Scenarios of Mentor Education in Romania – Towards Improving Teacher Induction
Povzetek
The aim of this paper is to examine the induction programme for newly qualified teachers and mentor education in Estonia, providing a comparative analysis of existing Estonian and possible Romanian models of mentoring. While the Estonian induction programme has been in place for more than ten years, induction in Romania is a relatively new and has only been mandatory since 2011 (National Law of Education 1/2011). The specifics of mentor professional development within the Romanian induction framework have yet to be explicated. This paper proposes two possible scenarios suitable for the Romanian system :1) long-term regulated academic education (part of master or doctoral level studies), and 2) flexible short-term in-service education. The advantages and disadvantages of both models are examined and ways to overcome some of the disadvantages are identified. Ultimately, the paper proposes that a flexible, needsdriven system which encompasses a degree of choice will best fulfil the professional development needs of teachers who wish to become mentors.
Prenosi
Podatki o prenosih še niso na voljo.
Literatura
Bullough, R. V. (2005). Being and becoming a mentor: school-based teacher educators and teacher educator identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(2), 143-155.
Eisenschmidt, E. (2006). Implementation of Induction Year for Novice Teachers in Estonia. Dissertations on Social Sciences-Abstract. Tallinn: Tallinn University Publishing House.
Eisenschmidt, E., Oder, T., & Reiska, E. (2013). The Induction Programme - Teachers’ Experience after Five Years of Practice. Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 21(3), 241-257.
Gravey, B., & Alred, G. (2000). Educating mentors. Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 8(2), 113-126. Haridussilm. Retrieved 03.08.2016 from http://www.haridussilm.ee.
Hartnett, A., & Carr, W. (1995). Education, Teacher Development and Struggle for Democracy. In J. Smyth (Ed.), Critical Discourses on Teacher Development (pp. 39- 53). London: Cassell, Wellington House.
Huling, L., & Resta, V. (2001). Teacher mentoring as professional development. ERIC digest. Retrieved 15.09.2015 from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/
ERICServlet?accno=ED460125.
Ingleby, E., & Hunt, J. (2008). The CPD needs of mentors in post-compulsory Initial Teacher Training in England. Journal of In-Service Education, 34(1), 61-74.
Iucu, R., & Stîngu, M. (2013). Training induction mentors: alternative policy scenarios. In: 5th International Conference EDU-WORLD 2012 - Education Facing Contemporary World Issues,
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 76(153), 931-934. Retrieved 15.04.2013 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.04.237.
Jones, M. (2010). The needs of mentors. In K. Smith, & M. Ulvik (Eds.), Mentoringnovice teachers: national and international perspectives (pp. 115-129). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Löfström, E., & Eisenschmidt, E. (2009). Novice teachers’ perspectives on mentoring: The case of the Estonian induction year. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(5), 681-689.
National Institute of Statistics (2015). Retrieved 25.07.2016 from http://www.insse.ro/cms/.
New priorities for European cooperation in education and training (2015). Communication From The Commission To The European Parliament. Retrieved 03.08.2016 from http://ec.europa.eu/education/documents/et-2020-draft-joint-report-408-2015_en.pdf.
OECD (2014). TALIS 2013 results: An international perspective on teaching and learning. OECD Publishing. Retrieved 20.09.2015 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264196261-en.
Õpetajate koolituse raamnõududed [Framework Guidelines for Teacher Education] (2000). Retrieved 27.08.2014 from https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/812791.
Orland-Barak, L., & Klein, S. (2005). The expressed and the realized: mentors’ representations of a mentoring conversation and its realization in practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(4), 379-402.
Poom-Valickis, K. (2007). Novice teachers’ professional development across their induction year. Tallinn University. Dissertation on Social Sciences. Tallinn: Tallinn University Publishing House.
Romanian National Law of Education (1/2011). Retrieved 20.04.2014 from www.edu.ro.
SEC Developing coherent and system-wide induction programmes for beginning teachers – a handbook forpolicymakers (2010). European Commission Staff Working Document. Retrieved 05.06.2014 from http://ec.europa.eu/education/library/publications/handbook0410_en.pdf.
Stîngu, M. (2013). Induction of newly qualified teachers: needs, implications and opportunities. (Doctoral thesis). Bucharest: University of Bucharest.
Strengthening teaching in Europe. EC policy note (2015). Retrieved 03.08.2016 from http://ec.europa. eu/education/library/policy/teaching-profession-practices_en.pdf.
Ulvik, M., & Sunde. E. (2013). The impact of mentor education: does mentor education matter? Professional Development in Education, 39(5), 754-770.
Wang, J., & Odell, S. J. (2002). Mentored Learning to Teach According to Standard-Based Reform: A Critical Review. Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 481-546.
Yee, S., & Fan Tang, S. Y. (2012). Knowledge base of mentoring and mentor preparation. In S. Flecher, & C. A. Mullen (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Coaching and Mentoring in Education (pp. 478-493). Sage: London.
Eisenschmidt, E. (2006). Implementation of Induction Year for Novice Teachers in Estonia. Dissertations on Social Sciences-Abstract. Tallinn: Tallinn University Publishing House.
Eisenschmidt, E., Oder, T., & Reiska, E. (2013). The Induction Programme - Teachers’ Experience after Five Years of Practice. Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 21(3), 241-257.
Gravey, B., & Alred, G. (2000). Educating mentors. Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 8(2), 113-126. Haridussilm. Retrieved 03.08.2016 from http://www.haridussilm.ee.
Hartnett, A., & Carr, W. (1995). Education, Teacher Development and Struggle for Democracy. In J. Smyth (Ed.), Critical Discourses on Teacher Development (pp. 39- 53). London: Cassell, Wellington House.
Huling, L., & Resta, V. (2001). Teacher mentoring as professional development. ERIC digest. Retrieved 15.09.2015 from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/
ERICServlet?accno=ED460125.
Ingleby, E., & Hunt, J. (2008). The CPD needs of mentors in post-compulsory Initial Teacher Training in England. Journal of In-Service Education, 34(1), 61-74.
Iucu, R., & Stîngu, M. (2013). Training induction mentors: alternative policy scenarios. In: 5th International Conference EDU-WORLD 2012 - Education Facing Contemporary World Issues,
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 76(153), 931-934. Retrieved 15.04.2013 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.04.237.
Jones, M. (2010). The needs of mentors. In K. Smith, & M. Ulvik (Eds.), Mentoringnovice teachers: national and international perspectives (pp. 115-129). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Löfström, E., & Eisenschmidt, E. (2009). Novice teachers’ perspectives on mentoring: The case of the Estonian induction year. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(5), 681-689.
National Institute of Statistics (2015). Retrieved 25.07.2016 from http://www.insse.ro/cms/.
New priorities for European cooperation in education and training (2015). Communication From The Commission To The European Parliament. Retrieved 03.08.2016 from http://ec.europa.eu/education/documents/et-2020-draft-joint-report-408-2015_en.pdf.
OECD (2014). TALIS 2013 results: An international perspective on teaching and learning. OECD Publishing. Retrieved 20.09.2015 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264196261-en.
Õpetajate koolituse raamnõududed [Framework Guidelines for Teacher Education] (2000). Retrieved 27.08.2014 from https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/812791.
Orland-Barak, L., & Klein, S. (2005). The expressed and the realized: mentors’ representations of a mentoring conversation and its realization in practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(4), 379-402.
Poom-Valickis, K. (2007). Novice teachers’ professional development across their induction year. Tallinn University. Dissertation on Social Sciences. Tallinn: Tallinn University Publishing House.
Romanian National Law of Education (1/2011). Retrieved 20.04.2014 from www.edu.ro.
SEC Developing coherent and system-wide induction programmes for beginning teachers – a handbook forpolicymakers (2010). European Commission Staff Working Document. Retrieved 05.06.2014 from http://ec.europa.eu/education/library/publications/handbook0410_en.pdf.
Stîngu, M. (2013). Induction of newly qualified teachers: needs, implications and opportunities. (Doctoral thesis). Bucharest: University of Bucharest.
Strengthening teaching in Europe. EC policy note (2015). Retrieved 03.08.2016 from http://ec.europa. eu/education/library/policy/teaching-profession-practices_en.pdf.
Ulvik, M., & Sunde. E. (2013). The impact of mentor education: does mentor education matter? Professional Development in Education, 39(5), 754-770.
Wang, J., & Odell, S. J. (2002). Mentored Learning to Teach According to Standard-Based Reform: A Critical Review. Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 481-546.
Yee, S., & Fan Tang, S. Y. (2012). Knowledge base of mentoring and mentor preparation. In S. Flecher, & C. A. Mullen (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Coaching and Mentoring in Education (pp. 478-493). Sage: London.
Objavljeno
2016-09-30
Kako citirati
Stîngu, M., Eisenschmidt, E., & Iucu, R. (2016). Scenarios of Mentor Education in Romania – Towards Improving Teacher Induction. Revija Centra Za študij Edukacijskih Strategij , 6(3), 59–76. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.65
Rubrike
FOCUS
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal (for short: CEPS Journal) by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher.
- The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
