environment
in which high expectations are shared by all stakeholders (Barth, 2002; Cobb, 2005;
Gruenert, 2005; Huffman & Hipp, 2003). Barth (2002) and Gruenert (2005)
indicated that an effective school is one that has norms and values shared by all.

129
Under the collective learning and application of learning theme the data reveled
the following: A.) there are various opportunities to meet; and B.) various topics to
discuss.
From the data collected, there is a sense of collegiality among Dynasty faculty
and staff. According to Bath (2002) collegiality enables peers to produce positive end
results by sharing effective instructional practices. In other word, experiences and
knowledge are easily shared between peers when there is a sense of collegiality and
trust (Barth, 2006; Waters, Marzano, & McNulty, 2004). Fullan et. al., (2005)
indicated that information shared among professionals is vital in order to build
capacity. Fullan et. al., further points out that building capacity is a collective
endeavor one in which it cannot be accomplished by one individual alone.
GLMs help in building capacity as well as the disbursement of information according
to the ten interviewees. Huffman and Hipp (2003) stated that a faculty,
administrators, and support personnel working collaboratively to plan, solve
problems, and improve learning is vital.
According to a veteran teacher differentiating the instruction to meet the needs of
students was a topic discussed in many meetings. Darling-Hammong et al., (2001)
cites the importance of differentiating instruction since student demographic has
diversified over the past years. Furthermore, beginning teachers have cited lack of
guidance and support in differentiating instruction as a reason for leaving the
classroom (Darling-Hammond et. al., 2001; Darling-Hammond, 2003; Meister et. al.,
2003; Quinn & Andrews, 2004; Renard, 2003; Robertson et. al., 2006). Also, Ganser

130
(2002) points to the need for principals to provide mentors and mentees release time.
The opportunities offered at Dynasty for beginning teachers to meet with their
mentors include: during grade level, new teacher academy, and release time
(substitute coverage). The school principal is aware of the value and need for
teachers to meet. She spearheaded the creation of the new teacher academy.
In their studies, Barth (2006), Waters, Marzano, and McNulty (2004) highlighted
the importance of teachers sharing instructional expertise. The sharing of
instructional expertise took place during the GLMs. In these meetings teachers
focused on teaching and learning which according to studies conducted by many
researchers (Darling-Hammond, 2003; Ganser, 1999; Meister et. al., 2003; Quinn &
Andrews, 2004; Renard, 2003; Robertson et. al., 2006) is vital to students academic
achievement as well as teacher professional growth. The GLM topics targeted
different instructional areas based on the needs of the grade level such as standards,
instructional practices, and the articulation between grade levels demonstrated that
teachers were focused on their instructional practice. The dialog also reflected that
among their grade level peers there was access to materials, supplies, and resources
which is an important area as identified by, Odell (1986), Whitaker (2000), Brewster
and Railsback (2001). Furthermore, the participants nonverbal patterns of
communication and dialog reflected respect for diverse ideas, as it relates to
instructional expertise.
Interviews with key Dynasty faculty, administrators, and support personnel
revealed the following under the supportive conditions theme: A.) time is provided

131
for teachers to meet; B.) the school environment is supportive; C.) support is provided
to teachers by administrators and support personnel; and D.) supportive structures are
in place.
Tangible support is another characteristic of a productive school culture (Barth,
2002). The literacy coach stated that funding is allocated for materials that are aimed
at improving student achievement as well as teacher professional development. For
example, substitute teachers are hired to enable beginning teachers to meet with their
mentors. Dynasty faculty is provided with time during GLMs to meet and discuss
instructional issues. Furthermore, the roles of the school principal and the assistant
principle have displayed a multidimensional role as indicated by Cotton and Savard
(1980). Cotton and Savard (1980) highlighted the common behaviors demonstrated
by effective principals that include conducting classroom observations,
communicating to staff their intended instructional goals via a school mission,
articulate high expectations, and are involved in planning and evaluating the
instructional program. The interviews revealed that the administrators at Dynasty
display similar characteristics.
Furthermore, the study conducted by the Public Education Network (2003)
identified the following three characteristics as necessary for principals to effectively
support first year teachers: accessibility, providing assistance, and guidance. The
interviews conducted with the ten participants indicated that administrators, coaches,
and veteran teachers provide beginning teachers with guidance and assistance. For
example, interview data revealed that the math and literacy coach provided support

132
on implementing district adopted reading and math programs. They stated that their
role is to provide instructional expertise on these key content areas. The job
description of the LAUSD math coach states that their responsibilities entail
providing teachers demonstration lessons, conducting observations, and leading grade
level meetings in a non-evaluative manner. This was revealed during the interviews.
Other forms of tangible support included grade level meetings, SST, action teams,
activities and celebrations that brought the faculty together. Personal and emotional
support was another area indicated by beginning teachers as essential to their growth
(Ganser, 1999; Odell, 1986; Public Education Network, 2003; Whitaker, 2000). As
the math coach indicated, teachers build friendships by participating in activities not
necessarily related to instruction such as the diversity festival and after school
bowling.
In addition, interview data revealed that Dynasty school environment is
supportive which is essential for the professional growth of beginning teachers and
teachers in general. A collaborative approach includes staff, administrators, and
faculty working together to produce higher student achievement and professional
growth. The interviewees indicated the following to describe their school
environment: teamwork oriented, strong sense of team and commitment, supportive,
tight unit, and collaborative. This coincides with Uhl & Pérez-Sellés (1995) study,
which found that when people work collaboratively it generates new ideas, practices,
and knowledge, which in turn help to create a common goal and vision.

133
Dynasty created a collaborative environment that resulted in the development of a
structure to support beginning teachers, the new teacher academy. The purpose of the
new teacher academy was two-fold, to acculturate and support beginning teachers.
The new teacher academy focused on many topics including curriculum, instruction,
record keeping (attendance cards and cums) and classroom discipline. In Quinn and
Andrews (2004) study, curriculum and instruction were areas that beginning teachers
identified as important. Many studies (Darling-Hammond, 2003; Ganser 1999;
Meister et. al., 2003; Renard, 2003; Robertson et. al., 2006) have also identified
curriculum and instruction as a top priority to beginning teachers. The new teacher
academy also focused on classroom management. In several studies, beginning
teachers have indicated that they need assistance with classroom management and
discipline (Darling-Hammond et. al., 2001, Darling-Hammond, 2003; Meister et. al.,
2003; Quinn & Andrews, 2004; Renard, 2003; Robertson et. al., 2006).
Darling-Hammond et. al. (2001), Darling-Hammond (2003), Meister et. al.
(2003), Quinn & Andrews (2004), Renard (2003), and Robertson et. al. (2006) have
revealed in their studies that beginning teachers have struggled in many areas such as:
differentiating the curriculum, time management, classroom management, and the
inability to fully communicate with parents and other adults. As evident in the GLMs
teachers were able to discuss issues related to curriculum and instruction. Teachers
shared their instructional expertise and reflected on their instruction. In the GLMs
Dynasty administrators and instructional support personnel provided assistance and
encouragement which is what Ganser (1999) identify as essential to supporting

134
teachers. Furthermore, teachers met in an environment that enabled such discussions
to take place. For example, with the exception of two GLMs the physical description
was inviting, it was surrounded by student work, grade level standards, and the
mission statement. The opportunity teachers were given to meet by grade levels was
a form of tangible support that teachers viewed as important. Cobb (2005), Huffman,
and Hipp’s (2003) studies are in agreement that school administrators need to provide
tangible support such as time to their faculty. In addition, Campo (1993) and Uhl, et
al., (1995) studies identified time as a necessary ingredient in a collaborative school
environment. In addition, recognition and celebration for outstanding achievement
took place in three of five GLMs. Cobb (2005), Huffman, and Hipp (2003) stated the
importance for appreciation and recognition of individual and group effort. In three
of five GLMs teachers were recognized for their outstanding performance based on
student achievement.
The interviews transcribed provided evidence that administrators, instructional
support personnel, and teachers share instructional practices as evidence of
opportunities for beginning teachers to participate in: A.) observations, B.) receive
feedback, and C.) mentoring.
Barth (2006), Walters, Marzona, and McNulty (2004) have cited the importance
collegial relationships are in enabling teachers to work together as professionals. In
addition Fullan et. al., (2005)has indicated that positive change can occur when there
is a school culture that promotes learning especially from each other. Providing time
for teachers to meet and share their expertise and knowledge base provides

135
opportunities for beginning teachers to receive necessary feedback. GLMs, formal
and informal meetings have been indicated as opportunities beginning teachers have
to receive feedback, encouragement, and support. Huffman and Hipp (2003), have
indicated that the importance of receiving feedback is to improve instructional
practices. Furthermore, opportunities for beginning teachers to observe veteran
teachers aid in deprivatizing instructional practices as stated by Louis and Kruse
(1995). Also, Huffman and Hipp (2003) discussed the importance peer visits and
observations are in terms of offering encouragement, knowledge, and skills among
teachers. It was also apparent in the interviewee responses that beginning teachers
are mentored by official and unofficial mentors. Furthermore, Huffman and Hipp
(2003), have indicated the importance of providing coaching and mentoring to
teachers. The new teacher academy offered teachers opportunities to observe veteran
teachers and to discuss what was observed. However, it is important to point out that
one beginning teacher was not included in the new teacher academy.
Transformational leadership (Bennis & Nanus, 2003) is revealed as a style
displayed by Dynasty administrators, specifically the school principal. Northouse
(2004), points out that transformational leadership seeks to enable followers to
achieve their fullest potential. This is the exact sentiment expressed by the principal
when she stated that via mentoring she could help teachers “realize their full potential
in the classroom and their potential as leaders”. The interviewees indicated that the
principal’s leadership style contributes to Dynasty’s supportive environment.
Interview data also revealed a sense of teacher empowerment evident in the response

136
of the principal, assistant principal, literacy coach, math coach, three veteran teachers,
and two beginning teachers. Teacher empowerment through a variety of leadership
opportunities is what Bennis and Nanus (2003) refers to leadership that “is not
arbitrary or unilateral but rather an impressive and subtle sweeping back and forth of
energy” (p 30-31).
In addition, literature on productive school cultures point to the need of having
norms and values shared via the school’s mission statement (Barth, 2002; Gruenert,
2005). De Costa, Marshall, and Riordan (1998) study concurs with this finding.
They point to the necessity of schools having a shared vision statement. Dynasty
Elementary School faculty and staff revealed that there was engagement and
awareness of the school’s shared mission. Also, from the data collected, there is a
sense of collegiality among Dynasty faculty and staff. According to Bath (2002),
collegiality enables peers to produce positive end results by sharing effective
instructional practices. In other word, experiences and knowledge are easily shared
between peers when there is a sense of collegiality and trust (Barth, 2006; Waters,
Marzano, & McNulty, 2004).
According to the research conducted by Darling-Hammond (2003), Ganser
(1999), Meister et. al (2003), Quinn & Andrews (2004), Renard (2003), and
Robertson et. al. (2006), curriculum and instruction are areas that beginning teachers
need support. The dialogue in the GLMs indicated that teachers shared instructional
practices, expertise, knowledge, and information. Curriculum issues were discussed
in all of the GLMs. In addition, three of five GLMs student data results were

137
analyzed, discussed, and teachers were able to reflect on their instructional practices.
Teachers were involved in sharing outcomes of instructional practices an important
aspect according to Huffman and Hipp (2003).
The ability to share these personal practices is attributed to positive collegial
relationships as indicated by the studies conducted by Barth (2006), Walters,
Marzona, and McNulty (2004). Teachers need to feel that they have the support from
their peers as well as from the school administration in order to share personal
practices. For example in a GLM a teacher felt comfortable in sharing her classroom
struggles. She was also receptive in accepting suggestions and feedback from her
colleagues. The dialogue that took place in these GLMs provided teachers with
feedback to improve their instructional practice. Huffman and Hipp (2003) point to
this form of feedback as essential to the improvement of a teacher’s instructional
practice.
Research Question Two
The purpose of this research question is to identify the differences between the
collaborative approach and the traditional one to one approach to supporting
beginning teachers.
Interviews, Observations, and Surveys
Similar to research question one interview, observation, and survey data was
coded using the following identified attributes of a collaborative school environment:
1.) supportive and shared leadership; 2.) shared values and vision; 3.) collective
learning and application of learning; 4.) supportive conditions; and 5.) shared

138
personal practices. These codes are further broken down into smaller analysis
sections based upon concepts from pertinent literature.
Supportive and shared leadership:
Interview
Interviews conducted revealed that there is a sense of supportive and shared
leadership at Dynasty Elementary School. The school principal indicated the
following when asked to describe the school environment:
“I would say one word to describe us here is collaborative. We all work together.
If I’m walking in the hallway and I see trash. I don’t call the custodian, I pick it
up and throw it away. So definitely there’s a strong sense of team and community
here. We all just pitch in and work together from discipline to curricular issues.
One of my number one goals as a principal is to build a bridge between all of our
stakeholders”.

A veteran teacher made the following comment: “I feel supported in my
classroom because the principal is open to suggestions and she lets us try new
ways to teach core instruction like using new teaching materials or methods”.

To get a deeper understanding of the principal’s view on effective leadership she was
asked to share her perceptions of what she views as an impact of an effective leader.
She stated:
“An effective leader I think knows when to lead and when to follow. You have to
know the strengths of your team and you have to know when they need support,
when they are looking for answers, and when to pull the support away which
allows them to be the solution seekers. It’s a juggling act”.

The assistant principal was also asked to share his perception of an effective
leader. Drawing from his professional experience working in other schools, he
indicated that the principal at Dynasty shares much more school responsibilities with

139
her faculty. According to the assistant principal, sharing school leadership has a two-
fold purpose: for accountability and to demonstrate confidence in her faculty.
Dynasty has several key committees that are part of the school structure, which
aims to promote leadership among its faculty. All of the interviewees indicated that
at the beginning of the school year teachers select a committee or action team that
they will actively participate throughout the school year.
A veteran teacher commented: “We know that we can make positive changes at
Dynasty when we become involved in what’s going inside and outside of our
classrooms”.

Another veteran teacher pointed out: “Our principal motivates us to become
active committee members. She reminds us that we’re all responsible for the
instruction that takes place here”.

A beginning teacher replied: “I like the way we all work together in committees.
It doesn’t really matter if you taught one or ten years you are part of the
committee. I’ve had a very wonderful time working with teachers here”.

A beginning teacher indicated: “As a new teacher I learned right away that I was
expected to be part of a committee. I’m in the diversity committee. We get
together with other teachers to plan school-wide activities that respect diverse
cultures”.

The interviewer asked participants if they felt empowered. All the participants
acknowledge that they felt empowered with the exception of one veteran teacher and
one beginning teacher.
The principal indicated the following: “I do believe that they [teachers] are
empowered. I give them a great voice in their professional development. I don’t
usually come in with a set agenda. I come in with a topic for discussion and then
it’s up to them to generate that discussion and come up with a plan of action. It’s
an expectation that we will take action and move forward in this school but I’m
not going to spoon feed them what we are going to do. It has to come from them
because they are the professionals, they are the practitioners, and they are working
with the kids. They are the experts. It should come from them”.

140
A veteran teacher indicated that she felt empowered to voice out concerns and
suggestions She stated: “I have spoken up when I don’t agree with what’s going
on. I don’t have to be afraid because there’re no repercussions they listen to you”.

A beginning teacher comments: “I like working here, I feel empowered. I feel
that I can take the risk of trying out new ideas which I think helps me to meet the
needs of my students”.

Observations
The observer found that there was indeed supportive and shared leadership at
Dynasty. It was observed that three of five GLMs were conducted by teachers. In the
majority of these GLMs administrators and instructional support personnel were
actively involving teachers in the discussion taking place yet teachers played center
stage in directing the conversation and topics. This ensured that teacher opinions,
suggestions, and comments were addressed. In three of five GLMs teachers were
actively participating in instructional decision making. Grade specific curricular
issues were discussed and teachers took part in the decision making process.
Survey
In the survey questionnaire, statement # 9 resulted in the highest mean score of
2.94 for the supportive and shared leadership code. The item states: Decision-making
takes place through committees and communication across grade and subject areas.
This statement indicates that faculty are involved in the decision making process via
school committees, grade levels, and subject areas which concurs with research
studies (Cobb, 2005; Idol, 2002; and Huffman & Hipp 2003) that point to the
importance of involving teachers in the decision making process.

141
On the other hand, item # 7 resulted in the lowest mean score of 2.43. The item
states: The principal participates democratically with staff sharing power and
authority. Data results indicate that although power and authority are shared by
faculty members it is clearly not evident as indicated by the responses given from the
surveyed beginning teachers. In essence, the principal limits authority and power of
its faculty which becomes difficulty when mentor teachers are the faculty members
directly responsible for supporting the professional development of beginning
teachers in a traditional mentoring approach.
Compared to other codes, supportive and shared leadership has an overall mean
score of 2.66, which is ranked the fifth lowest out of the six themes. The data
revealed that leadership is not consistently distributed to the faculty as perceived by
beginning teachers. From the overall, mean score of this code it can be interpreted
that surveyed beginning teachers worked in school environments that lacked
sufficient support and distributed leadership.
Shared values and vision:
Interviews
The interviewer found that faculty members shared common school values and
vision. All participants were asked about the school mission, its creation, and
whether or not it was shared school-wide. According to the interviewees, the mission
was created by school stakeholders. Parent, teachers, staff, and paraprofessionals
created the mission statement as well as the mission beliefs during a buy back day.
Goals and objectives were then developed for each of the belief statements. Every

142
year teachers select and participate in one of the belief committees and work all year
to meet the pre-determined goals and objectives. The participants indicated that the
belief statements, their objectives, and goals are reviewed twice a year to determine
their relevance.
A beginning teacher stated that the school’s mission strives to close the
achievement gap. It focuses on the preparation of students to become equipped with
the necessary tools to become productive citizens via high expectations and a rigorous
curriculum. The principal summarized the mission statement by stating:
“To be a life long learner and to always strive to move forward and to push
yourself and your students to their full potential. So that one day our students can
be contributing members of society”.

All of the participants indicated that the mission and its beliefs are routinely
shared school-wide. A veteran teacher and the school principal pointed out that the
mission and belief statements are posted on hallways and classrooms. The literacy
coach indicated that the mission is discussed during Back to School, Open House,
Literacy and Math Nights. The school principal also indicated that the mission was
shared with parents during committee meetings and parent workshops.
It was identified via the interviews that teachers shared high expectations for their
students as well as for themselves. The principal notes that students are expected to
put their best effort in every subject matter. Students are provided resources such as
tutoring (before and after school) and SST intervention in order to meet these high
expectations. According to a veteran teacher, they are provided support to help them
meet the high expectations they have for their own instructional practice via GLMs,

143
professional development, peer and administrative feedback. For example,
workshops and GLMs have focused on differentiating instruction. The math and
literacy coaches also provide teachers with effective teaching strategies and student
data is frequently analyzed to identify student strengths and areas of weakness.
The math coach stated: “We are always looking at core instruction and seeing
how we can refine and improve it”.

The literacy coach stated: “Teacher expectations begin with maximizing every
instructional minute from the start of the day to when the bell rings at the end of
the school day. I feel accountable to my teachers that I will be doing whatever I
can to support them and they expect that from me. Teachers expect that from
each other if there are teachers that are sending students to the next grade level
there’s a concern about whether they’ve been prepared enough for that grade
level. So, that’s part of how everything fits together I think because we do focus
on students and the professional growth of our teachers”.

A veteran teacher comments: “Student and teacher expectations go hand in hand.
We model the expected behavior so that our students can follow. If we expect our
students to work in cooperative groups then it’s our responsibility to demonstrate
that as teachers we can also work with each other”.

A beginning teacher comments: “We have high expectations for students and for
our selves. I want my students to succeed not only in the next grade but also in
life”.

Such high expectations are attribute to the school’s mission, the six action teams,
and their beliefs. The beliefs are: achievement, accountability, creativity, life-long
learning, teamwork, respect for diversity, and technology.
Observations
During the course of observing the five GLMs the researcher was able to note the
verbal interactions that reflect the school’s mission as well as several key school
beliefs. For example, in the first GLM teacher discussion reflected the following
mission beliefs: achievement, accountability, teamwork, and respect for diversity. As

144
it pertains to achievement, teachers reflected and discussed how their students are
performing relative to the established Language Arts grade level goals. The
discussion utilized the RoARR format. This format enable teachers to Reflect on their
own instructional practices to determine how well they are working towards meeting
the needs of their students. For accountability purposes, teachers Analyzed their
evidence which involved student work, periodic assessment scores, and determined
via discussion if their students were approaching proficiency or were already
proficient. Once teachers were able to share their input, as a grade level, teachers
Reflected on their progress thus far. Teamwork and respect for diversity was
represented when teachers brainstormed ways to support two teachers that revealed
their students had yet to reach mastery. Finally, teachers determined if their
established goals needed to be Refined based on the student data and teacher input.
Teachers began to plan the next course of action.
Surveys
Statement # 12 from the survey questionnaire resulted in the highest mean score
of 2.89 for the shared values and vision code. The item states: Shared values support
norms of behavior that guide decisions about teaching and learning. Research studies
(Bath, 2002; Cobb, 2005; and Huffman & Hipp, 2003) have indicated that having
shared values and vision help in promoting shared high expectations. This data points
to schools having values and norms but does not revealed if they are imposed or
collaboratively created.

145
Conversely, statement # 15 resulted in the lowest mean score of 2.49. The item
states: A collaborative process exists for developing a shared vision among staff.
Beginning teachers indicated that a limited process exists in their school sites to
develop a shared vision among its faculty. This is critical since research studies
(Bath, 2002; Huffman & Hipp, 2003) have pointed to the importance of involving all
stakeholders in the creation of the school mission, values, and beliefs. It is important
for faculty members to actively participate in developing a shared vision among its
faculty in order to develop ownership and have buy-in.
Compared to other codes, shared values and vision, has an overall mean score of
2.75, which is ranked the fourth lowest out of the six themes. Surveyed beginning
teachers perceived their school environments as having a limited collective process
for creating shared values and vision which deters faculty members from actively
participating in creating shared school expectations, goals, and a guiding vision.
Collective learning and application of learning:
Interviews
Data from interviews revealed that beginning teachers had two types of mentors,
official and unofficial. Official mentors included BTSA support providers and
unofficial mentors included veteran teachers and instructional support personnel such
as the literacy and math coach. Interview data indicated that opportunities for
mentors and mentees to meet include GLMs, professional development meetings, and
the new teacher academy. GLMs are grade specific, professional development

146
meetings include the entire staff, and the new teacher academy focused on the needs
of beginning teachers.
The literacy coach commented: “I have noticed that verbal interactions are much
higher in GLMs and in the new teacher academy compared to professional
development meetings. I’m not saying that new teachers do not speak up in
professional development meetings what I have observed is that new teachers
often share more concrete and personal experiences in GLMs. They share
experiences that are particular to their own classrooms”.

A beginning teacher stated: “I really like working with my grade level. I feel
comfortable because it’s a smaller group and because we talk about things that are
going on in my classroom”.

Other opportunities for mentors and mentees to meet include before school, during
recess, lunch, and after school. A beginning teachers indicated that at least twice a
semester she is provided a substitute teacher to cover her and her mentors class in
order for them to meet the entire day.
The principal pointed out that the discussion taking place in GLMs are powerful.
She cited the following example: “Some of the teachers were disappointed with
the Open Court writing rubric because they felt that it wasn’t expecting enough
from the students because their students could do more. They actually looked at
the writing standards and came up with their own rubric to push the students that
much farther”.

The assistant principal explains that teachers work “cohesively” planning and
discussing curricular issues.

Topics that are discussed between beginning teachers and mentor teachers include
student portfolios, differentiating instruction, classroom management, focusing on the
needs of English language learners, reflecting on instructional practices, and
paperwork requirements (i.e., report cards, cums, ELD portfolios). A veteran teacher

147
informed the interviewer that many topics of conversation deal directly with everyday
classroom issues.
A beginning teacher indicated the following: “ When I meet with my mentor and
with other teachers I get to reflect on my own teaching. The principal really
pushes us to think about our teaching. When I meet with my mentor and principal
to talk about a lesson they often ask me questions like, ‘Tell me how you think the
lesson went? Tell me who you think understood? Tell me who you think was
struggling? Tell me what you’re going to do to support those children who were
struggling? Tell me what you would have done differently? Tell me what
strategies you used in this lesson that you learned from another teacher?’ These
questions help me to think about what I’m doing in the classroom”.

A veteran teacher stated: “I reflect on my teaching and it has helped me to help
my students meet grade level expectations”.

Observations
GLMs provided the researcher with opportunities to observe if Dynasty faculty,
administrators, and instructional support personnel demonstrated collective learning
and application of learning. GLM participants in three of five meetings demonstrated
positive nonverbal patterns of communication. Participant’s body language such as
direct eye contact, nodding in agreement, and smiling indicated that they were
listening to the speaker. Participants also periodically took notes during GLMs.
The actual topics of discussion varied among the five GLMs. Yet, the common
underlying connection was a focus on instruction and its impact on teaching and
learning for both students and teachers. For example, teachers in the last observed
GLM discussed and planned for the next school year. Teachers determined pacing,
unit order, activities, themes, and resources that will enable their students to better
understand the subject matter. Teachers shared ideas, materials, challenges, and
successes as they discussed the core instruction. Ideas and suggestions were

148
discussed and selected based on the appropriateness of grade level standards, themes,
time, and availability of resources. The interactions were positive and the dialog
among teachers represented a level of professional respect and courtesy.
Surveys
Survey statement # 20 resulted in the highest mean score of 3.10 for the collective
learning and application of learning code. The item states: Collegial relationships
exist among staff that reflect commitment to school improvement efforts. Survey
data indicates that beginning teachers in a traditional mentoring approach perceive
that collegial relationships are evident in their schools. This is vital since research
data (Feiman-Nemser & Floden, 1986) indicates that having collegial relationships
help to minimize teacher isolation and the egg-crate ecology. In a traditional
mentoring approach beginning teachers benefit from a school that has collegial
relationships since in many cases mentor teachers are the only individuals assisting
beginning teachers.
On the other hand, statement # 22 resulted in the lowest mean score of 2.68. The
item states: A variety of opportunities and structures exist for collective learning
through open dialogue. Surveyed beginning teachers revealed that there a limited
opportunities for collective learning to take place. Data indicates that lines of
communication need to be further opened in order for peer-to-peer learning to take
place on a more consistent basis.
Compared to other codes, collective learning and application of learning, has an
overall mean score of 2.88, which is ranked the second highest out of the six themes.

149
Compared to the other themes, collective learning and application of learning is
evident to beginning teachers. As Huffman and Hipp (2003) point out collective
learning and application of learning can lead to higher levels of teacher retention,
commitment to change efforts, teacher accountability, and teacher efficacy.
Supportive conditions:
Interviews
Interviews determined that Dynasty Elementary had established supportive
conditions in place for its faculty members. Interviewees cited the school
environment as supportive. The principal used the word collaborative to describe the
school environment. She stated that everyone works together and this contributes to
“a strong sense of team and community”. The assistant principal remarked that
collaborative practices are supported via grade level meetings and everyday positive
attitudes.
The literacy coach adds: “I keep my door open for teachers to come and talk even
if they are having difficulties that don’t necessarily pertain to English Language
Arts or Open Court. I’m here to lend an ear and to provide teachers with the
support they need to effectively implement our language arts program”.

The math coach stated: “At Open House you go through the classrooms you see at
many grade levels that the work is the same work, which means that, they
collaborated. Our teachers feel that they can rely on each other for support”.

A beginning teacher expressed the following: “This school has really helped me a
lot because the teachers are very helpful and they like to share ideas and
materials. My principal and assistant principal are really, really, helpful too”.

The principal attributed action teams, committees, assemblies, SST process, and
grade level meetings as helping to support the academic progress of students, the

150
professional development of teachers, and to strengthen collaborative practices
among colleagues.
The literacy coach stated: “A lot of the new teachers bring more students to SST’s
than veteran teachers. Part of that is that they are looking for strategies that they
can try and that’s were we encourage them to go. The best things for supporting
teachers that it actually like ritualized, that’s set in place, that doesn’t happen
randomly would be the collaboration at grade level meetings”.

A new teacher academy and GLMs were cited as structures set in place that
support the professional growth of beginning teachers. According to the participants
these support structures are held weekly, monthly, and as needed by teachers.
The assistant principal stated: “We coordinate our resources to provide support to
new teachers through this new teacher academy. Our principal created this
academy to address the needs of our new teachers”.

A veteran teacher stated: “Our first meeting was about record keeping like
attendance cards, cums, how to fill out, close, and open cums, and registers.
Filling out SST forms incase they see students that might be falling behind so they
can start monitoring their progress. We try to anticipate the questions that new
teachers might have and present information to them that is relevant to what is
taking place in our school”.

A beginning teacher commented: “As new teachers we had a few questions about
our classroom management. So we had academy meetings to talk about what we
are doing in our classrooms that work and doesn’t work. A few of the more
experienced teachers shared with us their classroom management techniques”.

Another beginning teacher shared: “ I had tons of questions on planning my ELD
time especially because I have different student levels. In the new teacher
meeting, other new teaches asked several ELD questions. I was relieved to hear
that I wasn’t the only one having a hard time”.

The assistant principal stated: “I think that as a whole every one at Dynasty
supports our new teachers”.

Observations

151
Observation data revealed that the discussions taking place involved beginning
teachers, veteran teachers, administrators, and instructional support personnel. There
was a sense of comfort and comradeship among the participants which was evident in
the flow of conversation and the type of sharing taking place. For example, in the
first GLM teachers utilized the RoARR format and it allowed teachers to reflect and
reevaluate established grade level goals. Teachers discussed their classroom
experiences both the challenges and successes. Instructional practices and student
work samples were also shared. In addition, first grade teachers in the second GLM
shared their experiences working with specific target students during their IWT.
These teachers shared students across the grade level based on student reading
proficiency. The literacy coach presented student data and encouraged teachers to
discuss the implications at it pertained to their target group. Student data was
presented as evidence of growth and improvement. The GLMs also resulted in
celebratory acknowledgements. More than half of the GLMs began with recognizing
the hard work of students and teachers.
Observations during the five GLMs also revealed that the meeting places were
inviting and that teachers were provided with time to meet to discuss instructional
practices. Four GLMs took place in classrooms in which three were print rich.
Student work was not displayed in one of the classrooms due to end of the year clean-
up. One of the GLMs was held in the library, which was also inviting, clean, and had
student work displayed.
Surveys

152
For the supportive condition theme the survey had two areas in which beginning
teachers were surveyed. One of the supportive conditions was as it relates to
relationship and the other as it relates to supportive structures. Statement # 33 of the
beginning teacher questionnaire resulted in the highest mean score of 3.13 for
supportive conditions specifically as the code relates to relationships. The item
states: Caring relationships exist among staff and students that are built on trust and
respect. On the other hand, statement # 36 resulted in the lowest mean score of 2.73.
The item states: School staff and stakeholders exhibit a sustained and unified effort to
embed change into the culture of the school. Personal and emotional support are
viewed as important to beginning teachers. This survey revealed that beginning
teachers in a traditional mentoring approach work in supportive school environments.
In addition, there is inconsistency in faculty members changing the school culture.
Educational change needs to be a collaborative endeavor in order to be effective.
Statement # 42 resulted in the highest mean score of 3.01 as it relates to structures
under supportive conditions. The item states: The school is clean, attractive, and
inviting. 3.01. Conversely, statement # 38 resulted in the lowest mean score of 2.61.
The item states: The school schedule promotes collective learning and shared
practices. The structural aspect of the school environment was viewed positively by
surveyed beginning teachers. A clean, attractive, and inviting school environment is
to sufficient to support the needs of beginning teachers. Teachers need to be provided
with a school schedule that encourages and supports learning and shared practices.

153
Surveyed beginning teachers indicated that it is not consistent or readily available in a
majority of beginning teachers.
Compared to other codes, supportive conditions (relationships), has an overall
mean score of 2.89, which has the highest mean score of all the codes. Supportive
conditions (structures), has an overall mean score of 2.78, which is ranked the third
highest out of the six themes. In general, surveyed beginning teachers indicated that
supportive relationships are apparent in their school environments, which compared
to other codes takes less effort to accomplish. The determining factor, are the faculty
members being able to have professional working relationships. The structural aspect
was in general also viewed as supportive.
Shared personal practices:
Interviews
Interviews transcribed provided evidence that teachers, administrators, and
support personnel share instructional practices as evidence of opportunities for
beginning teachers to participate in observations. The math coach shared that she
models lessons for teachers. The literacy coach also indicated that she conducts
lesson demonstrations in the teacher’s classroom.
She stated: “I believe that having teachers observe a lesson is very useful because
it gives teachers ideas on how they can approach a difficult concept”.

A beginning teacher stated: “I feel that my literacy coach is helpful. We talked
about ways to pace my OCR lessons, and about my concept - question board. I
asked her to come to my class to help me open my unit using the concept -
question board”.

154
Another opportunity to observe is via the new teacher academy. The new teacher
academy first presents teachers with information via meetings, then classroom
observations, followed by a post discussion session.
The principal indicated: “The purpose of the new teacher academy is to ensure
that our new teachers get the support they need so that they can provide quality
education to our students. We schedule meetings so that we can answer their
questions, share ideas, and materials. The GLMs also contribute to the
professional development of our new teachers. This is a good time for teachers to
work with their own grade level”.

Participants cited the new teacher academy, GLMs, before school, during recess,
lunch, and after school as opportunities to share instructional practices. Interviewees
have also indicated that they receive feedback from different sectors of the school.
The principal and assistant principal stated that they provide instructional feedback to
teachers after they conduct walkthroughs.
The assistant principal points out the following: “After I visit a class I take time
to write a few observational notes. My feedback focuses on the content and the
instruction. I meet with teachers when there is a concern because I know that they
benefit from helpful suggestions. I also meet with teachers to congratulate them
on a job well done”.

As previously mentioned there are two types of mentor, official (official (BTSA
mentors) and unofficial (other veteran teachers). These two types of teachers have
been cited as helping beginning teachers through their first few years.
The math coach recalls: “We have two teachers who are officially NBC. So, it’s
automatic that they should service the new teachers at this school. We also have
teachers who are not NBC and who are not paid but on their own mentor new
teachers in their grade levels”.

A beginning teacher remarks: “One of the teachers here has helped me a great
deal. She came into my room and modeled a journal writing activity. She’s not
my BTSA mentor but she’s another teacher that I feel comfortable going to
when I have questions”.

155

The new teacher academy and GLMs enable all teachers including beginning
teachers to share personal practices.
A beginning teacher indicates: “My teacher program prepared me with new
instructional models and lesson formats. I contribute these models and formats in
GLMs”.

Observations
The composition of GLMs enable teachers to share their perspectives as it
pertains to their own instructional practices and their classrooms. Each GLM
afforded teachers with the opportunity to contribute their knowledge, insight,
challenges, and instructional successes. A structured conversational format utilized in
a GLM was the RoARR. This format enabled teachers to reflect, analyzed, refine,
and share in the discussion. Only the first GLM utilized this formal discussion
format. In the second GLM, teachers were presented with their student data. The
literacy coach prompted teachers to reflect on the areas of student strengths and areas
to improve as it pertains to their target IWT group. A beginning teacher commented
on the improvement in student reading comprehension. She shared strategies utilized
in her classroom that have aided in improving student reading comprehension skills.
Teachers in the third GLM worked together to brainstorm new ideas to teach OCR
unit 5. Teachers shared student work samples that were created during the course of
unit 5. Teachers also debated on the selection of activities and themes that would best
make it comprehensible for students at various English language proficiency levels.
In the fourth GLM, teachers discussed the instructional practices taking place in the
kindergarten and first grade classrooms. First grade teachers articulated the strengths

156
and weakness of incoming first grade student. Due to the openness of kindergarten
teachers, first grade teachers were able to air out their concerns. In the last GLM,
teachers shared instructional practices for the coming school year. Teachers
brainstormed ideas, reviewed grade level standards, discussed student work samples,
resources and shared how to improve instruction for the upcoming school year.
Materials were evaluated to determine their appropriateness in helping to support the
curriculum. Teachers shared their planners and focused on lessons that effectively
delivered the intended objectives.
Surveys
Statement # 29 of the beginning teacher questionnaire resulted in the highest
mean score of 3.03 for the shared personal practice code. The item states: The staff
informally shares ideas and suggestions for improving student learning. Despite the
fact that beginning teachers indicated that faculty members informally share
instructional practices their response does not indicate the time, frequency, quantity,
nor length of such interaction. The difficulty with understanding this practice is that
it is vital for teachers to formally share instructional practices in order to benefit every
faculty.
Conversely, statement # 27 resulted in the lowest mean score of 2.28. The item
states: Opportunities exist for staff to observe peers and offer encouragement. The
ability to build capacity as indicated by Fullan (2005) is possible only when teachers
are able to share the instructional practices that take place within their classrooms.

157
Learning from each other is essential to develop skills, knowledge, and gain further
insight into their own practices.
Compared to other codes, shared personal practices, has an overall mean score of
2.57, which is the lowest mean of all the codes. The results for this code indicate that
teachers have yet to fully feel comfortable in having peers observe during their
instructional practice. Research studies (Barth, 2006; Waters et. al, 2004) have
indicated that sharing instructional practices is critical to the professional growth of
beginning teachers.
Data Summary Analysis for Research Question Two
Interviews, observations, and surveys revealed data for each of the identified
themes. Within the supportive and shared leadership theme, the data collected
revealed the following: A.) a shared similarity in both approaches is that decision
making takes place in committees and/or grade level meetings; and B.) in a team
approach environment a principal shares and empowers others to participate in school
affairs as compared to a traditional beginning teacher support.
Northouse, (2004) points out a main outcome in a transformational leadership
style is the enabling of others to achieve to their highest potential. Transformational
leadership as displayed by Dynasty school principal seeks to encourage the
professional development of its faculty by promoting collaborative practices. O’Tool
(1995) adds that in order for this type of leadership to be effective it must be
distributed. Shared power and responsibility among faculty and staff is essential in
enabling teaches to become effective educators. According to Bowen-Childs (2000),

158
in a collaborative team approach the principal moves away from a hierarchical
leadership style to distributed leadership involving everyone to ensure the school’s
success. Dynasty committees, action teams, and GLMs promote shared leadership
and empower teachers to become part of the decision-making process. Several
studies (Fullan, 2005; Huffman & Hipp, 2003) agree on the importance of promoting,
nurturing, and sustaining leadership among its faculty. Cobb (2005) stated that
principals in particular are culture builders and therefore have a direct role in
organizing and facilitating shared leadership. It is the responsibility of the principal
to involve and empower others in the decision making process (Barth, 2002).
Dynasty principal was viewed by teachers and instructional support personnel as
supportive and promoting leadership via GLMs and school committees.
On the other hand, surveyed beginning teachers stated that decision-making takes
place during grade levels and committees but that the actual sharing of power and
authority is limited by school principals limits. According to Cobb (2005), Idol
(2002), and Huffman & Hipp (2003), beginning teachers need to be empowered by
being involved in the decision making process as equal participants. The availability
of leadership roles in the school site is a way to promote and nurture teacher leaders
but not effective if the roles and decision-making is superficial. As is evident from
the surveyed beginning teachers power and authority is willed from top down
approach rather than democratically. According to Uhl & Pérez-Sellés (1995)
historically the deficit model of leadership holds the principal in a hierarchical
position wilding all the power and decision-making thus public schools systems are

159
bureaucratically structured and do not allow for such collaboration to take place. In a
study conducted by the Public Education Network (2003), it was revealed that 46% of
the surveyed beginning teachers indicated that they do not have regular contact with
their school principal. Newell and Buchen’s (2004) study also points to the need for
principal – teacher partnerships and distributed leadership in order to create
collaborative school cultures. Bowen-Childs et. al., (2000) contend that the role of
the principal is that of leader of leaders rather than a dictatorship role. It is vital for
leadership to be distributed since in a traditional mentoring approach the mentor
teacher is the responsible faculty member for directly supporting the development of
beginning teachers. Yet Ganser (1999) points out that even though mentors are
considered the “fix it” all person in reality their power is limited. In actuality, mentor
teachers do not have direct responsibility over factors that directly affect their
mentees.
Under the shared values and vision interviews, observations, and surveys revealed
the following: A.) The team approach and traditional beginning teacher support
indicated shared values that support norms of behavior that guide decisions about
teaching and learning; and B.) A collaborative process exists in a team approach for
developing a shared vision among faculty and staff, a process not apparent in a
traditional model.
Literature (Barth, 2002; De Costa, Marshall, & Riordan 1998; Gruenert, 2005)
has revealed that effective schools have shared values, norms, and vision. Huffman
and Hipp (2003), explained that the purpose of shared values and vision is to create

160
common school norms of behavior. According to Huffman and Hipp, (2003) norms
“are manifested in shared responsibility for student learning, a caring environment,
open communication, a balance of personal and common ambition, and trusting
relationships” (p. 78-79). Simply imposing values and a vision is not enough for
teachers to internalize and take ownership. Beginning teachers indicated in their
survey response that there were shared norms of behavior that guide teaching and
learning yet they also pointed out that there is a limited process that exists for
developing a shared vision among its faculty and staff. In a study conducted by De
Costa, Marshall, and Riordan (1998) found that when a school culture lacked a shared
school-wide vision it resulted in an unfocused attempt to improve student
achievement. Teachers were unable to uniformly articulate the goals held at the
school site. Huffman and Hipp, (2003) deem important having a shared vision since
it helps to create and align policies, procedures, and strategies that promote school-
wide success. More importantly, having shared values and vision promotes shared
high expectations. As per Bath (2002), Cobb (2005), Huffman and Hipp (2003) a
component of a productive school culture are the high expectations shared by all.
Barth (2002), Cobb (2005), Gruenert (2005), Huffman and Hipp (2003), indicated
that beginning teachers and teachers in general need a school environment in which
high expectations are shared by all stakeholders.
Idol (2002), Uhl, and Pérez-Sellés (1995) stated that a collaborative school
environment is one that involves teachers in creating the schools vision and goals.
Dynasty stakeholders were involved in the creation of the school’s mission, beliefs,

161
and goals. According to Idol (2002), a collaborative school culture provides a basis
in which teachers are involved in creating school goals and the conditions and
structures to achieve them. According to Huffman and Hipp (2003), a school vision
is created by all stakeholders through a collaborative process in order to create
ownership as well as buy-in. Shared values and vision have the potential to unite the
norms of behavior at a school site. In a traditional mentoring approach, the values
and vision are basically shared between the mentor and mentee. Zimpher and Rieger
(1988), indicate that mentors are termed as guides, sponsors, and in many instances,
they transmit the established norms of the school to their mentees.
Interviews, observations, and surveys revealed data for the collective learning and
application of learning theme. The data collected revealed the following: A.) The
team approach and traditional beginning teacher support both possess collegial
relationships that exist among staff that reflect commitment to school improvement
efforts; and B.) In a collaborative team approach, a variety of opportunities and
structures exist for collective learning through open dialogue.
Huffman and Hipp (2003), stated that “when all teachers in a school engage
intentionally and continuously in the learning process, rather than in isolated pockets
and in uncoordinated efforts, the capacity of the school to solve problems and
maintain focus and commitment is powerfully enhanced” (p. 77). It was evident via
interview and observation data that Dynasty had collegial relationships that promote
the established school mission and beliefs. For example, teachers were able to
collaborate and reconfigure the OCR writing rubric to one that best met the pre-

162
existing grade level expectations. Observation data also revealed that teachers shared
knowledge, expertise, and information. Huffman and Hipp (2003) state that sharing
information among faculty is an essential component of an effective school. Dynasty
offered beginning teachers the following opportunities to meet such as during grade
level, new teacher academy, committees, and beginning teachers are offered release
time to work with their mentors.
The survey of 80 beginning teachers found that there are collegial relationships in
existence among faculty which reflects commitment to school improvement. Survey
data also revealed that there are limited opportunities and school structures for
collective learning through open discussion. Huffman and Hipp, (2003) cite the
importance for teachers to work collaboratively to plan, solve problems, and improve
instruction. In a study conducted by the Public Education Network (2003) 27% of the
surveyed beginning teachers indicated that they did not collaborate with their peers.
This notion is not surprising since studies have found that majorities of teachers
spend their instructional day isolated in their classrooms. This results in minimum
contact, discussion, and sharing of ideas among teachers. Feiman-Nemser and Floden
(1986) labeled this isolation as the cellular structure or egg-crate ecology as termed
by Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001). Huffman and Hipp (2003) state that in a
collaborative school environment sharing of information is the norm among faculty,
staff, and administration. When opportunities and structures exist for faculty to
collaborate it fosters school-wide collegiality. Riordan and da Costa (1998) point out

163
that the lines of school communication and trust open when there are positive
collegial relationships.
Interviews, observations, and surveys revealed data for the supportive conditions
theme. The data collected revealed the following: A.) The team and traditional
approach both indicated the existence of caring relationships; B.) Another shared
similarity was that the schools are clean, attractive, and inviting; C.) In a
collaborative team approach as compared to a traditional approach school staff and
stakeholders exhibit a sustained and unified effort to embed change into the culture of
the school; and D.) Another difference is that in a team approach the school schedule
promotes collective learning and shared practices as compared to a traditional
approach.
In many studies, (Ganser, 1999; Odell, 1986; Public Education Network, 2003;
Whitaker, 2000) beginning teachers have indicated the need for personal and
emotional support. According to the literacy coach, Dynasty teachers feel that they
can rely on each other for mutual support. She further indicated that she maintains an
open door policy so that teachers can talk to her on topics that do not necessary deal
with Open Court. In addition, the math coach points out that teachers are able to
build friendships by participating in activities not necessarily related to instruction
such as the diversity festival and after school bowling. These non-school related
activities foster relationships outside of the classroom. GLM observations also
revealed that the discussions reflect a level of comfort, respect, and trust among
faculty members. The sharing of instruction ideas, struggles, and achievement are

164
respected. Barth (2002) points out that collegiality, trust, honest and open
communication are characteristics of a productive environment that cares for those
involved. Observations revealed that the classrooms in which the GLMs were being
held were clean and inviting. Classrooms were print rich and student work were
prominently displayed.
Dynasty principal labeled her school environment as collaborative. Teachers
work in committees, action teams, and grade levels to continuously focus on the
school’s mission, beliefs, and goals. As indicated by participants, teachers review the
school beliefs and objectives twice a year to ensure that they are being met and that
they currently apply to students and their teachers. Furthermore, teachers work
collaboratively to focus on ensuring the academic success of students and their
professional growth. The school schedule promotes the continuous collaboration
among teachers. Dynasty participants indicated that each week teachers meet to
discuss grade level issues. Professional development meetings are held every
Tuesday to cover general instructional concerns and school-wide issues. The new
teacher academy is scheduled once a month and as needed by beginning teachers.
Studies (Cobb, 2005; Huffman & Hipp’s, 2003) have indicated that the allocation of
time for teachers to work together is essential to support the professional development
of its teachers. Furthermore, Campo (1993) and Uhl, et al., (1995) indicated that the
allocation of time is an essential ingredient in a collaborative school environment.
The survey uncovered that beginning teachers perceived that caring relationships
exist among staff and students in their own school settings. Beginning teachers also

165
perceived their schools as clean, attractive, and inviting. This is vital since research
studies (Ganser, 1999; Odell, 1986; PEN, 2003; Whitaker, 2000), on beginning
teachers indicated that they need personal and emotional support. According to
Cobb, (2005), Huffman & Hipp, (2003), and Monaghan & Lunt, (1992) beginning
teachers indicated a strong need for trusting and caring relationships. Furthermore,
this survey reveled that school stakeholders have limited sustained and unified effort
to embed change in the school culture. According to Bower-Childs (2000) positive
change can only happen when “multiple sources of leadership work collaboratively”
(p. 27). Also, identified were a lack of effective schedules that promote collaborative
practices. As indicated by Brewster & Railsback, (2001), Odell, (1986), and
Whitaker, (2000) beginning teachers need tangible support which include resources,
supplies, and materials as well as school schedules that enable teachers to collaborate.
The distribution of time throughout the school day is something that does not fall
within the scope of a mentor. Ganser (1999), points out that despite effective and
well trained mentors they have little control over their mentee’s work assignments
and schedules.
Interviews, observations, and surveys revealed data for the shared personal
practice theme. The data collected revealed the following: A.) Teachers in the team
approach and traditional beginning teacher support both informally shares ideas and
suggestions for improving student learning; and B.) In a collaborative team approach
as compared to a traditional approach, opportunities exist for staff to observe peers
and offer encouragement.

166
Sharing instructional expertise is viewed as critical to the professional
development of beginning teaches as highlighted by Barth (2006), Waters, Marzano,
and McNulty (2004). This was evident in the interview data and the observed GLMs
at Dynasty. Countless studies (Darling-Hammond, 2003; Ganser, 1999; Meister et.
al., 2003; Quinn & Andrews, 2004; Renard, 2003; Robertson et. al., 2006) further
reiterate the notion that teaching and learning is essential to students and teachers.
Furthermore, Fullen (2005) agrees that building capacity is essential in order to
enable faculty and staff to develop new knowledge, skills, and a shared identity. As
stated by Fullan (2005) building capacity is a collaborative effort unable to be
performed by one individual. The need to collaborate and observe peers is necessary
to be able to share personal practices. Louis and Kruse (1995) point to the need to
deprivatize education by sharing instructional practices.
In their survey response, beginning teachers indicated that within their schools
they are able to informally share ideas and suggestions to improve student learning.
Lacking in their schools were opportunities for peer observations and time to offer
encouragement. Many researchers such as Darling-Hammond et. al. (2001), Darling-
Hammond, (2003), Ganser (1999), Lewis, & Batts, (2005), Meister et. al. (2003),
Quinn & Andrews (2004), Renard (2003), and Robertson et. al., (2006) point to the
need for beginning teachers to be provided with support in curriculum and
instruction. One form of providing curricular and instructional support is by peer
observations, feedback, and encouragement. Gruenert (2005), points out that in
traditional school cultures, teachers are often isolated within their classrooms having

167
little or no contact with their collegueas. According to Barth (2006), Huffman and
Hipp (2003) teachers benefit from opportunities to observe and to be observed.
Huffman and Hipp (2003) argue that peer observations offer encouragement,
knowledge, and skills. Likewise, coaching and mentoring have been identified by
Huffman and Hipp (2003) as essential to the professional growth of teacher.
Furthermore, the PEN (2003) study found that 36% of beginning teachers did not
have the opportunity to observe the instruction of veteran teachers. The surveyed
beginning teachers cited that the school principals did not allocate sufficient time for
teacher observations, feedback, and guidance. In a traditional mentoring approach
Monaghan and Lunt (1992), point out that mentor teaches are responsible for
conducting observations and providing feedback. Dole et. al. (2006), point out that
feedback that is constructive and detailed is necessary to inform teachers of their
teaching practices. In addition Ganser (1999), stresses the importance to support
mentor teachers by training them to develop feedback and observational skills. Yet,
beginning teachers surveyed for this study indicated that there are limited
opportunities for such practices to occur in their school.

168
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE
FINDINGS
Introduction
This chapter will provide the reader with a brief background of this case study. A
summary analysis of the research will also be presented. Conclusions drawn from the
analyzed data will also be discussed. In addition, implications of this research study
will be discussed as it relates to beginning teachers, school administrative teams (i.e.,
administrators, instructional support personnel, and veteran teachers), teacher
preparation programs, school district personnel, and policymakers at the federal and
state levels. Finally, suggestions for further research will be included.
Background
Ingersoll (2001) stated that high teacher attrition rates negatively affect students,
teachers, and the school community. More troubling is the impact high attrition rates
have on low-income communities (Darling-Hammond et. al, 2001). According to
Vail, (2005) this has resulted in a drain of human and financial resources. A
substantial amount of money is utilized by school districts to recruit, hire, and support
highly qualified teachers. Darling-Hammond (2003) point out that the cost of
attrition rate is in excess of $329 million a year or roughly $8,000 per teacher. This
exceedingly high financial investment could be utilized in different areas within our
public school system such as in classrooms, purchasing instructional resources,
professional development, school maintenance, and technology. It has become vital
for schools to seek effective support structures that will nurture and retain new

169
teachers while simultaneously contributing to their professional growth and their
classroom students learning. Therefore, the researcher conducted a case study within
a collaborative school to get a deeper understanding of how school personnel might
work together to support the needs of their beginning teachers. Interviews,
observations, and surveys data were gathered and a summary analysis will follow.
Summary Analysis
Freeman (1993) stated that everyone stands to gain when working collaboratively
as opposed to working individually. Furthermore, Gruenert’s study revealed that a
school with a strong collaborative culture results in higher levels of student
achievement as measured by standardized test scores. These findings aptly apply to
Dynasty Elementary School since it has been identified as a California Distinguished
School and for the past five years they have reached and exceeded their AYP and API
scores. Moreover, the interview data analyzed from the school principal, assistant
principal, instructional support personnel, veteran teachers, and beginning teachers
concur that collaboration is essential in supporting beginning teachers. This
consensus among the interviewed participants ensures that the needs of beginning
teachers are acknowledged and addressed by their senior colleagues, administrators,
and instructional support personnel. Barth (2006), and Waters’ et al. (2004), studies
concur with this finding since they point out that collegial relationships are central to
a productive school culture. It is necessary to have a collaborative environment that
holds accountable the progress and professional growth of all involved.

170
The data also revealed that the leadership style of the principal enabled the school
culture to view the support of beginning teachers as important. Rubin (2002) stated
that the role of the school principal should be a bridge builder. The school principal
laid the groundwork to bridge the needs of beginning teaches by providing the
necessary supportive conditions needed for them to succeed their first few years of
teaching. For example, interviewees identified the design of a new teacher academy
as an effective school structure. The new teacher academy is a supportive structure
that does not exist in every school. It is a collaborative effort between the
administrators, instructional support personnel, and veteran teachers to provide a
forum for beginning teachers to feel comfortable asking for help. The school
principal’s leadership sets the tone in which beginning teachers are acculturated. This
is important since studies conducted by Hope (1999), Quinn and Andrews (2004),
revealed that many beginning teachers indicated that a reason for their departure from
the classroom is due to lack of administrative support.
Another finding that was revealed in the interview data was the feeling that the
leadership style of the school principal contributed to Dynasty’s supportive and
collaborative environment. The participants acknowledged that the principal was
supportive and actively involved in day-to-day school activities. It was also pointed
out that the Dynasty’s principal shared leadership positions across the school by
having grade level chairs, committee lead teachers, and action team leaders. Huffman
and Hipp (2003), supported this finding that, teacher leadership is a positive outcome
of collaborative learning. According to Huffman and Hipp (2003), teacher leadership

171
has many potential benefits that include teacher retention, commitment to change
efforts, teacher accountability, and teacher efficacy. Bowen-Childs, et al. (2000),
Huffman, and Hipp (2003) identified the ability to have a supportive and shared
leadership as another attribute of a collaborative school environment. This attribute is
important since it points to the need of holding administrators responsible for
promoting, nurturing, and sustaining leadership among its faculty. Furthermore, the
interviewees pointed out that their school principal cultivated potential administrators
from within her faculty. She provided the one-on-one support as a mentor to teachers
seeking their administrative teaching credential.
In addition, with the exception of one beginning teacher, all of the participants
interviewed relayed that they felt empowered. The beginning teacher that did not feel
empowered indicates that there are issues that need to be addressed in order for every
faculty member to truly feel part of a collaborative school environment especially
because a sense of empowerment ensures that teachers are given the responsibility for
their professional growth and are viewed as professionals. Bowen-Childs et. al.
(2000) stated that effective principals are “leaders of leaders”. This is very important
since according to Bower-Childs (2000) a successful school employs numerous
sources of leadership working collaboratively to implement school change. For
example, the faculty at Dynasty felt supported and empowered by the administrative
staff and the literacy coach to create an innovative way to teach their first grade
students. The administrative staff and literacy coach supported these teachers by
making: resources accessible; allocating the time for first grade teachers to

172
collaborate; and by providing knowledge and expertise. The goal for first grade
teachers was to effectively target specific groups of students based on their
instructional level. Observation and interview data revealed that this instructional
innovative was the result of opportunities provided for teachers to work together
during grade level meetings.
The interviewed participants cited grade level meetings as another example of a
supportive structure for beginning teachers. Beginning teachers indicated that grade
level meetings facilitated in their learning, sharing, and feeling part of the school
environment. Huffman and Hipp (2003) found that it is essential for the professional
development of teachers to be able to collaboratively plan, solve problems, and
improve learning. These types of opportunities for teachers to work together can only
benefit the professional growth of a school’s faculty and the learning of its students.
According to Barth (2002), the presence of collegiality, high expectations, trust,
tangible support, reaching out to the knowledge bases, honest and open
communication were attributes of a school culture that promotes collaborative
practice. These attributes were observed in the five grade level meetings. These
findings illustrate the existence of shared personal practices (Bowen-Childs, et al,
2000; Huffman & Hipp, 2003), an attribute shared by professional learning
communities. The ability to share instructional practices is vital since the
“deprivatization” of practice (Louis & Kruse, 1995) is able to take place.
Data also disclosed that the faculty shared a common school vision. The school’s
mission and beliefs exalted high expectations for students and teachers. The school’s

173
mission was reviewed, discussed, updated, and then displayed in classrooms and
hallways. Observational data revealed that the tenants of the school mission were
present in the discussions that took place during grade level meetings. In addition,
the data gathered informed the researcher that the school’s mission was shared
school-wide. According to Huffman and Hipp (2003), this is very important since a
shared vision helps to create and align policies, procedures, and strategies that
promote future goals. Sharing and agreeing to a school-wide mission and its beliefs
ensures that there is a focus and that everyone is working together to meet the school
goals and objectives for its students and teachers. Grunert (2005) and Idol (2002)
indicated that a collaborative school culture is a pre-requisite for creating a viable
school-wide vision. They point out that before creating a school-wide vision a
collaborative school culture must exist. For example, Gruenert (2005) pointed out
that a collaborative school culture is one that promotes professional development via
collaboration, mutual support, and shared educational values. Idol (2002) also stated
that collaboration provides the foundation for creating school goals, conditions, and
structures to achieve them. The findings point to Dynasty Elementary School as a
collaborative school environment that supports the growth of its teachers, especially
its beginning teachers.
In a 360- degree turn, survey data revealed that beginning teachers in a traditional
support model perceived that their school principals shared a limited amount of power
and authority with their faculty. Surveyed beginning teachers also indicated that
there were limited occasions and opportunities for collective learning through open

174
dialogue. Uhl and Pérez-Sellés (1995) indicated that a fundamental notion of a
professional learning community is the idea of teachers as professionals. As
indicated by research studies, teachers need to be afforded opportunities to discuss
and share best practices as well as afforded opportunities to take on leadership roles.
Also noted in the responses were limited opportunities for teachers to observe their
colleagues. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) stated that the egg-crate ecology must
be infiltrated in order to create a collaborative school culture. The limited
opportunities for collaborating, observing, and sharing perpetrates the idea of the
isolated classroom. According to the surveyed beginning teachers the school
schedule also contributes to limiting collective learning and shared practices. Fullan
(2000) stated that it is necessary for reculturing to occur because it requires the
transformation of the school culture to enable teachers to work together to focus on
their pedagogy. No longer should it be acceptable for teaches to be isolated the
majority of the day. Yet, the survey data revealed that there are schools that have yet
to make the complete change.
In addition, the survey revealed that due to relatively minimal collaborative
practices taking place a shared vision among stakeholders was not the norm. Studies
(Bowen-Childs et al., 2000; De Costa et. al., 1998; Huffman & Hipp, 2003) have
indicated that it is essential to have a school vision that is shared and articulated by
stakeholders. In De Costa’s et. al., (1998) case study of an elementary school it was
revealed that the interviewed faculty could not uniformly articulate the school goals.
According to De Costa et. al., (1998), this is significant since he believed that having

175
a shared vision would have helped the school to focus on achieving common goals
benefiting not only students, but also, faculty.
In summary, the data analyzed demonstrated that Dynasty Elementary School is
able to experience change in a positive way since there is a collaborative foundation.
Cuttress and Kilcher (2005) identified factors that are essential for long-term change.
Moral purpose, leadership, and school culture are just a few factors that can be
attributed to Dynasty Elementary School. Fullan (2005), stated that engaging the
moral purpose of individuals will improve society by improving the educational
system. The faculty at Dynasty was driven to close the achievement gap, which is an
example of a moral purpose that drives educational change. In addition, the vision,
goals, and beliefs held by the school stakeholders provided written and verbal
examples of school-wide moral purpose. The leadership within the school was both
distributed via committees and empowering as indicated by the interviewees. The
school culture was viewed as supportive and productive especially by beginning
teachers. Dynasty Elementary School was an example of a school that was willing to
participate in changing their school culture to that of a collaborative environment.
The survey data indicated that this was not the case in many other schools. The
perspective of many beginning teachers revealed that their schools did not: share a
collaborative environment; had limited opportunities for peer observation; and
restricted shared leadership.
The research data points to the need to focus on individuals and their experiences
in the change process. In a school setting, understanding change and its effect on

176
individuals is critical. For change to take place such as a desired reform, acceptance
of an educational innovation, supporting beginning teachers, implementing supportive
structures, and creating a collaborative school culture, it is critical to focus on teacher
experiences since they are they key to successful implementation. Hall and Hord
(1987) agreed that teacher’s needs and perceptions within the change process are
important.
Conclusions
From the analyzed data the following points were discerned:
1. The interview data analyzed revealed that the administrators, instructional
support personnel, veteran teacher, and beginning teachers viewed collaboration
as essential to supporting beginning teachers. They also indicated along with
beginning teachers that grade level meetings were effective school structures that
support the professional growth of teachers. Interview data revealed that
beginning teachers believed that these grade level meetings enabled them to learn,
share, and feel part of the school culture. Huffman and Hipp (2003), indicated
that teachers need to collaborate in order to plan, solve problems, and improve
learning essential to their professional growth. Furthermore, Louise and Kruse
(1995), “deprivitazation” of practice can only take place when instructional
practices are shared.

2. Interview data disclosed that the administrative leadership style was effective
and responsible for the supportive and collaborative environment at Dynasty

177
Elementary School. The principal’s leadership style enabled the school culture to
view the support of beginning teachers as important. This was evident in the
creation of a new teacher academy. The principal also nurtured potential
administrators from within the ranks of the school faculty by mentoring them.
According to Rubin (2002), the role of a school principal has changed and
diversified into that of bridge builder, instructional expert, and change agent.
This change has enabled principals to provide faculty members with the necessary
support. Research studies (Hope 1999; Quinn & Andrew, 2004) have cited lack
of administrative supportive as a reason for the departure of many beginning
teachers.

3. There is evidence that Dynasty Elementary School has a shared vision.
Interviews and observational data presented dialog that reflected a school mission,
which focused on high expectations for students and teachers. The mission was
prominently displayed in the main office, hallways, and classrooms. Interview
data revealed that the school’s mission was shared school-wide. According to
Huffman and Hipp (2003), holding a school-wide vision is essential in creating
and aligning policies, procedures, and strategies that promote future goals.
Research studies (Bowen-Childs et. al., 2000; De Costa et. al., 1998; Huffman &
Hipp, 2003) point to the need of having a school vision that is shared school-wide
in order for school personnel to have clear expectations, standards, and work
towards common goals.

178

4. Interview data revealed that the principal, assistant principal, math coach,
literacy coach, veteran teacher, and two beginning teachers indicated that they felt
empowered. Their sense of empowerment can be derived by the shared
leadership positions that are available to all teachers such as grade level chairs,
committee lead teachers, and action team leaders. Huffman and Hipp (2003)
indicate that teacher leadership results in teacher retention, commitment to change
efforts, teacher accountability, and teacher efficacy. Only one teacher stated that
she did not feel empowered. Even when prompted she did not elaborate on her
response. This beginning teacher also pointed out that she was not part of the new
teacher academy. In an ideal situation, all stakeholders must feel a sense of
empowerment in order to truly have a collaborative school environment. O’Tool
(1995), indicates that in order to be effective leadership must be distributed. In
addition, research studies (Cobb, 2005; Huffman & Hipp, 2003; Idol, 2002) cite
the importance in empowering teachers by having them actively involved in the
decision-making process as equal participants.

5. Interview and observational data revealed that when given the support,
teachers were able to develop innovative ways to teach their students. First grade
teachers worked collaboratively to target specific student needs by grouping them
based on their instructional level. The administrative staff and the literacy coach
support such practices by making resources available, providing guidance, and

179
time to plan. The positive results in student achievement and professional
development of first grade teacher reaffirms Freeman’s (1993) notion as
everyone stands to gain when working collaboratively as opposed to working in
isolation. Furthermore, Barth (2006) and Walters’ et. al., (2004) stated that
collegial relationships are important in fostering a productive school culture.

6. A majority of beginning teachers surveyed in traditional mentoring approach
perceived the following:
• Principals shared a limited amount of power and authority with their staff
• Limited collaborative processes exists in their school sites which prevented
the development of a shared vision among stakeholders.
• Limited opportunities and structures exist for collective learning through open
dialogue.
• School and staff exhibit a limited sustained and unified effort to embed
change into the culture of the school
• School schedules limited collective learning and shared practices.
• Limited opportunities exist for peer observations.
According to Uhl and Pérez-Sellés (1995), a professional learning community
views teachers as professionals. In a professional learning community, teachers
are provided opportunities to share instructional practices, take on leadership
roles, and feel supported within their school environment. Gallimore and
Goldenberg (2001), reiterate the importance of infiltrating the egg-crate ecology

180
in order for classroom practices to be shared. Peer observation is an example of
how teachers can begin to share instructional practices. Furthermore, there are
many reasons for the school cultures in traditional mentoring approach to share
values, beliefs, and vision. The positive outcomes include teacher retention,
professional development, and student achievement.
Implications by Audience
The findings analyzed in this case study have lead to the following implications:
• Beginning teachers need to be informed about the roles of each school
administrative team member in order to be proactive and seek support on their
own if it is not provided.
• Teacher preparation programs must provide students with exemplary
examples of supportive school cultures in order for them to understand that
such support exists. These teacher preparation programs need to emphasize
the roles and responsibilities of the school administrative teams in order for
them to know how each member of the school personnel provide support.
• Furthermore, prospective teachers need to know the fundamental theory of the
change process. They need to know their role in the change process in order
to propel, rather than impede, change.
• School leadership teams that include administrators, instructional support
personnel, and veteran teachers need more training on how they can
collaboratively nurture beginning teachers. These key individuals need to
develop collaborative practices in order to establish internal support structures

181
that will effectively promote the professional development and retention of
beginning teachers. A school does not necessarily need to be identified as a
California Distinguished School in order to promote a collaborative school
culture. School personnel must actively seek other schools that have effective
collaborative school environments in order to benchmark their successes.
Theory, research, student data, and effective collaborative strategies must be
sought out by school leadership teams in order to ensure that a productive
school culture exists within their school walls.
• Key school leaders must attempt to develop and implement an on campus
support structure that targets beginning teachers such as the new teacher
academy as presented at Dynasty Elementary school.
• At the district level, it is necessary to provide current and new administrators
with strategies and information that will enable them to develop collaborative
schools that encourage, support, and nurture the professional development of
beginning teachers. In-service for school administrators and instructional
support personnel must focus on developing positive school cultures,
collaborative practices, effective leadership styles, and the change process. It
is necessary to provide administrative teams a theoretical background on these
topics as well as request that they demonstrate their understanding by
implementing this information in their own schools. In the high stakes of
testing and high rates of teacher attrition, it is necessary to hold key school
leaders accountable for creating collaborative schools.

182
• It is necessary for policy makers at the federal and state level to provide more
support to mentor teachers and beginning teachers by having clearer
guidelines and policies that delineate their role and responsibility within the
wide scope of a school. BTSA is one way that beginning teachers and mentor
teachers are provided support; however, as indicated by this research data one
veteran teacher alone cannot fully provide all the support a beginning teacher
needs. Funding must be allocated for further research to identify all the
elements that support the professional development and retention of beginning
teachers.
Suggestion for Further Research
The following suggestions for further research are derived from the case study
findings:
1. It is necessary to conduct multiple case studies in collaborative schools in order
to be able to make further generalizations. Interviews and observations need to
take place with key school stakeholders in order to ascertain the key elements that
make up: a) collaborative school environment, b) effective administrative and
instructional support personnel roles, and c) supportive school structures that
sustain beginning teachers.
2. To make a better case for a collaborative approach to mentoring beginning
teachers it is essential to conduct longitudinal studies that follow beginning
teachers from their first through third year teaching in a traditional mentoring
approach while in a collaborative school environment. Further research is needed

183
to understand both the challenges and support beginning teachers face over time.
This will also provide vital data to compare and contrast a collaborative and a
traditional mentoring approach.
3. Studies should also include stakeholders that were not included in this case
study such as parents, and other school personnel (e.g., SB65, Resource Services
Personnel, School Psychologist, Pupil Services Attendance Counselor, Title I, and
Bilingual Coordinators). These key support personnel can play a role in assisting
beginning teachers as they face daily challenges and questions in their
classrooms. Roles and responsibilities need to be clearly defined to indicate
how school personnel can support beginning teachers.
4. Collecting and analyzing documents that reflect the collaboration taking place
between school faculty, administration, and staff is another key element that
needs to be scrutinized. Documents may include student work, rubrics, charts,
graphs, or other materials generated during collaborative practices or meetings.
These documents will ensure that not only do we see and hear collaboration
taking place, but we can have something tangible to indicate the level of
collaboration taking place.
5. The term beginning teacher needs to be further evaluated to be inclusive of
special education beginning teachers. Special education teachers have particular
needs that are distinct from general education beginning teachers they have a
specific student population with specific educational needs. This case study
highlighted the need for further study since the beginning teacher in this study did

184
not feel empowered, did not have a BTSA mentor, nor was she involved in the
new teacher academy. Further study may shed some light in answering the
following questions: What are the needs of special education beginning teachers?
How can a collaborative school culture support their growth?
With so many new teachers leaving the educational sector, it is important that
individual schools, school districts, teacher preparation programs, and governmental
agencies focus their resources on retaining beginning teachers not just by giving them
a mentor teacher (e.g., BTSA) but by creating supportive school infrastructures. If
schools are expected to achieve at higher rates each year based on API and AYP
scores it is necessary to look outside of the traditional approaches to supporting and
retaining new teachers. It was the researcher’s expectation to shed some light on the
needs for alternative modes of mentoring beginning teachers not only for matters of
retention, but also to support their professional growth as effective educators.

185
REFERENCES
Austin, D. B. (1972). The assistant principal—What does he do? Theory Into
Practice, 11(1), 68 – 72.

Barth, R. S. (2006). Improving relationships within the schoolhouse. Educational
Leadership, 63(6), 8 – 13.

Barth, R. S. (2002). The culture builder. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 6 – 11.

Bhola, H. S. (1966). The need for planned change in education. Theory Into
Practice, 5(1), 5 – 10.

Brookover, W. B., Schweitzer, J. H., Schneider, J. M., Beady, C. H., Flood, P. K., &

Bennis, W. G., & Nanus, B. (2003). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge (2
nd

ed.). New York: Harper & Row.

Burly, M. R., Coskie, T., Robinson, L., & Egawa, K. (2006). Literacy coaching:
Coming out of the corner. Voices from the Middle, 13(4), 24 – 28.

Calabrese, R. L. (1991). Effective assistant principals: What do they do? National
Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 75(51), 51 – 57.

Childs-Bowen, D., Moller, G., & Scrivner, J. (2000). Principals: Leaders of leaders.
National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 84(616), 27 –
34.

Cobb, C. (2005). Literacy teams: Sharing leadership to improve student learning.
The Reading Teacher, 58(5), p. 14, 16.

186
Colley, A. C. (2002). What can principals do about new teacher attrition? Principal,
81(4), 22 – 24.

Collinson, V., & Cook, T. F. (2000). “I don’t have enough time” Teachers’
interpretations of time as a key to learning and school change. Journal of
Educational Administration, 39(3), 266 – 281.

Cookson, P. W. (2007). Supporting new teachers. Teaching Pre K- 8, 37(5), p. 14 –
15.

Coskie, T., Robinson, L., Buly, M. R., & Egawa, K. (2005). What makes an effective
literacy coach? Voices from the Middle, 12(4), 60 – 61.

Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Curran, B., & Goldrick, L. (2002). Mentoring and supporting new teachers. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED467748). National Governor’s
Association, Washington, DC. Center for Best Practices.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Keeping good teachers: Why it matters what leaders
can do. Education Leadership, 60 (8), 6 – 13.

Darling-Hammond, L., Lafors, J., & Snyder, J. (2001). Educating teachers for
California’s future. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28(1), p. 9 – 55.

Dembo, M. H. (1994). Applying educational psychology (5
th
ed.). New York, NY:
Longman.

Dole, J. L. (2004). The changing role of the reading specialist in school reform. The
Reading Teacher, 57(5), 462 – 471.

Dole, J. A., & Donaldson, R. (2006). “What am I supposed to do all day?”: Three big
ideas for the reading coach. The Reading Teacher, 59(5), 486 – 488.

187
Ed.Gov U.S. Department of Education (2002). Retrieved April 7, 2007, from:
http://www.ed.gov/programs/readingfirst/index.html

Feiman-Nemser, S. (2003). What new teachers need to learn. Education Leadership,
60(8), 25 – 29.

Fink, E., & Resnick, L. B. (2001). Developing principals as instructional leaders.
Phi Delta Kappan, 82(8), 598 – 606.

Freeman, R. E. (1993). Collaboration, global perspectives, and teacher education.
Theory Into Practice, 32(1), 33 – 39.

Fullan, M. (2002). The change leader. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 16 – 20.

Fullan, M., Cuttress, C., & Kilcher, A. (2005). Eight forces for leaders of change.
Journal of Staff Development, 26(4), 54 – 59.

Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to
connect minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational
Psychologist, 36(1), 45 – 56.

Ganser, T. (2002). Getting the most out of new-teacher mentoring programs.
Principal Leadership, 3(1), 27 – 30.

Ganser, T. (2001). The principal as a new teacher mentor: Leader’s active support
keeps the wheels turning. Journal of Staff Development, 22(1), 39 – 41.

Ganser, T. (1999). Under their wings: Promises and pitfalls of mentoring. High
School Magazine, 7(2), 8 – 13.

Gantt, H. L. (1919). Organizing for work. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace, and
Howe.

188
Gartin, B., Murdick, N. L., Imbeau, M., & Perner, D. E. (2002). How to use
differentiated instruction with students with developmental disabilities in the
general education classroom. Council for Exceptional Children, 4, 1 – 81.

Ginsberg, M. B., & Murphy, D. (2002). How walkthroughs open doors. Educational
Leadership, 59(8), 34 – 36.

Goodwin, M. W. & Judd L. (2005). Ensure success as a novice teacher. Intervention
in School and Clinic, 41(1), 24 – 29.

Griffith, J. (1999). The school leadership/school climate relation: Identification of
school configurations associated with change in principals. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 35(2), 267 – 291.

Gruenert, S. (2005). Correlations of collaborative school cultures with student
achievement. National Association of Secondary School Principals, 89, 43 –
55.

Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process.
Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Hartzell, G. N. (1993). The assistant principal: Neglected actor in practitioner
leadership literature. Journal of School Leadership, 3(6), 707 – 723.

Healy, C. C., & Welchert, A. J. (1990). Mentoring relations: A definition to advance
research and practice. Educational Researcher, 19(9), 17 – 21.

Hope, W. C. (1999). Principals’ orientation and induction activities as factors in
teacher retention. The Clearing House, 73(1), 54 – 60.

Huffman, J. B., & Hipp, K. K. (2003). Reculturing schools as professional learning
communities. Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow Education.

Idol, L. (2002). Creating collaborative and inclusive schools. Austin, Texas: Pro-ed.

189
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational
analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), p. 499 – 534.

Ingersoll, R. M. & Smith, T. M. (2004). Do teacher induction and mentoring matter?
National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 88(638), 28 –
40.

Ingersoll, R. M., & Smith, T. M. (2003). The wrong solution to the teacher shortage.
Educational Leadership, 60(8), 30 – 33.

International Reading Association. (2004). The role and qualifications of the reading
coach in the United States [Brochure]. Anders, PL., Rasinski, T. V., Selin, A.
S., Block, C. C., Flood, J., Risko, V. J., Barnes, C. J., Bean R. M., &
Cummins, C. L.: Authors.

Isaac, J. (1980). A review of the literature and debates in the field of change in
educational organizations. British Educational Research Journal, 6(1), 53
– 61.

Johnson, S. M. (2006). The workplace matters: Teacher quality, retention, and
effectiveness. National Education Association Research Department. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED4995822). Harvard Graduate School
of Education.

Kauffman, D., Johnson, S. M., Kardos, S. M., Liu, E., & Peske, H. G. (2002). “Lost
at Sea”: New teachers’ experiences with curriculum and assessment, Teachers
College Record, 104, 273 – 300.

Kelley, R. C., Thornton, B., & Daugherty, R. (2005). Relationships between
measures of leadership and school climate. Education, 126(1), 17 – 25.

Kies, C. (1978). Shifting school relationships: How people react when organizational
functions change. Peabody Journal of Education, 55(3), 178 – 183.

190
Kuhnert, K. W. (1994). Transforming leadership: Developing people through
delegation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lewis, S. G., & Batts, K. (2005). How to implement differentiated instruction?
Adjust, adjust, adjust: North Carolina project begins with encouragement from
administrators. Journal of Staff Development, 26(4), 26 – 31.

Lick, D. W. (2000). Whole-faculty study group: Facilitating mentoring for school-
wide change. Theory into Practice, 39(1), 43 – 49.

Little, J. W. (1990). The mentor phenomenon and the social organization of teaching.
Review of Reaching in Education, 16, 297 – 351.

Los Angeles Unified School District, Local District 8 Website retrieved (2006-2007),
July 1, 2007, from: http://www.lausd.k12.ca.us/District_8/math_el.htm.

Los Angeles Unified School District, Personnel Services and Research – Examination
Information, Human Resources Division (2006). Retrieved June 1, 2007,
from: http://www.teachinla.com/Research/examinfo.html.

Marshall, C., & Hooley, R. M. (2006). The assistant principal: Leadership choices
and challenges (2
nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Meister D. G., & Melnick, S. A. (2003). National new teacher study: Beginning
teachers’ concerns. Action in Teacher Education, 24, 87 – 94.

Mertz, N. T., & McNeely, S. R. (1999). Through the looking glass: An upfront and
personal look at the world of the assistant principal. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED435124). Paper presented at the Annual Meting
of the American Educational Research Association Montreal, Quebec, Canada
April 19-23, 1999

Meyer, D., & McGrath, D. J. (2004). Issue Brief: Who teaches reading in public
elementary schools? The assignments and educational preparation of reading
teachers. p. 1 – 4. US Department of Education: Washington, DC.

191
Mitchell, C., Joyce, B., & Castle, J. B. (2005). The instructional role of elementary
school principals. Canadian Journal of Education, 28(3), 409 – 433.

Monaghan, J., & Lunt, N. (1992). Mentoring: Person, process, and problems. British
Journal of Educational Studies, 40(3), 248 – 263.

Moroz, R., & Waugh, R. F. (2000). Teacher receptivity to system-wide educational
change. Journal of Educational Administration, 38(2), 159 – 178.

Moxley, D. E., & Taylor, R. T. (2006). Literacy coaching: A Handbook for school
leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Mumfors, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Connelly, M. S., & Marks, M. A. (2000). Leadership
skills: Conclusions and future directions. Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), 155 –
170.

Newell, R. J., & Buchen, I. H. (2004). Democratic learning and leading: Creating
collaborative school governance. Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow Education.

Northouse, P. G. (2004). Leadership: Theory and practice (3
rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications Inc.

Oakley, E., & Krug, D. (1991). Enlightened leadership: Getting to the heart of
change. New York, NY: Fireside.

O’Toole, J. (1995). Leading change: Overcoming the ideology of comfort and the
tyranny of custom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Panyako, D., & Rorie, L. (1987). The changing role of the assistant principal.
National Association of Secondary School Principals, 71(6), 6 – 8.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3
rd
ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.

192
Peterson, K. D., & Deal, T. E. (1998). How leaders influence the culture of school.
Educational Leadership, (56)1, 28 – 30.

Portin, B. S., Alejano, C. R., Knapp, M. S., & Marzolf, E. (2006). Redefining roles,
responsibilities, and authority of school leaders. Center for the Study of
Teaching and Policy, 1 – 41, University of Washinghton: The Wallace
Foundation.

Public Education Network (2003). The voice of the new teacher. Washington,
D.C. Retrieved on October 8, 2007 from
www.publiceducation.org/pdf/Publications/Teacher_Quality/Voice_of_the_
New_Teacher.pdf.

Quinn, R. J., & Andrews, B. D. (2004). The struggles of first- year teachers:
Investigating support mechanisms. The Clearing House, 77(4), 164 – 168.

Renard, L. (2003). Setting new teachers up for failure…or success. Educational
Leadership, 60, 62 – 64.

Reys, B. J., & Fennell, F. (2003). Who should lead mathematics instruction at the
elementary level? A case study for mathematics specialists. Teaching
Children Mathematics, 9(5), 277.

Roach, A. T., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2004). Evaluating school climate and school
culture. Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(1), 10 – 17.

Roberts, S. M., & Pruitt, E. Z. (2003). Schools as professional learning communities:
Collaborative activities and strategies for professional development.
Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, Inc.

Robertson, M., Hancock, D., & Allen, L. A. (2006). Why novice teachers leave.
Principal Leadership, 6, 33 – 36.

Rost, J. C. (1991). Leadership for the twenty-first century. New York: Praeger.

193
Rowan, B., & Miller, R. J. (2007). Organizational strategies for promoting
instructional change: Implementation dynamics in schools working with
comprehensive school reform providers. American Educational Research
Journal, 44(2), 252 – 297.

Rubin, H. (2002). Collaborative leadership: Developing effective partnerships in
communities and schools. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, Inc.

Short, P. M., Greer, J. T., & Melvin, W. M. (1994). Creating empowered schools:
Lessons in change. Journal of Educational Administration, 32(4), 38 – 52.

Short, P. M., & Rinehart, J. (1992). School participant empowerment scale:
Assessment of the level of participant empowerment in the school.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54(2), 951 – 960.

Smith, M. V. (2005). Modern mentoring: Ancient lessons for today. Music
Educators Journal, 92(2), 62 – 67.

Stolp, S, & Smith, S. C. (1995). Transforming school culture: Stories, symbols,
values, and the leader’s role. (Report No. ISBN-0-86552-132-8).
Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED386783).

The National Council of Teachers of English (2006). Retrieved April 3, 2007,
from: http://www.ncte.org/portal/30_view.asp?id=124382&source=gs.

Uhl, S. C., & Pérez-Sellés, M. E. (1995). The role of collaboration in school
transformation: Two approaches. Theory Into Practice, 34(4), 258 – 264.

U.S. Department of Education, Highly qualified teachers for every child (2006).
Retrieved June 4, 2007, from:
http://www.ed.gov/nclb/methods/teachers/stateplanfacts.html.

Vail, K. (2005). Create great school climate. The Education Digest, 71(4), 4 – 11.

194
Wachholz, P. B. (1994). Making sense of reform: The role of students in educational
change. The English Journal, 83(7), 80 – 82.

Walpole, S., & McKenna, M. C. (2004). The literacy coach’s handbook: A guide to
research-based practice. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Warren, H. C. (1999). Principals’ orientation and induction activities as factors in
teacher retention. The Clearing House, 73, 54 – 60.

Waters, J. T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2004). Leadership that sparks learning.
Educational Leadership, 61(7), 48 – 51.

Waugh, R. F., & Punch, K. F. (1987). Teacher receptivity to system wide change in
the implementation stage. Review of Educational Research, 57(3), 237 – 254.

Wisenbaker, J. M. (1978). Elementary school social climate and school achievement.
American Educational Research Journal, 15(2), 301 – 318.

Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Zimpher, N. L., & Rieger, S. R. (1988). Mentoring teachers: What are the issues?
Theory into Practice, 27(3), 175 – 182.

195
APPENDIX A: BEGINNING TEACHER SURVEY PROTOCOL
Thank you for taking the time to fill out the following survey. The survey is anonymous and
will not be shared on an individual basis with district or school administrators. Please be as
candid as possible.

Directions: This survey assesses your perceptions about your principal, staff, and
stakeholders based on the five dimensions of a professional learning community. Please
circle only one response. There are no right or wrong responses.

On a scale of one to four with 1 being Strongly Disagree and 4 being Strongly Agree, give
the number that best applies to how you feel.
1 = Strongly Disagree (SD), 2 = Disagree (D), 3 = Agree (A), 4 = Strongly Agree (SA)

Shared and Supportive Leadership
SD D A SA
1. The staff are consistently involved in discussing and making decisions about
most school issues
1 2 3 4
2. The principal incorporates advice from staff to make decisions. 1 2 3 4
3. The staff have accessibility to key information. 1 2 3 4
4. The principal is proactive and addresses areas where support is needed. 1 2 3 4
5. Opportunities are provided to staff to initiate change. 1 2 3 4
6. The principal shares responsibility and rewards for innovative actions. 1 2 3 4
7. The principal participates democratically with staff sharing power and
authority.
1 2 3 4
8. Leadership is promoted and nurtured among staff. 1 2 3 4
9. Decision making takes place through committees and communication across
grade and subject areas.
1 2 3 4
10. Stakeholders assume shared responsibility and accountability for student
learning without evidence of imposed power and authority
1 2 3 4
Shared Values and Vision
SD D A SA
11. A collaborative process exists for developing a shared sense of values
among staff.
1 2 3 4
12. Shared values support norms of behavior that guide decisions about teaching
and learning.
1 2 3 4
13. The staff share visions for school improvement that have an undeviating
focus on student learning.
1 2 3 4
14. Decisions are made in alignment with the school’s values and visions. 1 2 3 4
15. A collaborative process exists for developing a shared vision among staff. 1 2 3 4
16. School goals focus on student learning beyond test scores and grades. 1 2 3 4
17. Policies and programs are aligned to the school’s vision. 1 2 3 4
18. Stakeholders are actively involved in creating high expectations that serve to
increase student achievement.
1 2 3 4
Collective Learning and Application
SD D A SA
19. The staff work together to seek knowledge, skills, and strategies and apply
this new learning to their work.
1 2 3 4
20. Collegial relationships exist among staff that reflect commitment to school
improvement efforts.
1 2 3 4
21. The staff plan and work together to search for solutions to address diverse
student needs.
1 2 3 4

196
22. A variety of opportunities and structures exist for collective learning through
open dialogue.
1 2 3 4
23. The staff engage in dialogue that reflects a respect for diverse ideas that lead
to continued inquiry.
1 2 3 4
24. Professional development focuses on teaching and learning. 1 2 3 4
25. School staff and stakeholders learn together and apply new knowledge to
solve problems.
1 2 3 4
26. School staff is committed to programs that enhance learning. 1 2 3 4
Shared Personal Practice
SD D A SA
27. Opportunities exist for staff to observe peers and offer encouragement. 1 2 3 4
28. The staff provide feedback to peers related to instructional practices. 1 2 3 4
29. The staff informally share ideas and suggestions for improving student
learning.
1 2 3 4
30. The staff collaboratively review student work to share and improve
instructional practices.
1 2 3 4
31. Opportunities exist for coaching and mentoring. 1 2 3 4
32. Individuals and teams have the opportunity to apply learning and share the
results of their practices.
1 2 3 4
Supportive Conditions – Relationships
SD D A SA
33. Caring relationships exist among staff and students that are built on trust and
respect.
1 2 3 4
34. A culture of trust and respect exists for taking risks. 1 2 3 4
35. Outstanding achievement is recognized and celebrated regularly in our
school.
1 2 3 4
36. School staff and stakeholders exhibit a sustained and unified effort to embed
change into the culture of the school.
1 2 3 4
Supportive Conditions -- Structures
SD D A SA
37. Time is provided to facilitate collaborative work. 1 2 3 4
38. The school schedule promotes collective learning and shared practices. 1 2 3 4
39. Fiscal resources are available for professional development. 1 2 3 4
40. Appropriate technology and instructional materials are available to staff. 1 2 3 4
41. Resource people provide expertise and support for continuous learning. 1 2 3 4
42. The school facility is clean, attractive, and inviting. 1 2 3 4
43. The proximity of grade level and department personnel allows for ease in
collaborating with colleagues.
1 2 3 4
44. Communication systems promote a flow of information among staff. 1 2 3 4
45. Communication systems promote a flow of information across the entire
school community including: central office personnel, parents, and
community members.
1 2 3 4

Teacher Questionnaire on Support for Beginning Teachers - this survey was adapted
from Huffman & Hipp (2003).

197
APPENDIX B: ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF, INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT
PERSONNEL, AND VETERAN TEACHER INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

Background Interview Questions
1.) How long have you been in your current position at Dynasty Elementary School?
2.) If, I followed you through a typical day, what would I see you doing?
School Culture
3.) How would you describe your school environment?
• How does the school environment support the learning of teachers and
students?
• In particular how does the school environment support beginning
teachers?
• What views do teachers have on the academic success of students?
• How does it feel to work in this school?
4.) What is the schools mission for its teachers and students?
• Is the school’s mission shared school-wide?
• Who created the schools mission?
• What expectations do teachers have for their students? For themselves?
5.) What is your role/responsibility in supporting beginning teachers?
Leadership
6.) What structures are in place for teachers to take on leadership roles in this school?
• What leadership positions do teachers have in this school?
• In your professional opinion, do you think teachers in this school feel
empowered?

198
• What are the implications of an effective leader?
• What about leadership is most important to you?
• How does a school leader promote positive change in a school?
Mentoring
7.) Since mentor teachers are assigned to beginning teachers as indicated in BTSA
policy, how are mentors selected in this school?
• What type of support is provided to mentor teachers?
• When do mentors and mentees meet to discuss instructional practices?
• What topics of conversation are discussed at these meetings?
• Who else assists in mentoring beginning teachers?
Collaborative Practices
8.) How are beginning teachers monitored to determine that the support provided is
observable in their instructional practices?
• What type of strategies (i.e., peer coaching, observations, conferencing,
walkthroughs) do you personally employ to provide teachers with
constructive feedback?
9.) What structures and conditions are in place in this school that support beginning
teachers?
• Can you provide me with specific examples?
10.) What type of support structures and conditions are in place in this school that
supports collaborative practices?
• Can you provide me with specific examples?

199
11.) How do you feel about collaboration among faculty members? Explain your
answer.
Last Interview Question
12.) That covers the things I wanted to ask. Anything you care to add?

200
APPENDIX C: BEGINNING TEACHER INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

Background Interview Questions
1.) How long have you been teaching at Dynasty Elementary School?
2.) If, I followed you through a typical day, what would I see you doing?
School Culture
3.) How would you describe your school environment?
• How does the school environment support your professional growth?
• What type of support do you need to succeed as a beginning teacher?
• What views do teachers have on the academic success of students?
• How does it feel to work in this school?
4.) What is the schools mission for its teachers and students?
• Is the school’s mission shared school-wide?
• Who created the school’s mission?
• What expectations do teachers have for their students? For themselves?
Leadership
5.) What structures are in place for teachers to take on leadership roles in this school?
• What leadership positions do teachers have in this school?
• Are you actively involved in a leadership position in your school? Why or
why not?
• In your professional opinion, do you feel empowered? Explain your
answer.
• What about leadership is most important to you?

201
• How does a school leaders promote positive change in a school?
Mentoring
6.) Since mentor teachers are assigned to beginning teachers as indicated in BTSA
policy, Do you know how mentors are selected in your school?
• What type of mentoring activities takes places between you and your
mentor?
• How would you describe your experience with your one-to-one BTSA
mentor?
• When do mentors and mentees meet to discuss instructional practices?
• What topics of conversation are discussed at these meetings?
• Who else assists in mentoring beginning teachers?
Collaborative Practices
7.) How is your professional development monitored to determine that the support
provided is observable in your instructional practice?
• What type of strategies (i.e., peer coaching, observations, conferencing,
walkthroughs) do administrators and instructional support personnel
employ to provide you with constructive feedback?
8.) What support structures and conditions are in place in this school that supports
beginning teachers?
• Can you provide me with specific examples?
9.) What type of support structures and conditions are in place in this school that
supports collaborative practices?

202
• Can you provide me with specific examples?
10.) How do you feel about collaboration among faculty members? Explain your
answer.
11.) Describe the interactions that take place between you and other colleagues as it
relates to instructional practices.
Last Interview Questions
12.) That covers the things I wanted to ask. Anything you care to add?

203
APPENDIX D: OBSERVATION FOR GRADE LEVEL MEETINGS (GLMs)
PROTOCOL

GLM Topic:

Time: Date:
# of Teachers Present:

# of Administrators Present: # of Support Personnel
Present:

Attributes of a
Collaborative School
Observations Field notes, Comments, &
Number of Occurrences
1.) Supportive and
shared leadership
--Who is conducting the GLM?
--Are administrators and instructional support
personnel encouraging and involving all teachers?
--When decisions need to be made who is
involved? (Huffman & Hipp. 2003)

2.) Shared Values
and Vision
--Does the verbal interactions reflect the vision of
the school?
--What vocabulary is used to describe students?

3.) Collective
learning and
application of
learning
--Nonverbal Patterns of Communication- body
language, direct eye contact, nodding, smiling
--Does the grade level meeting focus on teaching
and learning? (Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
--Does the staff engage in dialogue that reflects
respect for diverse ideas? (Huffman & Hipp,
2003)

4.) Supportive
Conditions
--Description of Context: Physical description of
the grade level meeting (environment) is it clean,
inviting? (Huffman & Hipp, 2003)
--Who is participating and providing input
(Administrators, Instructional Support Personnel,
Veteran & Beginning Teachers)?
--Is there recognition and celebration for
outstanding achievement? (Huffman & Hipp,
2003)
--Is time provided for teachers to work together in
grade level meetings? (Huffman & Hipp, 2003)

5.) Shared Personal
Practices
--Are teachers sharing instructional practices,
expertise, knowledge, and/or information?
--What are the levels of engagement (actively
paying attention, involved in the
discussion/activity)
--Number of times beginning teachers share in
small and whole group discussions.
--Are the faculty and staff collaboratively
reviewing student work? (Huffman & Hipp,
2003)

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The educational problem that schools face is the loss of new teachers that leave the field of education with in the first five years of teaching (Hope, 1999

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Beginning teachers' perceptions of effective practices used by their mentor

PDF

No teacher left behind: an examination of beginning teachers' preconceptions and attitudes about induction

PDF

A comparative study of self-efficacy, outcome expectancy, and retention of beginning urban science teachers

PDF

The impact of induction: a study of program designs and teacher quality outcomes

PDF

A comparative study of novice and veteran teachers in response to principal initiated efforts to cultivate a positive school culture

PDF

Factors influencing teachers' differentiated curriculum and instructional choices and gifted and non-gifted students' self-perceptions

PDF

Status of teaching elementary science for English learners in science, mathematics, and technology centered magnet schools

PDF

Teachers’ perceptions of strategies and skills affecting learning of gifted 7th graders in English classes

PDF

Teachers' choices of curriculum and teaching methods and their effect on gifted students' self-perceptions

PDF

How can I help you? A study of onboarding and ongoing supports for new teachers

PDF

Developing a culture of teacher collaboration in middle school

PDF

The spill over effect: an examination of differentiated curriculum designs in a heterogeneous classroom

PDF

Internationalizing education: a study of the impact of implementing an international program on an urban elementary school

PDF

Mentoring outcomes in education: the perceived impact for mentors in induction programs

PDF

The role of the principal in new teacher development under the California Beginning Teacher Support & Assessment Program

PDF

Factors affecting the transfer of differentiated curriculum from professional development into classroom practice

PDF

Multi-site case studies on the collaboration of career technical education teachers and core teachers

PDF

Linking theory and practice in teacher education: an analysis of the reflective-inquiry approach to preparing teachers to teach in urban schools

PDF

"Thinking in the middle" what instructional approaches are employed by urban middle school teachers to effect changes in African American students' learning outcomes and performances?

PDF

Factors influencing gifted students' preferences for models of teaching

Asset Metadata

Creator Pech, Elda (author)

Core Title Collaborative team approach to mentoring beginning teachers: a case study of a collaborative elementary school

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publication Date 10/13/2009

Defense Date 09/20/2009

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag beginning teachers,collaborative support,novice teachers,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Pensavalle, Margo (committee chair), Kaplan, Sandra N. (committee member), Ragusa, Gisele (committee member)

Creator Email epech@lausd.net,epech@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m2666

Unique identifier UC1499544

Identifier etd-Pech-3270 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-271790 (legacy record id),usctheses-m2666 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Pech-3270.pdf

Dmrecord 271790

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Pech, Elda

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu