Nghiên cứu về Chương trình Hướng dẫn Giáo viên Năm đầu tại các Trường Trung học Dòng ở Tỉnh California

The University of San Francisco USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center Doctoral Dissertations Theses, Dissertations, Capstones and Projects 2013 An Investigation of First-Year Teacher Induction Programs in Jesuit Secondary Schools within the California Province Justin James Dixon Christensen University of San Francisco, justinjchristensen@me.com Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.edu/diss Part of the Educational Leadership Commons, and the Elementary and Middle and Secondary Education Administration Commons Recommended Citation Christensen, Justin James Dixon, "An Investigation of First-Year Teacher Induction Programs in Jesuit Secondary Schools within the California Province" (2013).edu/diss/82 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, Capstones and Projects at USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center. For more information, please contact repository@usfca. The University of San Francisco AN INVESTIGATION OF FIRST-YEAR TEACHER INDUCTION PROGRAMS IN JESUIT SECONDARY SCHOOLS WITHIN THE CALIFORNIA PROVINCE A Dissertation Presented to The Faculty of the School of Education Department of Leadership Studies Catholic Educational Leadership Program In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Education by Justin Christensen San Francisco December 2013 © 2013 by Justin J.

Christensen All Rights Reserved ii THE UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO Dissertation Abstract AN INVESTIGATION OF FIRST-YEAR TEACHER INDUCTION PROGRAMS IN JESUIT SECONDARY SCHOOLS WITHIN THE CALIFORNIA PROVINCE In recent decades, researchers have made considerable contributions to the field of new teacher induction. More specifically, they have demonstrated that an effective induction program can increase teacher effectiveness and decrease teacher attrition (Ingersoll & Smith, 2004; Ingersoll & Strong 2011; Villar & Strong 2007). Yet, little research has been conducted on the presence of induction programs within Jesuit secondary schools. In addition to teacher effectiveness and teacher attrition, administrators at Jesuit secondary schools must focus on the formation of their new teachers as Ignatian educators.

This mixed methods study invited principals (n=5) and first-year teachers (n=25) in five Jesuit secondary schools in the California Province to participate. Online surveys and follow-up online interviews were designed to assess the degree to which the schools met 11 standards that constituted the conceptual framework for the study: (a) Program vision, goals, and institutional commitment, (b) Formation of the Ignatian educator, (c) Program administration and communication, (d) Principal engagement, (e) Program assessment, evaluation, and accountability, (f) Assessing first-year teacher practice, (g) First-year teacher professional development and learning communities, (h) Mentor role and responsibilities, selection, assignment, and assessment, (i) Mentor professional development and learning communities, (j) Focus on instructional practice, and (k) Focus on equity and universal access. Ten of the 11 standards were adapted with iii permission from the New Teacher Center’s (2011) Induction Program Standards. The second standard regarding Ignatian formation was adapted from the Jesuit Secondary Education Association’s (2011) Profile of an Ignatian Educator.

Overall, the study revealed that all five schools developed and implemented some form of an induction program for their first-year teachers during the 2012-2013 academic year. The perception data indicated that all five schools demonstrated a strong commitment to (b) Formation of the Ignatian educator. In contrast, the respondents reported the most need for growth in (e) Program assessment, evaluation, and accountability. The respondents showed modest support for the remaining nine standards, indicating the potential for improvement.

For example, first-year teachers reported the need for the presence of mentor teachers who play a supportive role throughout the academic year. The results of this study invite administrators in Jesuit secondary schools to develop and implement robust first-year teacher induction programs. iv This dissertation, written under the direction of the candidate’s dissertation committee and approved by the members of the committee, has been presented to and accepted by the Faculty of the School of Education in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education. The content and research methodologies presented in this work represent the work of the candidate alone.

Christensen December 10, 2013 Candidate Date Dissertation Committee Gini Shimabukuro, Ed. December 10, 2013 Chairperson Christopher Thomas, Ph. December 10, 2013 Ralph Metts, S. December 10, 2013 v DEDICATION And Mizpah; for he said, The Lord watch between me and thee, when we are absent one from another.

(Genesis 31:49) This dissertation is dedicated to… My parents and my brother… Max Gordon Christensen Janet Elizabeth Christensen Spencer Gordon Christensen My wife… Molly Mavorneen Dixon Christensen My sons… Finn Michael Christensen Dillon Max Christensen Mizpah. vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS St. Ignatius of Loyola (1491-1556) described the first Jesuits as “companions of Jesus.” Together, they laid the groundwork for the Society of Jesus to introduce a model of education that would, in the words of St. Ignatius, form students to “carry on the care of souls” with the “fruit expanding more widely every day.” The publication of this study represents the fruit of a long journey.

I, too, have been blessed with many companions along the way. I wish to begin by extending my gratitude to the Society of Jesus. The Jesuits at St. Ignatius College Preparatory have helped me deepen my own relationship with God, and they have personally formed me as an Ignatian educator.

God’s love for me is reflected in the institution they established in 1855. I am humbled to be a part of their transformative work that continues into the 21st century. The Holy Spirit is also at work in the lay administrators and colleagues at St. Ignatius College Preparatory who have supported my growth these past 10 years.

Thanks to their companionship, I have grown both as an educator and as a person. Furthermore, I am grateful for their role in inviting me to consider enrolling at the Institute of Catholic Educational Leadership (ICEL), and their ongoing support over the past five years as I engaged in this work. This dissertation would not have been possible without the support of the New Teacher Center in Santa Cruz, CA. My every interaction with the organization was marked with kindness and generosity.

I especially wish to thank Wendy Baron, Adele Hermann, and Kitty Dixon for their help with developing my conceptual framework and accompanying survey instruments. vii I also must acknowledge my deep gratitude for my companions within ICEL and the School of Education at the University of San Francisco. I am indebted to my classmates for sharing their much-needed perspectives on Catholic and public school education., was especially helpful when I found myself stuck. I am similarly indebted to my professors who have challenged me to reflect on what exactly constitutes school leadership, to collect and analyze meaningful data, and to be a witness to Catholic education in the 21st century.

It was a privilege to work with Dr. Ben Baab, Dr. Christopher Thomas, and Dr. I am especially humbled by the companionship of Dr.

She has truly been a companion in a more literal sense, sitting by my side in Room 203 as I developed, executed, and wrote this dissertation. Gini exemplifies that special kind of love that manifests itself in patience and unwavering support. While our formal relationship is coming to an end, I will always remember her faith in me. No journey I undertake would be possible without my first companions: my parents, Max and Janet Christensen.

No childhood is without its challenges, and mine was no exception. Yet, I only fully recognized those challenges in hindsight as an adult because of their unconditional love for me every day as a child. In adulthood, they continue to be my loving audience. While I may have lost the physical companionship of my father during this doctoral journey, I knew he was still by my side as I toiled away.

My parents will always be my first teachers. I am also grateful to my parents for blessing me with another companion: my brother, Spencer Christensen. It is a tremendous source of comfort to know that he will always be there for me as the decades pass by. With the completion of this dissertation, I viii am thrilled to be able to spend more time with him, Rachael Christensen, and their growing family.

I am at a loss for words when I try to acknowledge the role of my lifelong companion: my wife, Molly Christensen. Less than a year after we were married on that perfect day in June of 2008, I began this doctoral journey with her by my side. It was an extraordinary and humbling feeling to experience her unconditional love on a daily basis as I put one foot in front of the other over the course of five years. And along the way, she blessed me with two more lifelong companions: my sons, Finn Christensen (2010) and Dillon Christensen (2013).

This “book,” as Finn called it, is a product of their unconditional love. ix TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I: THE RESEARCH PROBLEM……………………………………. 1 Statement of the Problem…………………………………………………. 1 Background and Need……………………………………………………… 3 New Teacher Induction………………………………………………….

3 Jesuit Secondary Education……………………………………………… 4 Conceptual Framework……………………………………………………. 7 Induction Program Standards…………………………………………….8 Profile of an Ignatian Educator…………………………………………. 10 Purpose of the Study………………………………………………………. 12 Educational Significance……………………………………………………13 CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE……………………………….

15 Restatement of the Problem………………………………………………. 15 Overview of Chapter…………………………………………………. 15 History of New Teacher Induction………………………………………… 15 Components of New Teacher Induction…………………………………… 24 Administrators……………………………………………………………. 25 Structures………………………………………………………………… 28 Standards for New Teacher Induction…………………………………….

30 Jesuit Secondary Schools and New Teacher Induction……………………. 35 Summary…………………………………………………………………… 38 CHAPTER III: THE METHODOLOGY……. 41 Restatement of the Purpose of the Study…………………………………. 57 CHAPTER IV: RESULTS………………………………………………………….60 Overview…………………………………………………………………… 60 Demographics……………………………………………………………… 62 Summary of Demographic Variables……………………………………….

72 Relationship Between Mentor Teachers and First-Year Teachers……. 75 Open-Ended Item Results……………………………………………… 78 Orientations………………………………………………………… 79 Observations……………………………………………………….81 Mentor Teachers…………………………………………………… 82 Retreats……………………………………………………………. 84 Length……………………………………………………………… 85 Program Assessment and Upcoming Changes……………………. 92 Other Demographic Comparisons………………………………………95 Relationship Between Mentor Teachers and First-Year Teachers…….

100 Open-Ended Item Results……………………………………………… 107 Orientations………………………………………………………… 108 Observations……………………………………………………….112 Mentor Teachers…………………………………………………… 114 Retreats……………………………………………………………. 117 Summary of Results………………………………………………………. 120 CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS…………………………………………………………. 124 Summary of the Study…………………………………………………….

124 Conclusions and Implications……………………………………………… 129 Demographics…………………………………………………………. 130 Foundational Standards…………………………………………………130 Structural Standards……………………………………………………. 136 Recommendations for Future Research………………………………. 136 Recommendations for Future Practice………………………………….

138 Closing Remarks…………………………………………………………… 138 REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………. 147 APPENDIX A: Induction Program Standards by New Teacher Center…… 148 APPENDIX B: Permission Letter from the New Teacher Center…………. 150 xi APPENDIX C: Profile of an Ignatian Educator by the Jesuit Secondary Education Association…………………………………………………… 153 APPENDIX D: Formal Letter to Principal to Request School Participation……………………………………………………………… 155 APPENDIX E: Follow-up E-mail to Principal to Request School Participation……………………………………………………………… 158 APPENDIX F: Formal Letter to First-Year Teacher to Introduce the Study…………………………………………………………………. 160 APPENDIX G: Principal Survey………………………………………….

163 APPENDIX H: First-Year Teacher Survey………………………………. 182 APPENDIX I: Principal Follow-up Interview……………………………. 200 APPENDIX J: First-Year Teacher Follow-up Interview…………………. 218 APPENDIX K: Formal Letter to Validity Panel Requesting Participation.

224 APPENDIX L: Validity Panel Members and Qualifications………………. 226 APPENDIX M: Validity Panel Materials…………………………………. 228 APPENDIX N: Letter from Institutional Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects……………. 253 APPENDIX O: E-mails with Survey Link to Principals and First-Year Teachers………………………………………………………………….

255 APPENDIX P: Reminder E-mails with Survey Link to Principals and First-Year Teachers………………………………………………………. 258 APPENDIX Q: Second Reminder E-Mails with Survey Link to Principals and First-Year Teachers…………………………………………………. 261 APPENDIX R: E-mails with Follow-up Interview Questions to Principals and First-Year Teachers………………. 264 APPENDIX S: Reminder E-mails with Follow-up Interview Questions to Principals and First-Year Teachers……….

267 APPENDIX T: Second Reminder E-mails with Follow-up Interview Questions to Principals and First-Year Teachers………………………… 270 xii LIST OF TABLES 1 Comparison of Components of a Quality Induction Program………………. 31 2 Induction Programs Standards for Jesuit Secondary Schools and Corresponding Items on Principal Survey and First-Year Teacher Survey…. 47 3 Principal Responses to Survey Subscales by Standard………………………. 70 4 Principal Responses to Survey Subscales by Standard, Organized by School………………………………………………………….

73 5 First-Year Teacher Responses to Survey Subscales by Standard……………. 89 6 First-Year Teacher Responses to Survey Subscales by Standard, Organized by School…………………………………………………………. 93 7 First-Year Teacher Responses to Survey Subscales by Standard, Organized by Years of Prior Teaching Experience………………………….