Impacts of Comprehensive Teacher Induction: Final Results from a Randomized Controlled Study. NCEE 2010-4027
Author: Glazerman, Steven
Date: 2010-06-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Beginning Teacher Induction,Randomized Controlled Trials,Beginning Teachers,Program Effectiveness,Teacher Persistence,Teaching Methods,Mentors,Faculty Development,Teacher Collaboration,Longitudinal Studies,School Districts,Classroom Observation Techniques,Teacher Surveys,Comparative Analysis,Teacher Influence,Teacher Characteristics,Student Records,Outcomes of Treatment,Mathematics Achievement,Reading Achievement,Scores,Teacher Attitudes,Labor Turnover,Correlation,Urban Schools,Elementary School Teachers

In 2004, the U.S. Department of Education's Institute of Education Sciences contracted with Mathematica Policy Research to conduct a large-scale evaluation of comprehensive teacher induction. The purpose of the study was to determine whether augmenting the set of services districts usually provide to support beginning teachers with a more comprehensive program improves teacher and student outcomes. This is the study's third and final report on the program's impacts. This report compares retention, achievement, and classroom practices of teachers who were offered comprehensive induction services to teachers who were offered the support normally offered by the school. Teachers assigned to receive comprehensive induction for either one or two years were supported by a full-time mentor who received ongoing training and materials to support the teachers' development. The teachers also were offered monthly professional development sessions and opportunities to observe veteran teachers. The teachers were followed for three years. Data was collected from 1,009 beginning teachers in 418 schools in 17 districts. Districts included in the study were not already offering comprehensive induction services, including paying for full-time mentors. Novice teachers in approximately half of the schools were assigned by lottery to receive comprehensive induction services. In 10 of the districts, these teachers were provided one year of comprehensive induction services; in the remaining 7 districts, the teachers were provided two years of services. Teachers in the schools not assigned to receive comprehensive induction services were provided the support normally offered to novice teachers by the school. Teacher practices were measured via classroom observations conducted in the spring of 2006. Data on teacher retention were collected via surveys administered in the fall of 2006, 2007, and 2008. Student test scores were collected from district administrative records for the 2005-06, 2006-07, and 2007-08 school years. Key findings include: (1) During the comprehensive induction program, treatment teachers received more support than control teachers; (2) The extra induction support for treatment teachers did not translate into impacts on classroom practices in the first year; (3) For teachers who received one year of comprehensive induction, there was no impact on student achievement; (4) For teachers who received two years of comprehensive induction, there was no impact on student achievement in the first two years. In the third year, there was a positive and statistically significant impact on student achievement; and (5) Neither exposure to one year nor exposure to two years of comprehensive induction had a positive impact on retention or other teacher workforce outcomes. The following are appended: (1) Supplemental Information for Chapters II and III; (2) Supplemental Information for Chapter IV; (3) Sensitivity Analyses and Supplemental Information for Chapter V; and (4) Sensitivity Analyses and Supplemental Information for Chapter VI.