Questionnaire for Beginning Teachers and Questionnaire for Mentor Teachers

Abstract

The Questionnaire for Beginning Teachers and the Questionnaire for Mentor Teachers are parallel instruments developed in 1991 by Reiman and Edelfelt. These scales were specifically designed to assess the effectiveness and impact of long-term mentor training programs, particularly those emphasizing developmental supervision, within an educational context. A primary goal of the research was to evaluate the degree to which the objectives of the North Carolina Certification Program were being successfully implemented in the field. By comparing the perceptions of both novice and experienced educators, the questionnaires utilized a discrepancy model to identify areas of misalignment in the mentoring experience.

Keywords

Beginning teachers, mentor teachers, developmental supervision, teacher training, North Carolina Certification Program, school-based mentoring, teacher performance, professional development, educator assessment.

Authors

Reiman, A. J., and Edelfelt, R. A.

Purpose

The core purpose of these parallel questionnaires was twofold: first, to empirically investigate the influence of specialized, long-term mentor training on the practices and perceptions of both mentors and the beginning teachers they supported. This training was anchored in the principles of developmental supervision, suggesting a differentiated approach to support based on the novice teacher’s stage of growth.

Second, the instruments served as a mechanism for evaluating the efficacy of state-level policy implementation. Specifically, they sought to measure the extent to which the intended goals and operational procedures of the North Carolina Certification Program were being realized on the ground. The comparison between the two respondent groups (mentors and beginning teachers) provided crucial insight into the functional reality of the mentoring relationship and the institutional support provided to new educators.

Construct

The primary construct measured by these instruments is the operational reality of the school-based mentoring relationship, specifically focusing on the alignment (or discrepancy) between the expectations and experiences of the mentor teacher and the beginning teacher. The questionnaires assess several dimensions critical to successful induction, including professional support, instructional guidance, personal well-being, involvement in school policy, use of educational technology, and reflective practice.

The instruments utilize a discrepancy model framework, which is designed not merely to measure the presence of supportive conditions, but to highlight significant gaps between the perceived existence of a condition (as reported by the mentor) and the perceived effectiveness or availability of that condition (as reported by the beginning teacher). Key areas of focus include the provision of adequate planning time, assistance with classroom management, opportunities for professional reflection, and the overall school climate supporting novice educators.

Validity

Specific quantitative validity metrics (such as construct validity or criterion validity coefficients) were not detailed in the provided source material. However, the initial item generation process suggests strong content validity. The questionnaire items were derived directly from themes and ideas explored during extensive interview techniques in an earlier, foundational study. This approach ensures that the items reflect the authentic concerns, challenges, and realities faced by both mentors and beginning teachers within the specific context of the North Carolina educational system.

Reliability

The provided source material does not contain specific information regarding the reliability estimates (such as internal consistency measures like Cronbach’s alpha) for either the Questionnaire for Beginning Teachers or the Questionnaire for Mentor Teachers. The methodology focused heavily on capturing qualitative differences through a discrepancy model analysis of responses from a limited sample size.

Factor Analysis

The source documentation does not report the execution or results of a formal factor analysis. The questionnaires appear to function as comprehensive indices covering various aspects of the mentoring relationship and the induction experience, with items grouped thematically (e.g., support, consultation, challenge, reflection) rather than empirically derived factors. The analysis method centered on identifying and critically analyzing items showing the largest discrepancy between the two respondent groups.

Instrument

Test Type: Research Questionnaire / Perceptual Survey (Parallel Forms)

Format: Self-report rating scale using a 4-point Likert-type scale.

Language Available: English

Population Group: Educators involved in induction and mentoring programs.

Age Group: Adult (Professionals)

Population Details: The initial sample included 22 mentor teachers and 16 beginning teachers participating in the North Carolina Certification Program.

Test Methodology: The instruments employ a discrepancy model. Respondents indicate the degree to which a condition is operative in their situation using a four-point scale. Items with the greatest disparity between mentor and beginning teacher responses are highlighted for critical analysis and interpretation regarding the effectiveness of the mentoring program.

Keywords

Discrepancy model, school climate, instructional support, professional reflection, teacher induction, North Carolina, ERIC ED 329 519, teacher certification, educational research.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in the source material.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in the source material.

Correspondence Address: North Carolina State University (Affiliation at time of publication).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 1991

Permissions: The original report is publicly available through the ERIC (Educational Resources Information Center) system, suggesting it is intended for academic research use. Researchers should cite the original source for utilization.

Fee: Not applicable for academic research using the instrument items published in the report.

Reference’s

Reiman, A. J., and Edelfelt, R. A. (1991). The opinions of mentors and beginning teachers. Research Report, North Carolina State University. ERIC ED 329 519.

The original PDF report can be downloaded via the ERIC database using the identifier: ERIC ED 329 519.

A related foundational study referenced is: School-based mentoring: Untangling the tensions between theory and practice. Research Report 90–7, North Carolina State University.

Items of the Questionnaire for Beginning Teachers and Questionnaire for Mentor Teachers

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Scoring: Never or hardly ever = 1; Sometimes = 2; Frequently = 3; and Always or almost always = 4.

Questionnaire for Beginning Teachers

1. I have had adequate time to plan.
2. My mentor provided assistance with classroom management.
3. My mentor provided help with instructional concerns.
4. My mentor provided assistance with personal concerns.
5. I received help from the district office on salary and certification questions.
6. My mentor was in my classroom.
7. I was receptive to criticism.
8. Feedback from classroom observations was helpful.
9. My teaching assignment was realistic for a beginner.
10. I discussed all aspects of teaching with my mentor.
11. My mentor helped me keep current professionally.
12. I had opportunities to talk with other novice teachers.
13. I got help from colleagues.
14. I sought feedback from students.
15. There was time to reflect on my teaching.
16. I got adequate clerical support.
17. I found satisfaction in teaching.
18. Professional development opportunities were provided.
19. I have been helped to develop my own teaching style.
20. I followed the textbook in my teaching.
21. I have been helped to develop a repertoire of teaching strategies.
22. I felt a part of the school community.
23. Teaching included mundane duties.
24. The materials I needed for teaching were available.
25. I got help and encouragement from my principal.
26. I was assessed by administration on the Teacher Performance Appraisal Instrument.
27. The climate in my school supported a good learning environment for students.
28. The climate in our school supported a good learning environment for me as a beginning teacher.
29. I have thought that I would have liked to have been involved in the selection of my mentor.
30. I had opportunities to visit and observe exemplary teachers.
31. I had opportunities to read and to review educational research and theory with my mentor.
32. My mentor is empathic.
33. My mentor can describe teaching concepts in a way that is understandable.
34. My mentor has acted on my behalf.
35. I participated in decisions on school policy.
36. Teaching was what I thought it would be.
37. I think I will be teaching five years from now.
38. I felt pressured to teach in certain ways.
39. We used technology to great advantage in our school.
40. There were opportunities to exchange ideas with colleagues.
41. Students were responsive to the way I taught.
42. Motivating students was very difficult.
43. Classroom management was a problem for me.
44. I communicated with parents.
45. Our school functioned in an efficient and productive manner.
46. The rules and requirements in our school were reasonable.

Questionnaire for Mentor Teachers

I have enough time to work with my ICT.

I confer with my ICT.

I make formal observations of my ICT.

I make informal observations of my ICT.

I visit my ICT’s classroom.

I consult with my ICT on

• discipline.
• classroom management.
• school routines.
• the content being taught.
• changing the way teachers and students work together.
• finding materials.
• selecting materials.
• making materials.
• developing curriculum.
• skills in questioning.
• cooperative learning.
• personal concerns.

I support my ICT in

• maintaining his or her well-being.
• fostering self-evaluation. increasing student self-direction.
• and decision making.
• individualizing instruction.
• finding effective ways to group.
• students for learning.

I help my ICT understand

• the community.
• the goals of school.
• different cultures, races, and lifestyles.
• democratic values as they apply in school.
• instructional theory and research.
• dialects and language.
• usage.
• the issues in promotion and retention.
• the initial certification program
• . managing time.
• school policy.
• school district policy.

I assist my ICT with

• identifying student needs.
• identifying student interests.
• motivating students.
• teaching basic skills.
• planning lessons to achieve.
• measurable learning outcomes.
• working with the high-risk child.
• working with exceptional children.
• developing critical thinking.
• employing democratic values.
• fostering problem solving.
• helping students help each other.
• developing homework assignments.
• evaluating student learning.
• designing teacher-made tests.
• interpreting standardized test scores.
• reporting student achievement.
• communicating with parents.
• relating local issues to the curriculum.
• planning professional development.

I challenge my ICT to

• be an active listener.
• employ positive reinforcement.
• analyze his or her teaching.
• reflect on teaching.
• encourage original expression.
• evaluate his or her teaching.
• use technology.
• use computers.
• develop learning centers.
• document student learning.
• stay current professionally.
• promote equal opportunity.

I encourage ICT reflection through

• conferences.
• journal writing.
• audiotaping.
• videotaping.

I have been able to use the knowledge and techniques learned in mentor training. I do demonstration teaching.

I use developmental theory in my work with my ICT.

I use the research of Bruce Joyce in my work with my ICT.

I vary the amount of structure employed in working with my ICT.