Beyond Mentoring

Abstract

Support for music teachers new to the profession is important and necessary. Some school districts use traditional mentor–mentee pairings as their primary support for novice music teachers; however, many factors in the professional lives of music teachers, such as traveling among multiple schools or a lack of subject-specific colleagues often makes this type of mentoring problematic. This review of literature synthesizes the research on music teacher mentoring and suggests that avenues such as face-to-face professional learning communities of music teachers and virtual communities of practice be further researched and explored as an augmentation of the mentoring framework in the support of novice music teachers.

Keywords

communities of practice mentoring/induction novice music teachers online communities professional learning communities (PLCs)review of literature

Support for music teachers new to the profession is important and necessary. Traditionally, such support has taken the form of mentoring; however, effective and helpful mentoring is often a more complicated issue for music teachers than it is for teachers in other subject areas. Some researchers have even gone so far as to say that current mentoring structures are simply not effective for novice music teachers because of the unique demands of a music teacher’s position (Conway, 2006; Jacobs, 2008). There are several factors in music teachers’ professional lives that are different from other teachers and may contribute to higher attrition rates and greater needs for support. Some of these include the high number of students that music teachers instruct, the geographical location of music classrooms in schools, a heavy extracurricular schedule and the paperwork, budgeting, and scheduling that goes along with it, the demands of public performances, and the necessity to travel among multiple school buildings (Conway, 2006; Haack, 2003; Jacobs, 2008; Krueger, 1999, 2003; Scheib, 2006). However, the issue most related to on-site mentoring and support seems to be the fact that many music teachers are the only teacher of their subject in the school building. In smaller districts and rural areas, they are perhaps the only music teacher in the district. This can make the availability of a subject-specific mentor clearly problematic.

Improvements in new teacher mentoring and support in general education have been made in recent years through more comprehensive induction programs (Achinstein & Athanases, 2006; Strong, 2005, 2009; Wang & Odell, 2002; Wang, Odell, & Schwille, 2008; Wood & Stanulis, 2009). In addition to the practice of mentoring, this current trend of comprehensive induction often includes elements such as mentor preparation, reflective inquiry into teaching practices, structured observations, professional development that is developmentally appropriate, formative assessment, supportive school culture, program research and evaluation, and a shared vision of knowledge, teaching, and learning (Wood & Stanulis, 2009). Many school districts also use professional learning communities (PLCs) and other forms of inquiry groups as an additional means of professional development and support for beginning teachers (Meyer & Achinstein, 1998; O’Malley, 2010; Rust & Orland, 2001; Wilkins & Clift, 2007). Furthermore, the flexibility and accessibility of the Internet and its multiple avenues of online support for novice teachers is also becoming well-documented in general education research (Babinski, Jones, & DeWert, 2001; Fry, 2006; Gleaves & Walker, 2010; Kepp & Mike, 2009; Klecka, Cheng, & Clift, 2004).

Although these advances in mentoring and induction seem to be promising, these studies and others like them are primarily focused on nonmusic classroom teachers; very little research is being conducted on novice music teachers and involvement in such alternative forms of support. Considering the logistical challenges faced by music educators and those who attempt to mentor them, such additions to and alternatives in the support of new teachers should be welcomed and embraced. I contend that music education must move beyond mentoring into the exploration of other forms of support focused specifically on the needs of novice music teachers. This review synthesizes the literature on current forms of music teacher mentoring and support, outlines additional ideas such as face-to-face and virtual PLCs, and offers suggestions for future areas of research and practice specifically in music education.

Synthesis of Music Mentoring Literature

Isolation and Other Challenges for Music Teachers

Although there seems to be little doubt that first-year teachers of any subject or curricular area need mentoring and support, the guidance that novice music teachers need can be unique (Conway, 2003c). As previously stated, some music teachers are the only instructor of the subject in their building or district, thus making a match with a subject-specific mentor or support system challenging. Many music teachers feel their subject is marginalized within their schools, misunderstood, or labeled as a special subject that exists only to give classroom teachers planning time (Krueger, 1999).

While these issues are systemic, there are additional challenges on an individual basis. Music teachers, especially at the secondary level, often are overwhelmed with an intense pressure to put on quality, public musical performances, such as concerts, and keep up with administrative tasks, such as paperwork for festivals, bus requests, parent booster meetings, equipment repairs, and budgets (Conway, 2006). Haack (2003) discussed the challenges for beginning music teachers in the sheer number of students they see: elementary music teachers usually see hundreds of students a few times per week, undoubtedly different than a teacher who works with the same classroom of students for the majority of the day. For music teachers at the middle school and high school level, novice band, string, and choral directors are often teaching larger numbers of students than in other classrooms, “each and every one armed with a potent noisemaker” (Haack, 2003, p. 10). In Krueger’s (1999) study of first-year music teachers, 16 out of 20 teachers described feelings of isolation because of these issues and named an overwhelming workload as one of their primary struggles. Later research by Krueger (2003) investigated other reasons for this isolation: music teachers who travel among multiple schools often must travel over lunch periods or are scheduled to be at one school during another school’s staff meeting times, thus severely limiting their time for interaction with other teachers. When these factors are considered as a whole, it is evident how professional isolation has the potential to create unique challenges for novice music teachers.

While teacher isolation as a general phenomenon has been studied, Sindberg and Lipscomb (2005) noted that until their original research, no studies had been conducted specifically on the professional isolation of music teachers. Sindberg and Lipscomb’s (2005) work was a descriptive investigation, carried out through a survey of 100 music teachers with multiple levels of teaching experience. They related four findings: (a) music teachers felt isolated because of the location of their classroom; (b) music teachers felt isolated in relation to their subject matter; (c) teachers with 1 to 10 years of experience felt the negative effects of isolation more intensely than veteran teachers; (d) isolation had a negative effect on teaching. One powerful comment from the Sindberg and Lipscomb (2005) surveys read as follows: “I honestly believe that if I could have had at least one person there for support and to talk to about the profession with, I might not be leaving after this year” (p. 55). Conway (2003a) similarly found informal interactions with other teachers were novice music teachers’ most powerful form of professional learning and development. Smith and Haack (2000) encouraged all music teachers, in particular novices, to seek out relationships with other music teachers for the purpose of informal learning and professional development. New teachers seem to want this type of peer support and collaboration; “New teachers need to talk with other professionals who are familiar with their classroom situations as they interpret their new roles as teachers” (Krueger, 2003, p. 93). These experiences seem to speak to the need for music educators, particularly novices, to come together and interact around ideas of teaching music, yet these opportunities for collegiality are often few or nonexistent.

Mentoring for Novice Music Teachers

Although current mentoring structures for novice music teachers have attempted to address such issues as isolation, transition into the profession, and teacher learning, mentoring is often tenuous at best. The experience can be successful when a beginning music teacher is paired with a successful veteran who teaches the same subject (Conway & Zerman, 2004); yet can be detrimental when, for example, a principal assigns a custodian to mentor a novice music teacher because he played drum set in a band (Conway, 2003b). Krueger (1999) found the majority of effective mentoring and support strategies for novice music teachers to be haphazard and varied because of a lack of consistency in time for mentors and mentees to meet, a lack of mentors who shared the novice music teachers’ content area, and a lack of useful or applicable advice and assistance.

Conway (2003b) examined 13 different school districts in Michigan where new music teachers were hired and described similar results to Krueger (1999); there was significant variance in the way novices were assigned mentors, if those mentors were paid or trained, and the amount of time mentors and mentees spent together. Additionally, it was noted that the content of the mentor–mentee conversations did not focus on curriculum, but on issues of administrative duties, classroom management, parental interactions, and school policies. Other studies have also reported that novice teachers often seemed to feel comfortable with issues surrounding classroom teaching and instead felt they needed assistance and advice with topics such as budgeting and recruitment (DeLorenzo, 1992) and communication with parents, colleagues, and the greater community (Ballantyne & Packer, 2004). These and other issues seen as outside the realm of what occurs during a class period of teaching music seem more overwhelming to novice music educators, as Conway (2003b) also discovered. Although researchers, music teacher educators, mentors, and beginning teachers themselves may have differing opinions about what novice music teachers most need from their mentors to be successful, one fact seems clear. A lack of professional and emotional support during a novice music educator’s early years as a teacher can often lead to unnecessary struggles, stress, and the eventual leaving of the profession all together (Conway, 2003c; Krueger, 2003; Sindberg & Lipscomb, 2005).

Benson (2008) examined the shortcomings of music teacher mentoring through a review of literature on the subject and found five factors that appeared to play a role in the ineffectiveness of mentoring for music teachers: (a) the lack of consistent standards for implementing mentoring programs and selecting mentors; (b) the unique circumstances of a music classroom that are frequently not taken into consideration; (c) the feelings of isolation among new music teachers; (d) the use of standardized induction programs that are often perceived by music teachers as not beneficial; and (e) the lack of emotional support provided for new music teachers who may even be participating in a mentoring program. Benson (2008) advocated for mentoring and induction that takes these specialized circumstances into account, stating that

To sustain the newest music educators as vibrant members of the teaching force in the future, it is imperative that the creation of new mentoring programs be established as a critical priority among educational policy makers, academic professionals, and the research community. (p. 48)

These new music teacher mentoring programs for which Benson (2008) and others have advocated could include PLCs, other forms of peer support, and virtual music teacher networks, as is currently being explored in general education research. Research on these subjects is becoming an increasingly significant research area in the general education literature (Wood & Stanulis, 2009), yet is not as prolific in music education. The research I located on the topic of additional support systems for novice music educators is outlined below.

Additional Ideas

Collegial Support Systems for New Teachers in Music Education

Beginning music educators could benefit by being connected and supported through the use of collegial discussion groups or communities of practice (Blair, 2008; Sindberg & Lipscomb, 2005). Blair (2008) articulated the idea of music teachers developing communities of practice in her narrative study of three first-year music teachers. Because of the somewhat unique circumstances that music teachers often face, such as seeing students on a less frequent basis than other classroom teachers or not being involved with common planning and issues of school curriculum, music teachers “need communities of practice so that music specialists can meet to not only support their teaching but to find community in a setting where isolation is inherent to the job” (Blair, 2008, p. 101). As the group facilitator, Blair organized a meeting with the novice teachers every other week and was additionally available over e-mail for consultation.

Although the beginning of the year was described as frantic and the new teachers contacted the researcher quite often for advice on classroom management and with frustrations concerning evaluations by administrators, by midyear, their confidence grew and Blair (2008) discovered the three teachers communicating more regularly with each other versus only with her:

[They] eventually began to mentor each other as participants in a community of practice that resembled a learning community that schools might develop. With duties in multiple buildings and few opportunities to interact with other teachers, this “music teacher community of practice” served their specific and unique needs as novice music teachers. (p. 109)

Gruenhagen (2008) similarly found powerful meaning-making and learning through structured discussion groups as a core group of five teachers engaged in collaborative dialogue about practice in an early childhood music school. The common theme appears to be that teachers supporting each other and functioning as a professional learning community, be it in person or online, can have positive effects on music teachers’ learning, reflection, development, and sense of belonging.

In addition to sharing experiences and finding a sense of camaraderie in teaching, Colwell’s (2005) policy recommendations stressed that music education professionals must begin seeking out critical friends, ones who are passionate about constant growth and improvement. In a study of first-year music teachers, Conway (2001) recognized that novice teachers also needed the chance to observe more experienced music teachers and receive feedback from district music curriculum coordinators in addition to assistance from a mentor. Conway strongly advocated “these music teachers wish to be provided with opportunities to interact with other music teachers” (2001, p. 60). Such networking and dialogue with other music teachers is an important part of novice music teachers’ professional growth (Krueger, 2001; Stegman, 2007).

Taken together, the above research findings detail the needs of novice music teachers and how various types of support structures may lead to possible avenues for professional learning and the development of critical peers. Such communities of practice (Wenger, 1998) that focus on teacher collaboration and problem-based learning for teachers appear to be a central theme in current music education policy recommendations (Schmidt & Robbins, 2011). Conway’s (2007) research agenda for music education called “for professional development options that allow music teachers time and settings to interact informally to share ideas and stories of teaching” (p. 58) and the development of communities of practice specifically for music teachers. These interactions among music teachers as peers and the opportunity for dialogue have been found to be professionally beneficial (Blair, 2008; Madsen & Hancock, 2002) particularly in rural areas in which opportunities for collegial interactions and music-specific professional development are limited (Burkett, 2011).

Online Components of Beginning Music Teacher Support

Music teachers are busy professionals. Adding another meeting such as a face-to-face PLC to their schedules, however useful and well-intentioned, may not be practical; yet, meeting with those same fellow music teachers through a virtual community of practice could be a workable alternative. There seem to be relatively few studies that have discussed peer support or mentoring of novice music teachers in the online environment. Ajero (2007) spoke of social networking sites such as Facebook, as well as blogs and discussion forums about particular musical topics, for communication between music teachers and students. Blair (2008) documented some online correspondence between participants in her research study mentioned above. While there is some research that has focused on methods of online communication and learning as part of music education coursework (Bauer & Daughtery, 2001; Conkling, 2003), not as much research exists describing online resources for in-service music educators.

One type of virtual resource for novice teachers could be online forums and discussion boards centered on music education. Bauer and Moehle (2008) conducted a content analysis of online discussion board postings through the National Association for Music Education (NAfME) website during the 2004–2005 academic year. This study was useful in identifying the topics that music teachers were discussing by area of specialty (band, choir, general music, or orchestra), as well as separating issues by curricular and extracurricular. This contributed to the research because it offered insight into which topics within music education are of the most value or are the most needed from a professional development perspective, as identified by the number of posts or from lack of postings on the online forum. It also highlighted the importance of the many cocurricular issues that music educators often face, such as budgeting, travel, advocacy, and retention of students; how these issues are often neglected in support and professional development of music teachers; and how support and discussion of those topics was needed. This matches DeLorenzo’s (1992) finding that beginning music teachers often struggle more with the cocurricular portions of their jobs than actual classroom teaching; however, this report mentioned first-year music teachers only in passing and did not attempt to focus on their specific needs, but rather on music teachers as a whole.

Bell-Robertson (2011) investigated the use of Wikispaces by 11 novice instrumental music teachers. Through multiple interviews, observation of the group’s online interactions, and document analysis, Bell-Robertson suggested that the online interactions among the music teachers contributed to the teachers’ emotional support and development. By posting their day-to-day experiences, reading about the experiences of others, and replying to others’ questions, the teachers reported feeling affective outcomes, such as not feeling alone and being able to reflect on their own experiences as well as those of other teachers in similar circumstances. This was the only study located that explored an online community of exclusively novice music teachers. To summarize, then, there appears to be some potential concerning virtual avenues for the support and induction of novice music teachers that could include, among other technologies, discussion boards, chat rooms, and group e-mail correspondence.

Suggestions for Future Research and Practice in Music Education Induction

The practice of mentoring novice teachers, with an experienced teacher as the mentor and the novice as the mentee has been studied; however, this review of literature highlights two suggestions for future research: (a) the practice of peer mentoring or in person support groups such as PLCs among music educators, and (b) online mentoring and communities of practice for music teachers.

Peer Support and PLCs Among Novice Music Teachers

This review of literature found very little research detailing peer support or participation in PLCs among music educators, novice, or otherwise. Looking outside the music education literature, Pugach et al. (2009) stated that most research on PLCs was focused solely on general education and rarely mentioned other curricular areas, even when the investigation was focused on whole-school PLC initiatives. Some general education scholars have advocated for the development of peer support programs and collaborative networks of novice educators in all subject areas to help support beginning teachers more comprehensively (Hsu, 2005; Wang, Odell, & Schwille, 2008; Wilkins & Clift, 2007). The fact that very few studies have investigated collegial interactions or PLCs specifically focused on novice music educators shows the need for further research.

Research in general education has investigated the experiences of novice elementary and middle school teachers as they participated in face-to-face new teacher discussion groups (Rogers & Babinski, 2002); these groups were highly structured, led by a facilitator, and based in inquiry and problem solving. Although studies have also been conducted in general education that have highlighted some of the benefits of peer coaching for beginning teachers (Harlin, 2000; Shin, Wilkins, & Ainsworth, 2006; Wilkins, Shin, & Ainsworth, 2009; Wynn & Kromrey, 2000), these works all focused on preservice educators instead of in-service, beginning teachers in their first job after earning their degree and teaching certification.

There appears to be little or no research on informal dialogues among novice music teachers acting as peers and how their interactions may be similar to mentoring interactions in their usefulness in assisting initial teachers with their common issues and struggles. In addition to giving music PLCs more attention on a research level, I offer practical suggestions for the usage of such ideas. School districts could experiment with pairing up novice music teachers for peer teaching observations and reflections on practice. While this may not be possible within one school building, administrators might consider release time for music teachers to observe and team teach with colleagues in other buildings. As part of professional development, schools could give music teachers opportunities to meet as a subject-specific PLC, within one school district or perhaps even across multiple districts. University faculty in music education could consider coordinating monthly meetings for area novice music teachers, similar to the format of a student teaching seminar, as a method of support and professional development.

Online Mentoring and Small, Music-Based Online Communities of Practice

Online mentoring is an emerging portion of the research on new teacher mentoring in the general education literature; in the music education literature, it appears to be nonexistent. However, if Conway (2006) and others in the field have suggested that traditional methods of teacher mentoring and induction are not working for first-year music teachers, then online mentoring for this population of educators could be a possibility, especially when considering the logistical challenges previously outlined such as travel among multiple school buildings and a lack of subject-specific colleagues in some school districts. University faculty, school districts, or coordinators of professional music education organizations could partner to support online mentors for music teachers; experienced teachers in choral, general, and instrumental music could be available to small groups of novices for assistance and feedback.

In a similar vein, there is little research on computer-based communities or support systems for novice music teachers. Research has been conducted on larger online communities of teachers, the subject or grade level they teach not being known (such as Hew & Hara, 2007; Hur, 2007; Hur & Brush, 2009; Schalger & Fusco, 2003) and with smaller groups of teachers or preservice educators who knew each other in a face-to-face setting before communicating virtually (Babinski, Jones, & DeWert, 2001; Dalgarno & Colgan, 2007; Edens, 2000). These studies and others in general education have reported benefits associated with participation in such online communities for teachers. Some of these benefits speak to issues of information access, such as the constant accessibility of content via the Internet (Weller, 2007) and the sharing of multiple perspectives from a variety of school environments (Schalger & Fusco, 2003). Other reported benefits have included the ability to have reflective discussions, because participants can reread online postings multiple times, have extended time for online discussions, and benefit from multiple teachers’ contributions (Dede, Ketelhut, Whitehouse, Breit, & McCloskey, 2009; Roddy, 1999), and a sense of camaraderie, and the ability to share emotions with others who understand their situations (Babinski, Jones, & DeWert, 2001; Gleaves & Walker, 2010; Hur & Brush, 2009; Klecka, Cheng, & Clift, 2004; Qian & Tao, 2005). Some researchers have explored online communities of musicians who engage in activities such as uploading their own music for feedback or commenting on various other musical artifacts (Salavuo, 2008; Waldron, 2009), but these communities focus on musical performance rather than teaching.

I suggest multiple possibilities for bringing the concept of virtual, collegial networks to the world of music education. University programs could set up such communities with music education graduates; students could even begin such collegial conversations and interactions as part of their university coursework. National professional organizations, such as NAfME, could add a discussion forum area exclusively for novice music teachers to their Web site. Veteran music teachers may wish to reach out to novices in their districts or greater geographical area via the Internet and create an online discussion board that specifically serves the needs of their community or region. Novice music teachers themselves could organize online communities with other music teacher peers for purposes of exchanging information and emotional support. However, my caution to anyone thinking about creating such a network is to give particular attention to issues of privacy and confidentiality in the online environment. Rather than setting up a Web site that anyone could access, a better alternative for secure discussions would be to use e-mail groups or invitation-only sites such as Wikispaces.

Conclusion

Support for teachers new to the profession is important and necessary. Much of the existing research on more comprehensive induction support has focused on academic areas that do not include music. Teachers of subjects such as music are underrepresented in the literature on larger issues of induction support. These alternative forms of in-person support for novice teachers, such as peer collaboration and communities of practice among beginning educators are growing within the research literature in general education, yet are not as strongly represented within the music education body of research. Such research could provide music teachers with opportunities for peer interactions and meaningful professional development that they may not otherwise have.

Novice music teachers could also benefit from increased attention to research on virtual methods of support. Smith and Israel (2010) offered policy recommendations for e-mentoring in the field of special education, stating that such support must focus on considerations specific to special education, such as entry-level teacher support with paperwork and individualized professional development. These recommendations could relate to early career music teachers and other teachers of unique subject matter, such as art and physical education as well as a means of addressing their unique professional needs. Music teachers who engage in virtual communications among a group of peers could potentially share, not only their emotions and commiserate about common issues and struggles, but also be able to share reviews of music, concert programs, field trip resources, lesson, and curriculum plans. The options for support are limitless.

New music teachers who are assisted by a mentor or other professional collaborative network may be more engaged in their teaching and may become more effective instructors, thus leading to being able to meet the needs of their students more effectively (Krueger, 1999). As society moves to an increasingly strong reliance on technology as a means of information and communication, it could benefit novice music teachers to have access to education-related, subject-specific online support systems. Therefore, it seems apparent that there is a need in the field of music education for research and practice that centers on the creation of such online communities of practice for novice music teachers. It is my hope that this examination of literature will lead to awareness of the need for a more well-rounded approach to the support of novice music teachers that can include effective mentor–mentee relationships, peer groups, face-to-face PLCs, online mentoring, and online music education communities of practice.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Achinstein

Athanases

S. Z.

(Eds.). (2006). Mentors in the making: Developing new leaders for new teachers. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Ajero

(2007). Web 2.0: How the new world wide Web is connecting music teachers and students. The American Music Teacher, 57(3), 48–49.

Babinski

L. M.

Jones

B. D.

DeWert

M. H.

(2001). The roles of facilitators and peers in online support communities for first-year teachers. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 12, 151–151. doi:10.1207/S1532768XJEPC1202_05

Ballantyne

Packer

(2004). Effectiveness of preservice music teacher education programs: Perceptions of early-career music teachers. Music Education Research, 6, 299–299. doi:10.1080/1461380042000281749

Bauer

W. I.

Daughtery

J. E.

(2001). Using the Internet to enhance music teacher education. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 11(1), 27–32. doi:10.1177/105708370101100106

Bauer

W. I.

Moehle

M. R.

(2008). A content analysis of the MENC discussion forums. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 175, 71–84.

Bell-Robertson

C. G.

(2011). Sharing emotional repertoire: A case study of an online community of practice for novice music teachers. Available from ProQuest Digital Dissertations. (AAT 3504538)

Benson

M. A.

(2008). Effective mentoring for new music teachers: An analysis of the mentoring programs for new music teachers as described in the literature. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 26(2), 42–49. doi:10.1177/8755123308317953

Blair

D. V.

(2008). Mentoring novice teachers: Developing a community of practice. Research Studies in Music Education, 30, 97–97. doi:10.1177/1321103X08097502

10.

Burkett

E. I.

(2011). A case study of issues concerning professional development for rural instrumental music teachers. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 21(1), 51–64. doi:10.1177/1057083710393152

11.

Colwell

(2005). Can we be friends? Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 166, 75–90.

12.

Conkling

S. W.

(2003). Uncovering preservice music teachers’ reflective thinking: Making sense of learning to teach. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 155, 11–23.

13.

Conway

(2007). Setting an agenda for professional development policy, practice, and research in music education. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 17(1), 56–61. doi:10.1177/10570837070170010109

14.

Conway

C. M.

(2001). Beginning music teacher perceptions of district-sponsored induction programs. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 151, 51–62.

15.

Conway

C. M.

(2003a). Ongoing professional development. In Conway

C. M.

(Ed.), Great beginnings for music teachers: Mentoring and support for new teachers (pp. 151–166). Reston, VA: MENC.

16.

Conway

C. M.

(2003b). School district-sponsored mentor programs. In Conway

C. M.

(Ed.), Great beginnings for music teachers: Mentoring and support for new teachers (pp. 69–81). Reston, VA: MENC.

17.

Conway

C. M.

(2003c). What do we know about beginning music teachers? In Conway

C. M.

(Ed.), Great beginnings for music teachers: Mentoring and support for new teachers (pp. 3–8). Reston, VA: MENC.

18.

Conway

C. M.

(2006). Navigating through induction: How a mentor can help. Music Educators Journal, 92(5), 56–60. doi:10.2307/3878504

19.

Conway

C. M.

Zerman

T. E. H.

(2004). Perceptions of an instrumental music teacher regarding mentoring, induction and the first year of teaching. Research Studies in Music Education, 22, 72–72. doi:10.1177/1321103X040220011001

20.

Dalgarno

Colgan

(2007). Supporting novice mathematics teachers’ induction in professional communities and providing innovative forms of pedagogical content knowledge development through information and communication technology. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 1051–1051. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.04.037

21.

Dede

Ketelhut

D. J.

Whitehouse

Breit

McCloskey

E. M.

(2009). A research agenda for online teacher professional development. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 8–19. doi:10.1177/0022487108327554

22.

DeLorenzo

L. C.

(1992). The perceived problems of beginning music teachers. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 113, 9–25.

23.

Edens

K. M.

(2000). Promoting communication, inquiry and reflection in an early practicum experience via an on-line discussion group. Action in Teacher Education, 22(2), 14–23. doi:10.1080/01626620.2000.10463035

24.

Fry

S. W.

(2006). A technology supported induction network for rural student teachers. The Rural Educator, 27(2), 1–10.

25.

Gleaves

Walker

(2010). Student teachers’ situated emotions: A study of how electronic communication facilitates their expression and shapes their impact on novice teacher development during practice placements. Teacher Development, 14, 139–139. doi:10.1080/13664530.2010.494498

26.

Gruenhagen

L. M.

(2008). Investigating professional development: Early childhood music teacher learning a community of practice. Available from ProQuest Digital Dissertations. (AAT 3295323)

27.

Haack

(2003). Challenges faced by beginning music teachers. In Conway

C. M.

(Ed.), Great beginnings for music teachers: Mentoring and support for new teachers (pp. 9–24). Reston, VA: MENC [now NAfME].

28.

Harlin

R. P.

(2000). Developing reflection and teaching through peer coaching. Focus on Teacher Education, 1(1), 1–10.

29.

Hew

K. K.

Hara

(2007). Empirical study of motivators and barriers of teacher online knowledge sharing. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55, 573–573. doi:10.1007/s11423-007-9049-2

30.

Hsu

(2005). Help-seeking behavior of student teachers. Educational Research, 47, 307–307. doi:10.1080/00131880500287716

31.

Hur

J. W.

(2007). Understanding teacher participation in online communities: Why do teachers want to participate in online communities of teachers? Available from ProQuest Digital Dissertations. (AAT 3278232)

32.

Hur

J. W.

Brush

T. A.

(2009). Teacher participation in online communities: Why do teachers want to participate in self-generated online communities of K–12 teachers? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41, 279–303.

33.

Jacobs

J. N.

(2008). Constructing a model for the effective mentoring of music educators. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 17(2), 60–68. doi:10.1177/1057083708317645

34.

Kepp

Mike

(2009). eMSS: An online, content focused mentoring program for secondary math and science teachers. Retrieved from http://www.newteachercenter.org/pdfs/eMSS_whitepaper.pdf

35.

Klecka

C. L.

Cheng

Clift

R. T.

(2004). Exploring the potential of electronic mentoring. Action in Teacher Education, 26(3), 2–9. doi:10.1080/01626620.2004.10463327

36.

Krueger

P. J.

(1999). New music teachers speak out on mentoring. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 8(2), 7–13. doi:10.1177/105708379900800203

37.

Krueger

P. J.

(2001). Reflections of beginning music teachers. Music Educators Journal, 88(3), 51–54. doi:10.2307/3399759

38.

Krueger

P. J.

(2003). Breaking the isolation: Beginning music teacher views on collaboration. In Conway

C. M.

(Ed.), Great beginnings for music teachers: Mentoring and support for new teachers. (pp. 91–104). Reston, VA: MENC.

39.

Madsen

C. K.

Hancock

C. B.

(2002). Support for music education: A case study of issues concerning teacher retention and attrition. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50, 6–19.

40.

Meyer

Achinstein

(1998, April). Collaborative inquiry among novice teachers as professional development: Sustaining habits of heart and mind. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.

41.

O’Malley

G. S.

(2010). Designing induction as professional learning community. Educational Forum, 74, 318–327.

42.

Pugach

M. C.

Blanton

L. P.

Correa

V. I.

McLeskey

Langley

L. K.

(2009). The role of collaboration in supporting the induction and retention of new special education teachers (NCIPP Document No. RS-2). Gainesville, FL: National Center to Inform Policy and Practice in Special Education Professional Development

43.

Qian

Tao

(2005). In-service teachers and computer mediated discussions: Ranges and purposes of reflection. Reading Horizons, 46, 115–142.

44.

Roddy

(1999). Using the Internet to unite student teaching and teacher education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 7, 257–267.

45.

Rogers

D. L.

Babinski

L. M.

(2002). From isolation to conversation: Supporting new teachers’ development. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

46.

Rust

Orland

(2001). Learning the discourse of teaching: Conversation as professional development. In Clark

C. M.

(Ed.), Talking shop: Authentic conversation and teacher learning (pp. 82–117). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

47.

Salavuo

(2008). Social media as an opportunity for pedagogical change in music education. Journal of Music, Technology & Education, 1, 121–121. doi:10.1386/jmte.1.2and3.121_1

48.

Schalger

M. S.

Fusco

(2003). Teacher professional development, technology and communities of practice: Are we putting the cart before the horse? Information Society, 19, 203–203. doi:10.1080/01972240309464

49.

Scheib

J. W.

(2006). Policy implications for teacher retention: Meeting the needs of the dual identities of arts educators. Arts Education Policy Review, 107, 5–5. doi:10.3200/AEPR.107.6.5-10

50.

Schmidt

Robbins

(2011). Looking backwards to reach forward: A strategic architecture for professional development in music education. Arts Education Policy Review, 112, 95–95. doi:10.1080/10632913.2011.546702

51.

Shin

Wilkins

Ainsworth

(2006). The nature and effectiveness of peer feedback during an early clinical experience in an elementary education program. Action in Teacher Education, 28(4), 40–52. doi:10.1080/01626620.2007.10463428

52.

Sindberg

Lipscomb

S. D.

(2005). Professional isolation and the public school music teacher. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 166, 43–56.

53.

Smith

M. V.

Haack

(2000). The long view of lifelong learning. Music Educators Journal, 87(3), 28–33. doi:10.2307/3399660

54.

Smith

S. J.

Israel

(2010). E-mentoring: Enhancing special education teacher induction. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 23(1), 30–40.

55.

Stegman

S. F.

(2007). An exploration of reflective dialogue between student teachers in music and their cooperating teachers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 55, 65–65. doi:10.1177/002242940705500106

56.

Strong

(2005). Teacher induction, mentoring and retention: A summary of the research. The New Educator, 1, 181–198.

57.

Strong

(2009). Effective teacher induction and mentoring: Assessing the evidence. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

58.

Waldron

(2009). Exploring a virtual music “community of practice”: Informal music learning on the Internet. Journal of Music, Technology & Education, 2, 97–97. doi:10.1386/jmte.2.2-3.97_1

59.

Wang

Odell

S. J.

(2002). Mentored learning to teach according to standards-based reform: A critical review. Review of Educational Research, 72, 481–481. doi:10.3102/00346543072003481

60.

Wang

Odell

S. J.

Schwille

S. A.

(2008). Effects of teacher induction on beginning teachers’ teaching: A critical review of the literature. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(2), 132–152. doi:10.1177/0022487107314002

61.

Weller

(2007). The distance from isolation: Why communities are the logical conclusion in e-learning. Computers & Education, 49, 148–148. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.015

62.

Wenger

(1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

63.

Wilkins

E. A.

Clift

R. T.

(2007). Building a network of support for new teachers. Action in Teacher Education, 28(4), 25–35. doi:10.1080/01626620.2007.10463426

64.

Wilkins

E. A.

Shin

Ainsworth

(2009). The effects of peer feedback practices with elementary education teacher candidates. Teacher Education Quarterly, 36(2), 79–93.

65.

Wood

A. L.

Stanulis

R. N.

(2009). Quality teacher induction: “Fourth-wave” (1997-2006) induction programs. The New Educator, 5, 1–23.

66.

Wynn

Kromney

(2000). Paired peer placement with peer coaching to enhance prospective teachers’ professional growth in early field experience. Action in Teacher Education, 22(2), 73–83. doi:10.1080/01626620.2000.10463041