Scenarios of Mentor Education in Romania – Towards Improving Teacher Induction

Mihaela Stingu; Eve Eisenschmidt; Romiță Iucu

doi:10.26529/cepsj.65

Mihaela Stingu
Eve Eisenschmidt
Romiță Iucu

Keywords: induction mentors, novice teachers, policy scenarios

Abstract

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.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

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.