|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Learning to Teach: Success Case Studies of Teacher Induction in Aotearoa New Zealand.Helen Aitken, Pip Bruce Ferguson, Fiona McGrath, Eileen Piggot-Irvine and Jenny Ritchie (2008) ISBN 978-0-477-10070-0 (paperback) ISBN 978-0-477-10071-7 (web) Table of contentsExecutive summary Executive summaryBackground and methodologyIn this research commissioned by the New Zealand Teachers Council, the quality of induction of Provisionally Registered Teachers was examined in a series of qualitative "success case studies" in early childhood, primary, secondary, and Māori-medium settings. The establishment of criteria for effective induction (from the literature and previous research) guided the identification of 20 sites across the sectors that were considered to demonstrate effectiveness. Following identification of the "success" sites, in-depth data collection of each case was conducted via a mixed method approach with focus groups, one-to-one interviews, observations, and documentary analysis. The data were subsequently analysed and reported upon thematically based on the following three key research questions:1. What examples are there, in a range of settings in New Zealand, of exemplary practices and of ways of dealing with problematic situations when supporting Provisionally Registered Teachers through effective advice and guidance programmes? 2. What contextual supports are needed when supporting Provisionally Registered Teachers through effective advice and guidance programmes? 3. What are effective practices and systems for the assessment and moderation of assessments of Provisionally Registered Teachers as they move towards full registration? The findings summarisedExemplary practiceExamples of exemplary practice were evident across all of the four sectors examined and these are summarised briefly in this section. Overall, in sites that conduct effective induction, there was strong evidence that wider support than just that of the mentor teacher alone was provided. Time was allocated for the Provisionally Registered Teacher and mentor teacher to meet (both informally through ongoing collegial support, and formally in the registration process). Participation in internal and external professional development for both mentor teachers and Provisionally Registered Teachers was a strong feature in all schools, as was openness to receiving feedback about progress and teaching. Good ratios of Fully Registered Teachers to Provisionally Registered Teachers existed in the each setting. In all case study sites, the perennial issue of lack of time for mentoring was acknowledged but also constructively attended to via approaches involving collaboration and sharing of resources, expertise, and support. An additional distinguishing feature in the success case studies was that of shared understandings among staff about good teaching and learning. Significantly, in almost all sites, there was appreciation of the need for the reviewing, checking, and reporting associated with induction: accountability was perceived to be an attendant component of the process. Also, particular care was often taken to ensure that the appropriate allocation of the mentor teacher to ensure a good "match" with the Provisionally Registered Teacher. Ways of dealing with problematic situationsThe predominant problematic situation that existed for all sectors was that of time pressure and the most effective ways of dealing with this were noted as being associated with:
Contextual supportThe findings of the 20 case studies also revealed a range of contextual supports that helped Provisionally Registered Teachers through effective advice and guidance programmes. Contextual support indicated in the success cases was wide and varied and overlaps exist with features noted in the previous two sections. Contextual support occurred via:
Learning, development and accountabilityThe findings of the 20 case studies revealed shared understandings about good teaching and learning and that the sites had clear general accountability practices for reviewing, checking, and reporting the progress of the Provisionally Registered Teacher as they moved towards full registration. These included:
The Māori-medium contextThe five Māori-medium case studies showed that there were several overlaps in the features of effective induction in Māori-medium settings with that of non-Māori. Overlaps included:
There were also induction features that were distinctive in the Māori settings. The predominant feature was associated with the definition and practice of mentoring itself. In the Māori settings, "mentoring" does not centre on individuals or a dual relationship between mentor and provisionally registered teacher, but on the much wider concept of whānau. RecommendationsAn extensive list of recommendations has been provided in the final section of this report. The most important of these recommend that:
1. Introduction and backgroundThe research was designed as the third and final stage of a three-phased design to investigate the nature and quality of advice and guidance (induction) provided for Provisionally Registered Teachers in Aotearoa New Zealand. Provisionally Registered Teachers in early childhood education services, Māori-medium settings and in other primary and secondary schools were the focus of the case studies.This third stage was preceded by a literature review (Cameron, 2007) and a national survey and focus groups (Cameron, Dingle, & Brooking, 2007). The New Zealand Teachers Council called for registrations of interest for the third and final stage of the Learning to Teach induction research programme in August 2006 and formal proposals were sought for qualitative case studies in a range of settings that examined practices and issues for induction processes, mentoring, and assessment of provisionally registered teachers. As noted in the Registration of Interest document, upon graduation from an approved initial teacher education programme, and subsequent granting of provisional registration status by the Teachers Council, a teacher undergoes a two-to-five year period of advice and guidance before applying for fully registered teacher status. In this period, a Provisionally Registered Teacher is entitled to a structured programme of mentoring, professional development, observation, targeted feedback on their teaching, and regular assessments based on the standards for full registration (the Satisfactory Teacher Dimensions established by the Teachers Council). At the end of this period, the professional leader uses information gathered to attest if the teacher meets the Council's's Satisfactory Teacher Dimensions. On the basis of this attestation, and satisfied that the teacher has met all conditions, the Teachers Council grants full registration to the teacher. The Registration of Interest document circulated by the Teachers Council also noted that this "induction period" of provisional registration is increasingly viewed as the "final practicum" of initial teacher education. It noted research indicating that the nature of induction plays a significant role in the future success and retention of newly qualified teachers (Cameron, Baker, & Lovett, 2006; Education Review Office, 2004, 2005; OECD, 2005; Renwick, 2001). The Teachers Council stated that it had a number of concerns in this policy area arising from recent research reports. These included four key concerns. Firstly, that the quality of advice and guidance being accessed by Provisionally Registered Teachers is variable (e.g. Cameron et al., 2006; Education Review Office, 2004, 2005; Kane, 2005; Kane & Mallon, 2006). Secondly, there are particular issues and barriers to establishing good advice and guidance programmes. Some of these are highlighted in settings such as isolated rural schools, small primary schools, early childhood settings and Māori medium settings. There is some evidence that Provisionally Registered Teachers who do not have adequate mentoring and structural support may fail to develop into competent teachers (Education Review Office, 2004; OECD, 2005). Thirdly, there are concerns that those responsible for supporting the Provisionally Registered Teachers, particularly the tutor teacher (subsequently called mentors in this report) and others charged with providing advice and feedback such as heads of department, are not themselves trained or qualified as adult educators. Fourthly, there are policy issues to work through in respect of the assessments and moderation of assessments of Provisionally Registered Teachers as they move to full registration as a teacher. The Teachers Council noted that these issues relate to both internal processes in each school or learning centre and externally, through the processes of the Council. They stated that there are complex issues specific to different settings. The Teachers Council reported that it had undertaken considerable policy analysis in the areas of teacher development and requirements for registration. Of the three points of entry to the profession (selection into, and graduation from, initial teacher education programmes and graduation from provisional to full registration), the last of these had been identified as critical for influencing teacher quality (OECD, 2005). The Council offered that supporting the professional learning of Provisionally Registered Teachers and clarifying responsibilities for their formative and final assessment and related issues were seen as the priority area where the Council could strengthen the profession. The Teachers Council concluded by stating that their awareness of the need to establish a broader and more in-depth evidence base on which to formulate future policy and advice to the profession led to the decision to engage in a research project (the Learning to Teach induction research programme). To support and guide this project, the Council, in 2006, established a reference group. 2. Aims, objectives, and outcomes soughtThe Teachers Council's stated longer term aims of the Learning to Teach induction research programme (as stated in the Request for Proposal document) were to influence the quality and retention of Provisionally Registered Teachers in early childhood, primary and secondary, and English and Māori medium settings. The Council articulated that the research would lead to policy development that seeks to influence quality teaching throughout the profession through the flow on effects of this work with Provisionally Registered Teachers in each of these settings. The Council argued that in the medium term it was expected that the research would raise awareness of the issues canvassed and would support and facilitate good practice throughout the sector.The Council's goal was to develop a research programme that would provide an evidence base for the development of policies and advice to schools, kura, and early childhood centres, and to initial teacher education providers, Provisionally Registered Teachers themselves, and others in the education community who have a role in the support and professional education of newly qualified teachers. It felt that exemplars of good practice should eventuate from the research project. The Council's policy goal is to develop practices that will give the Council, the profession, and the public confidence that Provisionally Registered Teachers have developed their professional learning to a level where they can be awarded full registration. They considered that the research would also contribute to policy development that would give similar levels of confidence in the assessment processes that lead to Provisionally Registered Teachers being granted full registration. With these aims, goals and background in mind, the following three main questions guided this third phase of the investigation of the induction of Provisionally Registered Teachers: 1. What examples are there, in a range of settings in New Zealand, of exemplary practices and of ways of dealing with problematic situations when supporting Provisionally Registered Teachers through effective advice and guidance programmes? 2. What contextual supports are needed when supporting Provisionally Registered Teachers through effective advice and guidance programmes? 3. What are effective practices and systems for the assessment and moderation of assessments of Provisionally Registered Teachers as they move towards full registration? More detailed research questions included:
The information gathered in the first two phases of the research (the literature review and the national survey and focus groups), along with indicators from additional research, were used to inform the establishment of criteria for effective/exemplary induction (practices, systems, and contexts). These criteria, in turn, were used to conduct "success case studies" as described in the following section of this report. 3. Research methodologyA predominantly qualitative set of "success case studies" (Brinkerhoff, 2003) were utilised as an appropriate means to gather the required empirical data on induction. Success case studies are a subset of the more traditional case study method where a single unit analysis is based upon depth that is both holistic and exhaustive (Bassey, 2007) but which also retains the meaningful characteristics of realistic events. A case study investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context (Wetherell, 2003) and is especially powerful when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident (Yin, 1994).The Success Case Method is described by Brinkerhoff (2005) as combining the ancient craft of storytelling with more current evaluation approaches of naturalistic inquiry, case study, and narrative research methodologies. They employ a mixed method approach to data collection to exhaustively examine a specific context (the data collection methods recommended for the success case studies in the induction research are outlined later in this section). Prior to this examination, survey methods are often used to locate suitable "cases" for analysis. Following this, literature review and focus groups are then employed to identify criteria for success that are collated into a matrix (or matrices) outlining the criteria for investigation. In the current induction project, the survey (which helped to identify potential "cases"), literature review and focus groups had already been conducted in the first two phases of the Learning to Teach induction research programme. Despite the fact that a previous literature review had been conducted in the first phase of the research, the first step for this third phase case study research was the updating of the literature review so that sample matrices outlining success case criteria could be developed. Matrix 1 (Table 1) shows the key factors arising from this updated literature review (that is, Cameron's (2007) initial review and other relevant literature published since). In Matrix 2 (Table 2) we identified an approach for the research focus, framing this around procedural and contextual indicators of successful processes. These matrices guided the success case study in-depth data collection, using focus groups, one-to-one interviews, observation, and documentary analysis. Table 1 Matrix one—key factors arising from recent relevant literature
The key literature referred to was: Aitken (2005, 2006); Cameron (2007); Cameron et al. (2006); Cameron, Dingle, et al. (2007); Darling-Hammond (2003); Education Review Office (2004, 2005); Kane (2005); Kane and Mallon (2006); OECD (2005); Renwick (2001); Stucki, Kahu, Jenkins, Bruce-Ferguson, and Kane (2006). In Table 2, the survey of the literature identified complexities and divergence amongst the range of practices across settings. Particular emphasis was given to innovations and success strategies within each sector or setting. Evidence of "success" occurred across components, however consideration was also given to each. In addition to the key factors in Table 2, emphasis was also given to explanations of how schools/centres have attempted to overcome barriers or challenges in the support and induction of Provisionally Registered Teachers. We believe that this information was relevant and useful for understanding the nature and quality of advice and guidance for Provisionally Registered Teachers. Table 2 Matrix two—success case study exemplar focus
The success case study method allowed the researchers to explore participant experiences and understandings as an experiential whole rather than the component parts (Hannabuss, 2000). Overall, the exploration was designed to identify: (a) issues that support good practice (including contextual supports); (b) exemplars of good practices and ways of dealing with problematic situations; (c) indicators of how Provisionally Registered Teachers have developed their professional learning to a level where they can be awarded Fully Registered Teacher status; and (d) assessment and moderation processes that validly lead to Provisionally Registered Teachers being granted full registration. Figure 1 summarises the success case method, showing the connections between results, data, outcomes, applications, and goals.
Note: Adapted from Brinkerhoff & Dressler (2003). Data collectionMultiple perspectives of induction were gathered from the data sources. In this situation they included a range of successful skills, knowledge, and abilities employed by the participants and "success" sites. The multiple perspectives create triangulation of the data which is designed to enhance credibility of the findings in terms of validity and reliability (Denzin, 1997).Organisations identified as "success" sites were initially contacted by telephone and email, with a follow-up letter. Carefully constructed informed consent processes were enacted. An outline of the nature of the project, the contribution that the individual and organisation might make to the research, and the nature and extent of their involvement were provided as well as assurance that participants and their organisation would only be identified by pseudonym in the report. Careful attention was paid to checking participant responses and quotations. Each researcher sent the case study reports back to participants for checking and approval. Data collection toolsThe success case study methodology used four main data collection tools:1. Focus group interviews were held with key stakeholders (Provisionally Registered Teachers, organisation managers, mentor teachers, heads of department, and fully registered teachers). A list of relevant attributes of successful induction were presented in the matrix and the group asked to comment on these, followed by a ranking to achieve some consensus on the attributes of successful induction that are exhibited in their organisation. The schedule for focus groups is provided in Appendix A. 2. One-to-one semi-structured interviews were conducted to probe in depth the attributes of successful induction. The semi-structured format of interviewing was used where the researcher guided the direction of the interview using primarily open-ended questions to encourage participants to discuss their experiences (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2000), as opposed to a more structured interview format that might have constrained responses (Opie, 2003). The interview schedule is attached as Appendix B. Interviews were conducted over a period of approximately one hour. 3. Analysis of existing documentation was undertaken. A raft of documentation associated with induction was examined. The following list is not exhaustive but includes some categories of documentation that were utilised:
4. Observations of Provisionally Registered Teacher and mentor interactions/meetings were also planned, but were achieved in very few situations. Despite multiple efforts to arrange times to coincide researcher visits with Provisionally Registered Teacher/mentor meetings, the combination of frantic schedules and the "on the hoof" nature of many Provisionally Registered Teacher/mentor meetings made it exceptionally difficult to plan concrete times for such observations in advance. AnalysisData analysis requires active comprehension, synthesising, theorising, and recontextualising (Irvine & Gaffikin, 2006). In order for this to occur, all focus groups and interviews were taped and transcribed for analysis. A case study report was then written for each case (as collated in separate Case Study Reports 1 document) and these were verified by the participants and then thematically coded in a way which derived increasingly specific categories within and across each sector.4. SampleThe information gathered in the first two phases of the research (the literature review and the national survey and focus groups), along with indicators from additional research, were used to inform the establishment of criteria for effective or exemplary induction (practices, systems, and contexts). These criteria, in turn, were used to identify "success" case studies as described in the following section of this report.There are difficulties in deciding on the type of sampling to select in educational research contingent upon various factors including "time, resources and access—but most importantly it depends on the purpose of the research" (Wellington, 2000, p. 61). Given the time available to carry out this research, the accessibility of educational organisations, and the nature of the methods (focus groups, interviews, observation, and documentary analysis) a purposive approach to sampling was employed (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000) for the intensive success case study approach. As noted previously, the first and second phases of the research on induction were examined to indicate success cases. Additionally, the Teachers Council reference group for the contract was asked for recommendations, as were local advisors working with educational organisations. A relatively small number of cases were chosen because, as Denzin and Lincoln (2000) argue, qualitative researchers may feel confident that they will "learn some important things from almost any case" and that it is appropriate to "choose one or a small number of exemplars" (p. 446). Five sites for each of the following sectors were chosen:
Within each sector, sites of variable size, location (urban, rural), and decile were selected. As the research progressed, development and refinement to the selected sample occurred, with the final sample and details recorded in the following sections. These details include: the centre or school type; decile (where applicable); the number of Provisionally Registered Teachers involved; the total number of participants involved; (including mentor teachers and further participants/roles where applicable); the presence and participation of Māori and/or Pasifika participants; and a brief outline of the distinguishing features of induction at the site. Early childhood education sectorOur access to centres or services in the early childhood education sector was complex at times due to the multiple sites and the complexities of many early childhood education organisations. Consent needed to be gained at an organisational level in a number of cases. Although a case study approach generally focuses on one site, a number of early childhood education organisations and services contained relevant people and positions that operated externally to the site, making this much more difficult. Therefore although the majority of early childhood education cases are located in a particular site, some contain a wider focus on a "success" relationship. For example, sites such as the home-based care organisation have multi-layered level of support and roles so further time and organisation needed to be given to allow all participants to meet together. In some instances multiple interviews and focus groups were conducted in order to accommodate the organisation's particular structure and preferences.The early childhood education sites reflected a range of variables relevant to the induction and support of Provisionally Registered Teachers in the early childhood sector (see Table 3) in relation to: early childhood service type (privately owned, community-based, state kindergarten, home-based care, and so on); number of Provisionally Registered Teachers; the total number of participants involved (including mentor teachers and further participants/roles where applicable); and the presence and participation of Māori and/or Pasifika participants. Table 3 also gives a brief outline of the distinguishing features of induction at the site. Table 3 Early childhood education sector sample
Primary school sectorThe primary school sector sample had considerable changes in comparison to the other sectors. Initial delays in starting data collection were partially due to flooding in the Northland area; however, the research team also experienced further unforeseen issues such as unexpected withdrawals from school principals just prior to data collection. High teacher workload and teacher sabbatical leave were some of the reasons given for this withdrawal.The primary school sector sites reflected a range of variables (see Table 4). These variables included: the type of school; decile rating (ranging from three to eight and including one intermediate school); numbers of Provisionally Registered Teachers; the total number of participants involved (including mentor teachers and further participants/roles where applicable); the presence and participation of Māori and/or Pasifika participants. A brief outline of the distinguishing features of induction at each site is given in Table 4. Table 4 Primary school sector sample
Secondary school sectorAlthough we made very good data collection progress in the secondary sector a reasonably high number of schools from our original (preferred) sample declined to participate in the research and this meant that the spread of decile ratings was somewhat reduced. However, we do not believe that the quantity and quality of the secondary sample was compromised. Some of the reasons given by principals for declining to be involved in this research included: high teacher workload in the school; a lack of time; and in some cases a desire to be reimbursed for their involvement.The five secondary school sector sites also reflected a range of variables (see Table 5). These variables included: type of school (co-educational and one single sex boys school); decile rating (ranging from decile four to nine); numbers of Provisionally Registered Teachers; the total number of participants involved (including mentor teachers and further participants/roles where applicable); and the presence and participation of Māori and/or Pasifika participants. A brief outline of the distinguishing features of induction at the site is also included in Table 5. Table 5 Secondary school sector sample
Māori-medium settingsThe five Māori-medium sites reflect a range of variables (see Table 6). These variables included: type of Māori-medium setting; decile rating (where applicable ranging from decile one to 2b); numbers of Provisionally Registered Teachers; the total number of participants involved (including mentor teachers and further participants/roles where applicable); and a brief outline of the distinguishing features of induction at the site. Unfortunately our sample did not include representation from whare kura, therefore secondary Māori-medium education has not been represented within the five cases.We did not experience any concern from Māori-medium teachers or participants questioning the benefits of the research for Māori. Both the mentor teacher and one of the Provisionally Registered Teachers in the kōhanga reo have been involved in national policy arenas and were very committed to supporting the research. Similarly, the Māori sites in Northland were happy to have their voice heard and their success stories relayed. It is our belief that for these participants, the success case study focus of the research has meant that the schools and centres see that their success stories are finally being recognised by others outside of their communities. The majority of interviews were conducted in English and one interview was conducted in te reo Māori. Table 6 Māori-medium settings sample
5. ResultsEach researcher developed one case study report per case, following data collection and the analysis of the data. These reports can be found in the separate Case Study Reports document.Each site and participants in the case studies have been coded to ensure anonymity. S-A, for example, refers to Secondary School case study A. A key is located at the top of each case study report showing the participant codes for each site. The case study reports are based on the research aims and questions outlined in the previous section and also refer to the induction matrices to identify links with the existing literature. Each case study report shows evidence relating to the effective contextual support and induction practices for Provisionally Registered Teachers and mentor teachers (as shown in Tables 1 and 2). Further issues that the researchers considered to be of interest and relevance to the research were also recorded. 2 An analysis has been conducted across the sectors, which is the focus of this section. The analysis is designed to draw conclusions and identify future implications in this report for each sector. The key areas that we have analysed using the matrices are:
As the existing literature and research on Provisionally Registered Teachers has included only a very limited consideration of Māori Provisionally Registered Teachers and Māori-medium settings, many of the issues and themes presented in our current matrices do not apply to Māori-medium settings and appear to override Te Aho Matua 3 guidelines used by these settings. This was confirmed in our data collection. For example, the consideration of a suitable "match" between Provisionally Registered Teacher and mentor teacher (as shown in Matrix One, Table 1) can be seen to discount the inherence of whānau relationships. Te Aho Matua recognises the staff, students, and community as whānau and takes ownership of all things at the kura, including the support of Provisionally Registered Teachers. Extensive discussion was held amongst the researchers of the Māori medium sector on this subject, and the Te Aho Matua (as outlined in the kura kaupapa Māori section of Towards Full Registration: A Support Kit (New Zealand Teachers Council & Ministry of Education, 2006)) provided a framework for our analysis and reporting. Early childhood education sectorOverviewThis section of the research covered five early childhood education case studies all recommended by a range of relevant sources as examples of success in the induction or support of Provisionally Registered Teachers. Due to the existence of external mentoring in some of the sites, three of the case studies (EC-A, EC-B, EC-D) did not focus on one physical early childhood site or centre, but instead focused on the key stakeholders within and across sites. This incidence of external mentoring, alongside the only very recent access to funding entitlements for Provisionally Registered Teachers in the early childhood education sector, made it more difficult for particular sites to be identified as having a "history" of supporting and inducting Provisionally Registered Teachers successfully (with the exception of the kindergarten sector which has always employed qualified and registered teachers). The five early childhood education case studies also included key stakeholders in the induction and support process who work outside of the site or centre. These included people in positions such as organisational or area managers, team leaders, registration coordinators, and Fully Registered Teachers. Demographic informationThe early childhood services captured in the sample varied in size, type, and structure. The sample included three education and care services (two of which were non-profit community-based and one which was a large privately owned franchise). The sample also included one state kindergarten, and one home-based service. Some of the services had sessional hours (e.g. EC-C and EC-D) and some were day-long services (EC-E). The roll and licensing details of the five case studies also varied. The smallest centre is licensed for 25 casual children and the largest is licensed for 97 children. All of the centres had a majority of Pākehā/European children as well as children of Māori, Asian, and other ethnic groups (see case study reports for details). The number of teaching staff in the early childhood education centres or services varied from three staff to 26 staff. The number of Provisionally Registered Teachers in each case study varied from one to four (with some Provisionally Registered Teachers in centres choosing not to participate). One of the Provisionally Registered Teachers was Tongan (EC-E) and two were Māori (EC-B and EC-E). Some of the Provisionally Registered Teachers also held positions of responsibility and leadership of Provisionally Registered Teachers in their centres or organisations. These responsibilities included being the Supervisor of their room or age group, the Area Manager (EC-E), and Visiting Teacher (EC-B). Organisations' and centres' willingness to participateThe response and willingness of early childhood education teachers and organisational stakeholders to be involved in the research was overwhelmingly positive. Funding and support for Provisionally Registered Teachers is relatively new to the early childhood education sector and there was a general sense of interest and enthusiasm in the research being conducted and its potential impact on Provisionally Registered Teachers and the early childhood education sector in general. Due to the diversity of early childhood education services and organisations in Aotearoa New Zealand, a number of initial contacts needed to be made at an organisational level rather than at a centre level. In these types of instances, key people (with responsibilities or oversight of teacher registration) were contacted in order to seek general permission before interest and consent was gained from specific centres and teachers recommended to us. In two of the case studies, the key organisational stakeholders were involved in qualifying our recommendations or referring alternative "success" sites and teachers to us (EC-B and EC-C). A separate and additional ethical approval process was required for the Kindergarten Association and this meant that further time was needed before data collection could start. In cases where the mentor teacher was external to the Provisionally Registered Teacher's centre, further telephone contact and permission needed to be sought in order to ensure that all relevant people were able to participate. The researcher received two "refusals" to participate during the early stages of the research and one in the later stages of the research. These were given with some reluctance and were due to the circumstances of the teachers and the requirements of the research rather than a lack of interest or concern by the potential participants. In the first two refusals, it was the mentor teachers who were unable to be involved, which meant that the case studies would not have been viable. One Provisionally Registered Teacher who was unable to participate (due to the mentor teacher leaving to go overseas for an extended period of time) expressed great disappointment at not being able to be involved. A further case study (EC-A) was affected at the later stages of the research as the Provisionally Registered Teacher was unable to participate. This meant that only the perspective and voice of the mentor teacher in relation to the induction experience was captured. The response from participants on being told they were recommended to us because of their "success" was often one of surprise. Organisational stakeholders and leaders within organisations were particularly delighted to hear this and were positive about using the research experience as a tool for further reflection and improvement. The Provisionally Registered Teachers responded with both surprise and uncertainty to their role and value in the research process; however, all were willing to be involved alongside their colleagues. It is possible that the Provisionally Registered Teachers may have felt some reluctance or fear about their own teacher registration experience being scrutinised by the researcher, or were reluctant to say something critical about the support they received from their mentor teacher or centre. This was not an ongoing obstacle or concern in the research process as Provisionally Registered Teachers became familiar with the researcher and the questions and focus of the data collection. Most of the data collection took place outside of the centre's hours with the exception of the home-based setting, where teachers and staff were able to meet during working hours. In all settings, the researcher was made to feel welcome. The focus group experiences were seen to be a positive experience for Provisionally Registered Teachers, mentor teachers, and others in the organisation (where relevant). Many of the staff with some responsibility for induction and registration had already undertaken their own assessment of the strengths and areas for improvement of their programmes and processes and the focus group gave them an additional opportunity to reflect collaboratively on what they had been doing. Another benefit of involvement in the research for the early childhood education participants was hearing that what they do is recognised by others in the sector and is valued by their colleagues and Provisionally Registered Teachers. In the spirit of manaakitanga and reciprocity, the researcher always brought food to share with the teachers during the focus group and interview. Some of the participants also provided their own food to share as a part of their own kaupapa in meeting together. This helped to keep the conversation as informal and relaxed as possible. The participants were invited to begin and conduct each meeting in their preferred and usual manner. For the remainder of this analysis, headings will replicate the issues explored with teachers and stakeholders in the five early childhood case studies. Approaches to induction in the success case studiesA fascinating range of induction processes was described across the five case studies and any universal or standardised approach to supporting registration was not revealed. What was evident is that the induction and registration support processes are shaped by the structure of each organisation, its organisational culture, and the aspirations of the teachers within it. Thus the induction processes ranged from larger, more formalised structures of support for Provisionally Registered Teachers and mentor teachers with assigned people to oversee them, to very small, informal and localised methods of support and guidance developed and monitored by the participants themselves. In the larger organisations, it was more likely that a formal system and approach existed and that there were people within the organisation who were allocated responsibility for overseeing the support of Provisionally Registered Teachers. For example, in the kindergarten setting the Provisionally Registered Teacher induction portfolio was the responsibility of the two professional services manager participants involved. Similarly, in the large corporate education and care franchise, the registration coordinator had this organisational responsibility within the North Island. Having a designated person responsible for induction was seen to ensure that an oversight was kept and that Provisionally Registered Teachers received consistent information and a high standard of support. The Provisionally Registered Teachers in these two settings (EC-E and EC-C) knew the registration coordinator and professional services managers were there to oversee the registration process and support the mentor teachers, and that this demonstrated the importance that the organisation placed on induction. For example, one of the mentor teachers in the large education and care centre (EC-E) remarked: "She [the registration coordinator] is there if I need her so that is great" (mentor teacher 1 in EC-E). The availability of additional printed resources and guidelines (beyond those published by the Teachers Council and the Ministry of Education) were also found in the two organisations that had these formal roles and processes (EC-C and EC-E). In the remaining three cases, the mentor teachers and Provisionally Registered Teachers mentioned referring directly to the Satisfactory Teacher Dimensions (first published by the Teacher Registration Board in 1996 and available on the Teachers Council website), the Towards Full Registration: A Support Kit (New Zealand Teachers Council & Ministry of Education, 2006), or the Teacher Registration Assessment Booklet produced by the Early Childhood Council (2004), commonly referred to as the "blue book", which, prior to the Towards Full Registration folder, was the only guideline available to early childhood education teachers. All of the Provisionally Registered Teachers and Fully Registered Teachers in the research had an allocated mentor teacher who was (or had been) supporting them in their provisional registration. In addition to this assigned mentor teacher, a number of the Provisionally Registered Teachers made use of informal (and in some cases formal) contact and discussion with other leaders and colleagues in their organisation or setting. In this sense, the support offered to the Provisionally Registered Teacher was much wider than the allocation of a mentor teacher. This feature of contextual support is recognised in the existing literature on induction and registration support of Provisionally Registered Teachers. Some organisations worked very hard to ensure that the Provisionally Registered Teachers had a choice about who their mentor teacher would be, and offered suggestions or guidance to the Provisionally Registered Teacher if needed: We check to make sure they have done it [sent info off to the Teachers Council] . . . after that we pretty much take care of them. It's up to them to choose a tutor [mentor teacher], we have given them the agreement to sign . . . [and] after that it really is their responsibility to drive it. (Teacher Registration Coordinator in EC-E) As outlined in the introductory overview, the proximity of the mentor teachers to the Provisionally Registered Teachers in the five case studies varied. Although some of the Provisionally Registered Teachers worked directly with their mentor teacher (such as in the kindergarten) most of the participants worked together in an indirect way. For example, the mentor teachers in the home-based setting were frequently the team leaders, whose role it is to visit, support, and educate the home-based caregivers providing care and educational experiences for young children. Similarly one of the mentor teachers in the large education and care centre (EC-E) was also the Centre Manager. Although most of the Provisionally Registered Teachers in this centre had a mentor teacher within the setting, one of the Provisionally Registered Teachers (who is employed as the company's Area Manager) elected to have a mentor within the company but in a different region, thus external to the case study centre. Three participants in two of the case studies (EC-A and EC-D) also had a mentor teacher who was off-site or external to the centre. As some of the Provisionally Registered Teachers in the research were not beginning teachers or "new" to working in the early childhood centre or organisation, they did not experience a formal induction into the setting. For instance, some of the Provisionally Registered Teachers had been working in the early childhood sector for some time as unqualified teachers or while undertaking their initial teacher education. The different forms of initial teacher education experienced by the Provisionally Registered Teachers included pre-service, distance education, and field-based teacher education. Furthermore, some of the Provisionally Registered Teachers had been employed in another early childhood education service or centre as a Provisionally Registered Teacher before coming to their current centre or service. This is also an indication of the current movement and retention issues in the early childhood education sector. In some cases, the Provisionally Registered Teachers change in employment was a direct result of the poor support and guidance received in other services (see PRT1J in EC-B and PRTK in EC-E for further details). Exemplary practices evident in the induction processAs might be expected in research of this nature, a wide range of exemplary practices used in the induction of Provisionally Registered Teachers were identified through the participants' stories. A number of these practices also reflect the features of positive induction examined in the literature as outlined later in the discussion section of this report. Support given to the Provisionally Registered Teacher is wider than the allocation of a mentor teacher In no case was there a restriction of support to just the allocation of a mentor teacher. On the contrary, a wide variety of strategies were in place to support the Provisionally Registered Teacher. In some organisations where there are a number of Provisionally Registered Teachers within the setting (EC-B and EC-E), a climate of supporting each other and sharing ideas developed. Comments such as "we work as a team so the support is there by default" (mentor teacher 1K in EC-B) were commonly expressed. Due to the diversity in early childhood education services across the sample, how this wider support looked in practice was varied. In the home-based organisation, for example, there was a growing capacity of Provisionally Registered Teachers and Fully Registered Teachers in roles of Visiting Teachers and this meant that they were working from the same office and could meet and share ideas regularly. One of the participants in that setting remarked: "It is useful sitting down talking to others who are going through it" (Fully Registered Teacher 2 in EC-B). Another setting (EC-E) was also large enough to contain more than one or two Provisionally Registered Teachers undertaking provisional registration and this naturally led to group or peer support. One of the Provisionally Registered Teachers described the way the centre staff functioned and supported each other as "a kind of a family" (Provisionally Registered Teacher J in EC-E). Within the kindergarten case study (EC-C) the Association's Professional Services Managers were also actively involved in contributing to feedback and observation of the Provisionally Registered Teacher and tried to ensure that their Provisionally Registered Teachers knew they were valued and supported. Comments from Provisionally Registered Teachers and Fully Registered Teachers acknowledged this wider support: Whenever X [PSM1] came to visit us at the kindergarten, I would always have my folder there and she would go through it so she was an amazing support. And she would say "Oh this is coming through from the Teachers Council, they are wanting this sort of input so you need to tweek this, or make sure you show growth across [the Dimensions]". (Fully Registered Teacher in EC-C) Similarly, the team leaders in the home-based setting (EC-B) provided overarching support and guidance to Provisionally Registered Teachers and their mentor teachers (if different): "It is their [the team leaders] responsibility to make sure that the process works but not necessarily their responsibility to do it" (Specialist Advisor in EC-B). Even for those Provisionally Registered Teachers whose mentor teacher was external to the centre, the support from their colleagues within the centre was vital and what was identified as the greatest support: "What helped me the most is the support that my centre gave me" (Fully Registered Teacher in EC-D). Support, guidance and feedback from mentor teachers Although the support and guidance of the Provisionally Registered Teachers was much wider than the allocation of a mentor teacher in all cases (as described above), all of the Provisionally Registered Teachers interviewed described the individual support and guidance given to them by their mentor teacher as vital to their progression and to the eventual completion of their teacher registration. The key practices referred to could be summarised as follows: the provision of emotional support and encouragement; giving general guidance and suggestions; providing summative feedback; promoting reflective questioning and conversation; supporting goal setting; and generally advocating for the Provisionally Registered Teacher and her progress. The descriptions or references to feedback given during mentor teacher/Provisionally Registered Teacher meetings were frequently strength-based and informal (rather than predominantly constructive or formal) in nature: We just start talking really . . . often we would go out for lunch. (Mentor teacher in EC-D) Our dialogue when we spoke was very open and honest and I really appreciated being able to share things really openly with her. (Fully Registered Teacher in EC-D) One of the Fully Registered Teachers described what she valued most about her mentor teacher: Really just having the opportunity to have somebody to talk to about the successes and my practice. It was really that professional dialogue that we had [together]. (Fully Registered Teacher in EC-D) It is more difficult for the researcher to reveal detailed and specific examples of the types of feedback that Provisionally Registered Teachers received from their mentor teachers and how this in turn affected their practice and thinking as teachers. The inability to use observation as a means of gathering data may have been a limitation that contributed to this. Some of the more general comments made by the participants are listed below: She [the mentor teacher] had some set reflective questions which really prompted me to a go a little deeper, and to explore my practice and the thinking behind it. (Fully Registered Teacher in EC-D) I do get feedback. D [her mentor teacher] goes over my evaluations and gives me feedback on those. She often gives me verbal [feedback], if I have any doubts she's very helpful in that way, points me in the right direction. (Provisionally Registered Teacher in EC-E) Getting them [her Provisionally Registered Teachers] to explain to me what they've been doing and giving them the feedback that supports them, but I'd also throw questions about it too. Like I'd say, "how do you think this [is] going to . . . affect the children's learning?", "why are you doing these things?". (Mentor teacher in EC-B) The frequency, duration, and nature of the meetings and discussions between Provisionally Registered Teachers and mentor teachers varied greatly across the sample. At a minimum, meetings were held about once a term, but this was typically in cases where the mentor was off-site and alternative methods of communication were often used between face-to-face meetings. Some of the meetings were planned and booked ahead (again sometimes out of necessity and as a means of minimising the potential limitations of the arrangement) and others were more flexible and "needs based"—depending on where the Provisionally Registered Teacher was at in their registration process and what support they felt that they needed form their mentor teacher. At the beginning the meetings were longer, they weren't more frequent but they were longer to make sure that I was doing the right thing . . . they would have been about every two months . . . As it got towards the end I had more and more regular meetings with her to say "this is where I'm at, let's sign this one off" [or], "this is what I'd like you to look at". (Fully Registered Teacher in EC-C) She tries to draw out what it is that I want to work on . . . where I've been. She likes to get set dates so I have a timeframe . . . this is really useful to know "oh gosh I have to get that finished by that date". (Provisionally Registered Teacher 2K in EC-B) Initially I got the person [PRT] to look at where they thought they were at, and through that criteria think about what they do really well, and then to go through again and look at areas where they would love to have some professional development . . . once it was all set up we would set some goals for the next meeting. (Mentor teacher in EC-A) The registration process is largely self-driven Coupled with the support given from their colleagues, managers, and leaders, many of the Provisionally Registered Teachers across the five case studies were also given a message of needing to take responsibility to drive the process themselves. This message did not seem to negate the necessity or desire of the organisation or centre to support the Provisionally Registered Teacher, but reflected a wider belief held by the teachers that ownership and self reflection were necessary to maximise the benefits of the induction experience. A "one size fits all" approach was avoided in all of the five case studies. The following four comments made by a Provisionally Registered Teacher, mentor teacher, and Fully Registered Teacher reflect this attitude: I drive the agenda. I'll just say I want to talk about this and this. (Provisionally Registered Teacher in EC-C) People are different so we draw on their experience. (Mentor teacher/Professional development leader in EC-B) In a sense I did drive it, so if I needed help or saw gaps I'd say "X" [name of mentor teacher], we need to do this, this, and this. (Fully Registered Teacher in EC-C) I have an idea that X [Provisionally Registered Teacher] needs to drive the process, not me. I'm not actually going to do it, so don't wait for me to do it, because I'm not . . . new graduates can be hesitant about the process. (Mentor teacher in EC-A) When asked what advice she would give to other Provisionally Registered Teachers based on her own experience, the same Fully Registered Teacher replied, "We [Provisionally Registered Teachers] really do need to drive it ourselves". Evidence is informed by the teachers' everyday practice—keeping it "real" In making suggestions to future Provisionally Registered Teachers and mentor teachers based on their own experiences, a large majority of the teachers reinforced the notion that registration evidence should be largely about a teacher's everyday practice and not something special or "added on". This view, when passed on by mentor teachers, seemed to help the Provisionally Registered Teachers feel reassured that the majority of the Satisfactory Teacher Dimensions could relate to what they already did in their capacity as teachers and that a strategy was just to remember (and be reminded) to document this evidence and then reflect on it. Try not to think that everything had to be a huge event to actually tick a box. That something as simple as keeping the minutes or . . . doing all of the art orders—that is still helping and supporting your team and you can still use that as documentation evidence . . . it doesn't have to be massive things. You have to regularly look at your own practice and say "this is actually what I do". You don't have to build a mountain to tick the box, you can actually just open a door [to your practice]. (Fully Registered Teacher in EC-C) It's about what am I doing? How does this relate? So making it a part of what they do rather than an extra task. (Mentor teacher 1K in EC-B) There were, however, different opinions and practices expressed by the Provisionally Registered Teachers and the mentor teachers about how evidence towards the Satisfactory Teacher Dimensions should be considered and how important it was to show evidence of practice and progression over the two-year period of advice and guidance. For instance, some of the Provisionally Registered Teachers ensured that multiple examples or evidence for each of the dimensions was documented. This practice was often reinforced by formative feedback from the mentor teachers who expected sufficient or substantial evidence before being willing to "sign off" a dimension as completed. Extensive evidence of documentary records The practice of documenting and presenting detailed evidence was observed by the researcher in examining the documentary evidence of the Provisionally Registered Teachers and Fully Registered Teachers. There was strong evidence of a portfolio approach to documentation—a combination of reflections, teaching and learning artefacts, and narratives as well as digital photos as visual evidence—similar to the style employed by early childhood education teachers in documenting young children's learning. The Provisionally Registered Teachers' evidence cited by the researcher was often extensive, ranging from one folder to two or more folders. In comparison to the documentary evidence cited by the researcher in primary school settings, the evidence of early childhood education teachers was considerable and mentor teachers were careful to make sure that all of the dimensions had related examples and supporting evidence (often before being signed off by the mentor teacher or Professional Services Manager, Induction Coordinator or similar). Materials related directly to the mentor teacher/Provisionally Registered Teacher relationship were also typically included, such as meeting agendas and meeting minutes and observation notes and feedback. I ask for three bits of evidence for each one [of the Dimensions], and they don't all come at once . . . I'm interested in some depth. (Mentor teacher in EC-A) Reflection and goal setting Reference to reflective practice was frequently mentioned as a desired practice and characteristic of Provisionally Registered Teachers, and an important ongoing practice for all teachers, including mentor teachers. In EC-C this was a particularly strong feature of the successful relationship between a provisionally registered teacher and a mentor. It's been a good process for questioning yourself and saying, "Well do I actually do that?" And then asking the others, "Have you seen me do this?" Because half the time you're unaware, it's just something you do everyday without thinking about the theory behind it . . . It makes you think about yourself in a whole new light, because you're actually asking do I actually fulfil those roles, achieve these things? (Provisionally Registered Teacher in EC-C) She [mentor teacher] was big on journaling which was necessary anyway, [but] not just journaling, but going back to it and going back to it, and keeping a separate little column for something that may have been noted and she would always remind us to go back and have a look and see if they'd been any growth from that reflection. (Fully Registered Teacher in EC-C) Considered "match" of Provisionally Registered Teacher and mentor teacher There was mixed response on how the Provisionally Registered Teacher/mentor teacher match is accomplished. In some centres, it was suggested or allocated by the Professional Services Managers or employers (EC-B, EC-C) although there was some flexibility available. Personality compatibility, proximity, and experience and workload of the mentor teacher were taken into consideration in some contexts. In case study EC-E, the Provisionally Registered Teacher was given written and verbal information to assist them, such as material about what to look for in a mentor and general expectations, so that they can then go and approach someone to be their mentor—either internally or external to the centre. The growing capacity of Fully Registered Teachers in the home-based setting also offered Provisionally Registered Teachers more choice. Talking to Provisionally Registered Teachers at the job interview about their options for mentor teacher support and the type of support they would expect to receive was commonly expressed. Case studies EC-B, EC-C and EC-E directly referred to this and gave time to consider what mentoring arrangement might be the best for each applicant and context. In X [name of organisation] we have a process to provide good advice and guidance to the Provisionally Registered Teacher and they can choose someone in the organisation, or a group thing, or stay with someone outside of the organisation if they've started but we still have responsibility to monitor that we are providing the opportunities, we are resourcing them—as their employer. A team leader can be an advice and guidance person, as can any Fully Registered Teacher. (Mentor teacher 2A in EC-B). For the mentor teacher in EC-A, being a mentor teacher was not a role that she had necessarily sought for herself, yet she has been approached by a number of Provisionally Registered Teachers over the years (known acquaintances and colleagues external to her own centre) and asked if she would be willing to support them through the registration process. Consequently, suitability and "match" are always considered and determined between herself and the Provisionally Registered Teacher. However references to her experiences of being a mentor teacher internal to her centre were not always her choice, but arose from necessity. She commented: "I am the only fully registered teacher in this centre so it has always fallen to me" (mentor teacher in EC-A). The five case studies reveal that due to the lack of Fully Registered Teachers available in many contexts, finding a mentor teacher was a challenge and therefore a real sense of choice was lacking. Provisionally Registered Teachers seemed to be grateful to have someone, and in some cases, anyone to support them. Thus, where a choice existed, this was regarded as a bonus. X [her mentor at the time she was a provisionally registered teacher] was the only one who was fully registered [in the centre] so the choices were zip really . . . [and] all the [other] qualified people that I knew didn't really understand registration. (Mentor teacher/centre manager in EC-E) Due to this teacher's position of manager in the centre (and position of room supervisor, which she had held as a Provisionally Registered Teacher), she believed it would have been preferable to have a mentor teacher who was "above her" (in terms of position and responsibility). This was also reflected by the other Provisionally Registered Teachers who held positions of leadership and responsibility (PRT1J, Provisionally Registered Teacher/centre manager in EC-E and Fully Registered Teacher in EC-B) and raises an issue for those Provisionally Registered Teachers who are also in positions of leadership about how the allocation of a mentor affects their experience. For the teachers in the case studies, the allocation and match of mentor teacher had been, by and large, mutually beneficial. The contextual supports required for (more) effective inductionThe contextual support, tools, information, and approaches that were identified by teachers and which were seen to support the induction of Provisionally Registered Teachers varied across a number of areas. Some of the supports were approaches that were used in the setting already, and others were identified because they were seen as gaps in the current practice or support structure. Clear information and guidelines A number of the mentor teachers had developed or used a contract with their Provisionally Registered Teachers and strongly endorsed discussing this with the Provisionally Registered Teacher at the beginning of the supervision process. This was seen to promote clear expectations and guidelines for both parties and a mutual commitment. Both Provisionally Registered Teachers and mentor teachers wanted more information from the Teachers Council about what constitutes appropriate evidence and reflection. It was thought that this would help to alleviate large discrepancies within and across early childhood education services and would lessen the anxiety in Provisionally Registered Teachers and mentor teachers about their evidence being audited (there were a number of stories and anecdotes regarding people who had been audited by the Teachers Council and who had been asked to provide or add further evidence). The participants within settings who had designated roles, responsibilities, and guidelines in relation to registration were less concerned about this issue. One registration coordinator made the following remark about the strength of the company's written guidelines produced for Provisionally Registered Teachers: It is easy to use, [and] it's connected to the company so it is not like a separate thing that they have to be doing on top of working for X . . . it's covering the dimensions and criteria of the Teachers Council at the same time. (Registration coordinator in EC-E) Our Provisionally Registered Teachers should feel valued and supported, and should know what the expectations are. (Professional services manager 2 in EC-C) Provisionally Registered Teacher knowledge of registration process and funding allocation Three of the participants had begun their registration in other centres and organisations where they had not received good support, as noted in the following two comments: My [previous] supervisor (mentor teacher in early childhood education centre), she had never done it. I felt like I was on my own. She had no idea, there was no support. I was the one who got hold of the Teachers Council and got the blue book [Teacher Registration Assessment Booklet published by the Early Childhood Council, 2004], and started laying it out, following the folder. (Fully Registered Teacher in EC-C) No one was informed about funding. Half of them [her past colleagues] went through their whole registration and no one told them [about the funding grant]. It was all kept hush, hush and put into the centre's bank account. (Provisionally Registered Teacher 1J in EC-B) The same two teachers were quick to point out the positive difference in their current jobs. One of the positive issues also referred to by Provisionally Registered Teachers was the level of transparency regarding the funding entitlement, and how this was being spent to enhance their own experience and learning. The Provisionally Registered Teachers and Fully Registered Teachers in one setting (EC-B) said they had been encouraged to spend their funding entitlements and stated that there is a real willingness by the organisation's managers to update them and fund and approve professional development requests. Coming into the X [name of] Association was wonderful. Being able to have a manual on it, being able to be told "This is what you need to do" ... it was really nice to actually know how to do it. (Fully Registered Teacher in EC-C) I was made really aware [of the entitlements] when I came on board at X's [name of organisation]—what funding there was, what I was entitled to, that it was there and I was encouraged to be using it—not just to let it sit there. So for me, I've been kept well in the picture. (Provisionally Registered Teacher 1J in EC-B) I'm aware of what the funding allocation is and in this organisation they are very upfront in saying "you've got this amount to spend, please decide on what you would like to spend it on". (Provisionally Registered Teacher 2K in EC-B) This was similarly reflected in other case studies. In addition to attending professional development courses, the Provisionally Registered Teachers in some cases also described using the funding to purchase resources and equipment (which enabled them to better support the learning of caregivers and children). This was endorsed by others in the setting also: It is really important that they have access to that grant so that they can go on those courses that are specific to them or get resources if there are particular things [they want] . . . it's also a great motivation tool. So you can say, "hey there is support grant money there, so write yourself an action plan and let's use that support grant". (Registration coordinator in EC-E) It seemed to be easier for the smaller centres to manage this transparency and convey clear details to Provisionally Registered Teachers. For individuals within very large organisations, it was more difficult for those in positions of responsibility to know where and how the money was spent as the funding was typically pooled in a larger budget and was used to support the formal induction and support processes, such as workshops or events. In some of these settings, the Provisionally Registered Teachers and Fully Registered Teachers expressed a desire for more transparency from the organisation including encouragement to maximise the funding and opportunities for professional development. None of the mentor teacher participants referred to payment or release as a reason for being a mentor teacher or a driver in agreeing to take on such a role; however the use of the funding grant also affected mentor teachers in relation to payment. One mentor teacher had not been paid for her role in supporting a Provisionally Registered Teacher. She advocated for her Provisionally Registered Teachers to be proactive in using and keeping track of the spending of the grant so that they would not "miss out". In this instance, "success" had occurred despite a need for contextual and financial support: Here [at her centre], the only reason actually I did get paid once was because they were audited. So they had to account for the money that had come in for teacher registration. It's not so bad the other way, for the teacher [PRT], because I recommend professional development and for them to go and visit other centres every term . . . spending money that way, going to conferences. (Mentor teacher in EC-A) Flexible approach—finding time, making time There was very mixed feedback regarding time allocation and release for mentor teachers and Provisionally Registered Teachers, with only two settings (EC-C and EC-E) having formal guidelines about this. In comparison to the release grant for secondary and primary school teachers (of often at least one hour a week), all of the early childhood education cases reflect little mention of release allocation. This may be partly influenced by the fact that the early childhood education funding entitlement does not stipulate compulsory release for Provisionally Registered Teachers or mentor teachers. Across the five case studies, most paper work and record keeping was done by the Provisionally Registered Teachers in the evenings or outside centre or work hours. When release time did occur in the three centres or settings without formal release guidelines, it was principally used for meetings between Provisionally Registered Teachers and their mentors or observation of the Provisionally Registered Teacher by the mentor teacher. Few centres required any specification by Provisionally Registered Teachers of how release time was spent. The one exception was the kindergarten, EC-C, which did place expectations on mentor teachers and Provisionally Registered Teachers relating to release. In the kindergarten sector, both the mentor teacher and Provisionally Registered Teacher were entitled to take one day a term (or part thereof) to undertake roles and practices in relation to their role. The mentor teacher in the kindergarten described using half a day to observe the Provisionally Registered Teacher, while the Provisionally Registered Teacher commonly described using the time to complete written evidence or visit other centres. It was the general feeling of the researcher that the teachers interviewed were still experiencing a feeling of gratitude for the relatively new introduction of the funding grant within the early childhood education sector. The teachers appear to see a considerable improvement on some of the past practices (including the recalling of their own initial experiences as newly qualified teachers) and so were perhaps reluctant or unaware of discrepancies amongst teachers in other sectors when it came to funding. Notwithstanding the positive nature of this research, there were some overall suggestions raised for the improvement of induction programmes. Many of these issues relate to themes already detailed within this analysis and within individual case study reports. Suggestions for improvement of induction in the early childhood education were:
The enabling conditions that affect the professional learning of Provisionally Registered TeachersThe participants were asked to comment on what conditions "enabled" their professional learning within their particular contexts. Their responses identified a range of general themes within their diverse contexts. Willingness of mentor teachers to support Provisionally Registered Teachers The experience and commitment of mentor teachers was mentioned as an enabling feature for all of the Provisionally Registered Teachers. An example of this is reflected in the following comment from the Registration Coordinator about one of the mentor teachers in the case study: Another reason why [the] centre is successful [is that] we have a lot of people who were happy to be mentor teachers and take on extra responsibility, we had people who were motivated. R [mentor teacher 1] who is there now, she is really motivated, and she is committed to the profession . . . and that helps hugely. (Registration coordinator in EC-E) As already mentioned, there was a much wider sense of care and support for the Provisionally Registered Teachers and taking on a formal mentoring teacher role was an extension of this collective willingness. Regular contact with mentor teachers and others Despite the challenges in finding time and formalising meetings, a general theme in the early childhood education case studies was the willingness and ability of the participants to "find time and make time". If teachers worked in the same setting, they described trying to connect with each other regularly, even if over the usual demands or schedules of the day (such as lunchtimes), while those not in the same centre described using other forms of communication to stay in contact with each other such as emails, telephone conversations, or text messages. It is fairly casual in a way, we just talk. Usually what I've done is . . . an observation first and I've written up the ob [observation] first for her to read through . . . to give her feedback . . . so I'll do that before the meeting, and then at the meeting we might talk about what came out of the observations, what I think she might need improvement on, what's she's doing well. Just general support. (Mentor teacher 1 in EC-E) I like to make regular phone calls to her throughout the week. Just making contact with her, and reassuring her with where I'm at, and she's reassuring [about] what I'm doing and whether that's correct . . . We do see each other about once every three weeks so we still do that physical contact as well. (Provisionally Registered Teacher/centre manager in EC-E) The constraints and challenges in supporting Provisionally Registered TeachersDespite the various centres and settings reflecting a number of successful practices and traits in relation to induction and support of Provisionally Registered Teachers, the participants also experienced a number of challenges and constraints. Many of the issues identified across the five case studies reflect constraints facing the early childhood education sector as a whole (such as lack of time and release), whilst others were heightened because of the nature of the setting and its specific capacity in supporting Provisionally Registered Teachers. Lack of time and release The most common constraint identified was lack of time. This was mentioned universally, across all coordinators, professional service managers, team leaders, visiting teachers, mentor teachers and Provisionally Registered Teachers. The current demand for qualified staff in the early childhood education sector (and the relationship with funding) placed additional pressure on many of the Provisionally Registered Teachers and mentor teachers, as a reliever typically has to be brought in to cover then both. Finding qualified relievers was described as being very difficult and, at times, impossible. Release time off "the floor" therefore has to be arranged in advance, making the opportunities for both Provisionally Registered Teacher and mentor teacher being released together even more unlikely. More time was wanted for observation, meetings, professional development, and visiting other centres and teachers. Synchronised time between mentor teachers and Provisionally Registered Teachers was particularly needed. When the Provisionally Registered Teachers in one centre (EC-E) were asked about the challenges and constraints they faced, they all expressed a desire for further release time: Non contact time off the floor for both of us. I know it's available but you have to get the relievers. (Mentor teacher/centre manager in EC-E) [In order for mentor teacher 1] to come and watch me and to get off the floor I need someone else to come in. (Provisionally Registered Teacher J in EC-E) Increased pressure on qualified staff and mentor teachers The issues and challenges surrounding release time described above, in turn exacerbated the pressure placed on existing qualified staff within the centre. In contrast, longevity of teams and relationships was a feature of the five case studies and remarks often centred on monitoring levels of responsibility and stress to ensure that staff workload and harmony in the setting be maintained. Lack of wider recognition, guidelines and funding within some early childhood education organisations The issue of recognition was not widely described but is particularly relevant for two of the case study organisations: the home-based care organisation and the Kindergarten Association. The participants interviewed from the home-based care organisation made many remarks in relation to the added challenge for home-based teachers to interpret the Satisfactory Teacher Dimensions and to provide adequate evidence of work with young children: We are not on the floor all day with the children, which is very much what the booklet [Teacher Registration Assessment Booklet] presumes. (Provisionally Registered Teacher 1J in EC-B) We found it hard to interpret the Dimensions because we mainly work with the caregivers . . . a lot of the Dimensions for us slotted into how we support caregivers to achieve those and also at the playgroups that we run. (Fully Registered Teacher 1S in EC-B) Because the language of the Satisfactory Teaching Dimensions is directed at teachers working in early childhood education centres, it does not currently translate into home-based settings. As a consequence, the dimensions needed to be re-worded in order to encapsulate the differing role of the visiting teacher. This is a job that all mentor teachers had undertaken and discussed with their Provisionally Registered Teachers. The participants within the Kindergarten Association raised a different constraint that they see as significantly affecting the experiences and levels of support that some of their Provisionally Registered Teachers receive; that is, the discrepancy in the early childhood education sector in relation to the funding entitlements of teachers in long-term relieving positions. Sector-wide constraints and challenges Under this heading, participants were asked to comment on sector-wide issues that they felt were particularly relevant. These issues identified are briefly summarised below.
Other sources or models that mentor teachers draw on to guide the professional learning of the Provisionally Registered TeachersThe mentor teachers and organisational leaders who were interviewed mentioned a range of sources and documents that they used to guide the teaching and learning of their Provisionally Registered Teachers. These included:
Formal qualifications and experience of the mentor teachersThe background and education of each of the mentor teachers revealed a range of qualifications and length of experience in the teaching sector. The qualification level evident in the mentor teachers ranged from the diplomas in teaching (early childhood education) to bachelors and masters degrees (in progress). The length of experience in the sector was often considerable yet the year of qualification more recent. This reflects the growing qualification levels of many teachers in the early childhood education profession. Some mentor teachers referred to prior experience in the role of associate teacher and supporting student teachers as a useful experience that also helped to inform their role of mentor teacher. However it was largely unclear how such prior roles and educational background affected the type (and related quality) of support they provided to the Provisionally Registered Teachers. There was no single factor which seemed to determine the quality of support experienced by the Provisionally Registered Teachers; however, ongoing professional development and support was regarded by the mentor teachers and Provisionally Registered Teachers to be an important catalyst in creating a "successful" mentor teacher. Training and support of the mentor teachersVery few of the mentor teachers described receiving targeted formal support in relation to their roles as mentor teachers. Training and support could best be described as informal and varied as even mentor teachers within the same organisation reported different experiences and levels of support. The exception to this experience of informal support was the Kindergarten Association, which provided registration workshops for both Provisionally Registered Teachers and their mentor teachers to attend. The main benefit of the specially targeted registration workshops for Provisionally Registered Teachers and mentor teachers seemed to be the opportunity to share exemplars and provide opportunities for teachers to meet and share ideas, issues, and information. Recent workshops organised for Provisionally Registered Teachers and mentor teachers by the Kindergarten Association included exemplars of mentor teacher feedback, which both the Professional Services Managers and the mentor teachers felt was very useful. A lot of them [mentor teachers] are intimidated and a bit overwhelmed by needing to write, having to do observations, they are not quite sure about what the requirements are, and it is a big benefit to us that we have so many mentor teachers that we can take really exemplar feedback from and show it to others. (Professional services manager 1 in EC-C) The mentor teachers within the five case studies described a range of informal support provisions, ranging from individual meetings and advice to occasional informal encouragement and support given by other mentor teacher colleagues. The nature of this support seemed to be a result of positive relationships, willingness, and collegiality among the teachers and staff, rather than a requirement or formal structure. In general, provision of appropriate professional development for mentor teachers was neither widespread nor easy to access, and was general in nature rather than specifically targeted to the mentor teacher role. A professional development focus in areas such as reflection (EC-C) and leadership (EC-B) had been useful for some mentor teachers to adapt to their role and responsibilities as a mentor teacher. I'm going to a leadership course next Thursday that will hopefully help me in this role [as a mentor teacher] as well as just general Supervisor [role], and so I am looking for more workshops and courses that can help me with both of those roles. (Mentor teacher 1 in EC-E) Professional development and support was also reliant on teacher release time and this created further challenges for mentor teachers. For those mentor teachers in external mentoring positions, it was often very difficult to be supported as the role was additional to and separate from the responsibilities in their centre. The mentor teacher in case study EC-D relied solely on written guidelines and incidental conversations with other colleagues in the profession as a means of support and guidance. Organising release from her centre was difficult. There was a common desire among the mentor teachers for further support and guidance for mentor teachers both from within their organisations or services and from wider government agencies such as the Ministry of Education and the New Zealand Teachers Council. Some of the mentor teachers requested input on issues such as their responsibilities as mentor teachers, the Satisfactory Teacher Dimensions, giving formative and summative feedback, and observation strategies. Some of the mentor teachers also mentioned external workshops and support offered by the New Zealand Education Institute, although none had attended them. There hasn't been any support from the Teachers Council; [this] is something that is sadly lacking. They are suddenly expecting all of these people to become mentor teachers but not actually giving the mentor teacher advice and direction as to how to be a mentor teacher . . . so I've developed what I've done in consultation with my manager. (Mentor teacher 1K in EC-B) The Provisionally Registered Teachers were also aware of the lack of formal support and guidance available to their mentor teachers, especially if they had started their provisional registration prior to the publication of the revised document Towards Full Registration: A Support Kit (New Zealand Teachers Council & Ministry of Education, 2006). In such instances the mentor teachers and Provisionally Registered Teachers recalled how they had tried to make sense of the requirements together. In a sense we were muddling through it together. Hey, what does this dimension mean for home-based care? Nobody was the expert. (Mentor teacher 2A in EC-B) That was why we floundered at the beginning. There was nobody to go to and say 'hey is this right? ... You would really go on your own instincts about what it [registration requirements] was all about. (Mentor teacher in EC-D) Based on the comments and stories of the mentor teacher participants regarding the general lack of specific training and education they received related to their role as mentor teachers, one can only conclude that "successful" mentoring occurred in spite of these factors and that the future resourcing and education of mentor teachers would help to improve this further. The benefits and constraints of off-site mentorsParticipants from across the five early childhood education sites who had off-site mentors had different reasons for doing so. For some, the reason was due to a lack of available mentor teachers in their own centres (EC-A, EC-B); for others, it related to their own position within the centre or setting and a desire for a mentor external to the centre (EC-B, EC-E). The kindergarten setting was the only case study where none of the participants had an external mentor, although reference was made to other Provisionally Registered Teachers within the association who have had a mentor external to their kindergarten due to the circumstances. As previously mentioned in this analysis, those Provisionally Registered Teachers who held positions of leadership and responsibility often elected to have a mentor off-site and felt that this was preferable and more appropriate: It would have been very hard say for A [hypothetically] to come to our centre . . . to be my mentor teacher would have been very uncomfortable for her . . . because of my position [as centre Supervisor]. (Fully Registered Teacher in EC-D) The Provisionally Registered Teac | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
