Skip Navigation

Ask a REL Response

Teacher induction mentoring programs — July 2017


Could you provide evidence-based research on teacher induction mentoring programs?


Following an established REL West research protocol, we conducted a search for research reports and descriptive study articles on evidence-based research on teacher induction mentoring programs. The sources included ERIC and other federally funded databases and organizations, research institutions, academic research databases, and general Internet search engines (for details, see the “Methods” section at the end of this memo).

We have not evaluated the quality of references and the resources provided in this response. We offer them only for your information. Also, we searched for references through the most commonly used sources of research, but the list is not comprehensive. Other relevant references and resources may exist.

Research References

Glazerman, S., Isenberg, E., Dolfin, S., Bleeker, M., Johnson, A., Grider, M., & Jacobus, M. (2010). Impacts of comprehensive teacher induction: Final results from a randomized controlled study (NCEE 2010-4027). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from

From the description: “The final report on an impact evaluation of comprehensive induction on beginning teachers 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. Key findings include:

  • There were no impacts on teacher retention rates after each of the three years of follow-up.
  • There were no impacts on teachers’ classroom practices, which were measured during teachers’ first year in the classroom.
  • For teachers offered one year of comprehensive induction, there were no impacts on student achievement in any of the teachers’ first three years in the classroom.
  • For teachers offered two years of comprehensive induction, there were no impacts on student achievement in either of the first two years. However, in the third year, there were positive impacts on student achievement, based on the sample of teachers whose students had both pre-test and post-test scores. These impacts were equivalent to moving the average student from the 50th percentile to the 54th percentile in reading and the 58th percentile in math.

The report, Impacts of Comprehensive Teacher Induction: Final Results from a Randomized Controlled Study, uses data 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.”

REL West note: See also

What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Single Study Review. (2013). WWC review of the report “Impacts of comprehensive teacher induction: Final results from a randomized controlled study.” Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from

From the description: “The 2010 study, Impacts of Comprehensive Teacher Induction: Final Results from a Randomized Controlled Study, examined the effects of a comprehensive teacher induction program for beginning teachers on teacher and student outcomes in 17 school districts across 13 states. Researchers randomly assigned 418 elementary schools with a total of 1,009 beginning teachers to either an intervention group that received the program or a business-as-usual comparison group. The program included mentoring, monthly professional development sessions, study groups with other beginning teachers, and opportunities to observe veteran teachers. In the second year of the study, researchers selected a subset of the original districts to receive a second year of the teacher induction program. In these districts, the schools that were originally assigned to receive the intervention continued to offer the intervention services for a second year to beginning teachers. Impacts after the first year of the study were based on data from all participating districts, all of which received the intervention during the first year. Impacts after the second and third years of the study were presented separately for districts receiving 1 or 2 years of the intervention. Study authors assessed the effects of the program on both teacher outcomes and student outcomes over a 3-year period. The study is a well-implemented randomized controlled trial that meets WWC evidence standards for assessing impacts on teacher retention for the entire sample at the end of year 1 of the study, and for the subset of districts that received only 1 year of the intervention at the end of years 2 and 3 of the study. The remaining analyses conducted by this study—including impacts on teacher practices, preparation, satisfaction, some retention outcomes, and student achievement—either do not meet WWC evidence standards or were deemed to be ineligible for review.”

Hong, Y., & Hong, G. (2013). Making sense of the “Zero effect” of comprehensive teacher induction programs: A mediational analysis. Washington, DC: Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “Teachers new to the profession may face various challenges and struggle with pedagogy and classroom management. They tend to be less effective in boosting student learning than their more experienced colleagues (Murnane & Phillips, 1981; Raymond, Fletcher, & Luque, 2001; Rivkin, Hanusheck, & Kain, 2001). Since the early 1980s, there has been an increasing recognition of the importance of providing induction support in forms of mentoring programs, workshops, orientation seminars, collaboration opportunities, and other support systems to new teachers in their initial years of teaching (Furtwengler, 1995). At the present time, 27 states require some forms of induction or mentoring support for new teachers, 22 states mandate completion of or participation in an induction program for advanced teaching certification, and 17 states provide dedicated funding for teacher induction. While the general goal of teacher induction is to transform a student of teaching into a competent teacher of students, many evaluations in the past have focused on program impacts on novice teacher retention and professional well-being. Only a few studies have attended to instructional improvement as outcomes (see reviews by Ingersoll & Strong, 2011; Strong, 2009; Wang, Odell, & Schwille, 2008). Most studies (Davis & Higdon, 2008; Evertson & Smithey, 2000; Stanulis & Floden, 2009; Thompson, Paek, Goe, & Ponte, 2004) have suggested that more intensive mentoring and support from university-trained mentors might be associated with a higher rate of using effective instructional practices among new teachers. Yet one study (Roehrig, Bohn, Turner, & Pressley, 2008) reported that new teachers regardless of induction intensity declined in their use of effective teaching practices over the first year. These evaluations have been mostly non-experimental or quasi-experimental with a relatively small sample size. In contrast, a large-scale randomized study funded by the U.S. Department of Education and conducted by a research team from Mathematica Policy Research (Glazerman et al., 2010) compared two prominent Comprehensive Teacher Induction (CTI) programs with standard district or school support for more than one thousand new teachers. Although teachers in the treatment group experienced more intensive, structured, and sequenced mentoring activities from trained external mentors, they exhibited surprisingly similar teaching practices as those in the control group in the spring of the first year such that a zero effect of the CTI programs was concluded. Reanalyzing data from the comprehensive teacher induction study, the authors aimed to unpack the zero effect of the CTI programs on teaching practices by closely examining the content and activities of mentoring as potential mediators of the induction program effects on teaching practices. The content of mentoring includes teaching planning and preparation, management of classroom environment, instructional content and pedagogy, and professional responsibilities. Key activities for mentees include keeping record and analysis of teaching and student learning, working with a study group of teachers, observing other teachers’ teaching, and meeting with local instructional leaders. The following questions were asked: (1) Did treatment teachers and control teachers have different experiences with mentoring content and activities? (2) Did the differences in mentoring experiences mediate the program effect on teaching practices? (3) Was receiving mentoring from external mentors in the CTI programs as effective as receiving mentoring from home-based mentors under the control condition? Preliminary analysis indicated that treatment teachers and control teachers had different experiences with mentoring content and activities. Clearly, beginning teachers assigned to the CTI programs tend to receive a higher dosage of induction content and a higher intensity of mentoring activities. Therefore, we can rule out the second explanation for the zero effect of the CTI programs given that the treatment teachers displayed an equal or higher rate of participation than did the control teachers. The authors did note that a higher level of participation rate in the treatment group apparently did not lead to superiority in teaching practices in comparison with the control group. One would wonder, had the treatment teachers participated in the CTI programs at a lower rate that becomes equal to the control teachers’ participation rate in their local induction programs, whether the teaching practices of the treatment group would become inferior to that of the control group. Tables are appended.”

Hunt, C. S. (2014). A review of school-university partnerships for successful new teacher induction. School-University Partnerships, 7(1), 35–48. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “The first few years of teaching are a critical time in the development of expert teaching. However, many universities are missing valuable opportunities to foster diversity and critical thinking by participating in the professional development of new teachers. This literature review explores research into how universities have attempted to support school districts as they work to implement more intensive forms of new teacher induction. The review demonstrates that school-university partnerships have strong potential for connecting theory to practice in meaningful ways in the first years of teaching. The author offers suggestions for implementing successful partnerships for new teacher induction and introduces questions for future research in the field. NAPDS Essentials Addressed: #2/A school-university culture committed to the preparation of future educators that embraces their active engagement in the school community; #3/Ongoing and reciprocal professional development for all participants guided by need; #4/A shared commitment to innovative and reflective practice by all participants; #8/Work by college/university faculty and P-12 faculty in formal roles across institutional settings.”

Johnson, S. M., & Kardos, S. M. (2002). Keeping new teachers in mind. Educational Leadership, 59(6), 12–16. Retrieved from and related research brief from

From the abstract: “Discusses research on new-teacher induction from the Project on Next Generation of Teachers at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Describes three types of school-based professional cultures: veteran-oriented, novice-oriented, and integrated. Emphasizes the importance of organized onsite, ongoing support for new teachers.”

Ingersoll, R. M., & Strong, M. (2011). The impact of induction and mentoring programs for beginning teachers: A critical review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 201–233. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “This review critically examines 15 empirical studies, conducted since the mid-1980s, on the effects of support, guidance, and orientation programs—collectively known as induction—for beginning teachers. Most of the studies reviewed provide empirical support for the claim that support and assistance for beginning teachers have a positive impact on three sets of outcomes: teacher commitment and retention, teacher classroom instructional practices, and student achievement. Of the studies on commitment and retention, most showed that beginning teachers who participated in induction showed positive impacts. For classroom instructional practices, the majority of studies reviewed showed that beginning teachers who participated in some kind of induction performed better at various aspects of teaching, such as keeping students on task, using effective student questioning practices, adjusting classroom activities to meet students’ interests, maintaining a positive classroom atmosphere, and demonstrating successful classroom management. For student achievement, almost all of the studies showed that students of beginning teachers who participated in induction had higher scores, or gains, on academic achievement tests. There were, however, exceptions to this overall pattern—in particular a large randomized controlled trial of induction in a sample of large, urban, low-income schools—which found some significant positive effects on student achievement but no effects on either teacher retention or teachers’ classroom practices. The review closes by attempting to reconcile these contradictory findings and by identifying gaps in the research base and relevant questions that have not been addressed and warrant further research. (Contains 1 note, 1 table and 1 figure.)”

Ingersoll, R., & Strong, M. (2012). What the research tells us about the impact of induction and mentoring programs for beginning teachers. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 111(2), 466–490. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “This chapter summarizes a comprehensive and critical review that the authors recently completed of empirical studies that evaluate the effects of induction on various outcomes. The review’s objective was to provide researchers, policy makers, and educators with a reliable and current assessment of what is known and not known about the effectiveness of teacher induction and mentoring programs. A second objective was to identify gaps in the research base and pinpoint relevant questions that have not been addressed and that warrant further research. Overall, most of the studies the authors have reviewed provide empirical support for the claim that induction for beginning teachers, and teacher mentoring programs in particular, has a positive impact. Most of the studies reviewed showed that beginning teachers who participated in some kind of induction had higher satisfaction, commitment, or retention. Likewise, for teachers’ classroom practices, most of the studies reviewed showed that beginning teachers who participated in some kind of induction performed better at various aspects of teaching, such as keeping students on task, developing workable lesson plans, using effective student questioning practices, adjusting classroom activities to meet students’ interests, maintaining a positive classroom atmosphere, and demonstrating successful classroom management. Finally, for student achievement, most of the studies reviewed showed that students of beginning teachers who participated in some kind of induction had higher scores, or gains, on academic achievement tests. (Contains 1 figure and 1 note.)”

Kono, C. D. (2012). Comprehensive teacher induction: Meeting the dual needs of principals and new teachers in rural schools. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 9(2), 129–134. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “This research project is the third in a series of research projects conducted for the purpose of assisting rural school principals create comprehensive first-year teacher induction programs. This project promotes the use of comprehensive teacher induction programs that meet both the needs of school principals, but also the social, personal, and family needs of new teachers starting their education careers in rural schools in South Dakota. The data was collected from previous teacher skills and school traits studies involving school principals and first-year teachers from across South Dakota. This report was created through the Northern State University Teacher Induction Program, a follow-up support and data collection program intended for new teachers entering education upon graduation from Northern State University in Aberdeen, South Dakota. The data collected documents trends and issues and is reported annually to Northern State University School of Education. (Contains 1 table.)”

McGlamery, S., Fluckinger, J., & Edick, N. (2006). The CADRE project: Looking at the development of beginning teachers. Educational Considerations, 33(2), 42–50. Retrieved from (see Spring 2006)

From the abstract: “The CADRE Project is a collaborative teacher induction effort between higher education and K–12 practitioners. It was designed to make a difference in the induction experience of beginning teachers. The evaluation of the CADRE project was designed to assess whether the needs of the beginning CADRE teachers were being met. In order to assess teaching success, the authors chose to observe and evaluate the beginning teachers’ teaching skill levels in their classroom settings. The research was designed to address two-research questions: (1) What are the skill levels of beginning teachers (strengths and weaknesses)? and (2) Does participation in CADRE make a difference in skill acquisition? (Contains 3 tables and 17 endnotes.)”

Smith, T. M., & Ingersoll, R. M. (2004). What are the effects of induction and mentoring on beginning teacher turnover? American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 681–714. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “In recent years there has been an increase in the number of programs offering support, guidance, and orientation for beginning teachers during the transition into their first teaching job. This study examines whether such programs—collectively known as induction—have a positive effect on the retention of beginning teachers. The data used in the analysis are from the nationally representative 1999–2000 Schools and Staffing Survey. The results indicate that beginning teachers who were provided with mentors from the same subject field and who participated in collective induction activities, such as planning and collaboration with other teachers, were less likely to move to other schools and less likely to leave the teaching occupation after their first year of teaching.”

Taranto, G. (2011). New-teacher induction 2.0. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(4), 4–15. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “The purpose of this program evaluation study was to design, implement, and evaluate the effectiveness of incorporating an online learning community as part of a comprehensive new-teacher induction program. The researcher, who serves as the middle school principal and new induction coordinator for the school district, used a mixed-method approach to collect and analyze the results of the study. First, the researcher created an online learning community model based on the results of a comprehensive review of literature and a previous year’s pilot study. Next, the researcher implemented an online learning community in the form of a wiki. The study evaluated the implementation of the model through the perspectives of all the participants: new teachers and contributors (veteran teachers, principals, central office administrators, and professors from schools of education). The data (pre- and postsurveys, questionnaires, and focus-group sessions) revealed positive results for the new induction online learning community format. (Contains 9 tables and 3 figures.)”

Thompson, M., Goe, L., Paek, P., & Ponte, E. (2004). Study of the impact of the California formative assessment and support system for teachers, Report 1: Beginning teachers’ engagement with BTSA/CFASST (Research Report, ETS RR-04-30). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “This report is the first of four that stem from a study of The Impact of Approved Induction Programs on Student Learning (IAIPSL), conducted by Educational Testing Service (ETS) and funded by the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CCTC). The IAIPSL study began in July 2002 and continued through April 2004. The purpose of the study is to investigate the implementation and impact of the California Formative Assessment and Support System for Teachers (CFASST), within the context of the Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment program (BTSA). The study addresses three research questions: (1) What is the impact of BTSA/CFASST on the teaching effectiveness of beginning teachers who participate in the program? (2) What is the impact of BTSA/CFASST on the learning of the students of beginning teachers who participate in the program? (3) What are the features of successful BTSA/CFASST programs that make them more effective in impacting beginning teachers’ growth as teachers? In addition, the IAIPSL study provides the grist for a ‘meta-evaluation’ in which the study is examined for insights into the processes and validity of conducting evaluation research on statewide induction programs such as BTSA/CFASST. This report focuses on what has been learned about how BTSA/CFASST is being implemented and experienced at the level of the beginning teacher. The report presents and analyzes findings from two main data sources: a written questionnaire and follow-up telephone interviews with BTSA/CFASST ‘graduates.’ Other reports in the series present the methods and findings of other phases of data collection and analysis that comprise the larger study.”

Waterman, S., & He, Y. (2011). Effects of mentoring programs on new teacher retention: A literature review. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 19(2), 139–156. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “Building upon previous literature reviews, this article highlights research and evaluation efforts regarding the effectiveness of mentoring programs for new teacher retention in the USA since 2005. Through the analysis of various mentoring program components, different research methods used, and major findings from these studies, we discuss the non-linearity and complexity of both the mentoring process itself and the study of mentoring on new teacher retention. Based on our review, we offer recommendations for researchers and decision-makers to enhance the quality of such studies and maximize the use of the findings in improving mentoring programs and enhancing teacher retention. (Contains 3 tables.)”

Wechsler, M. E., Caspary, K., Humphrey, D. C., & Matsko, K. K. (2012). Examining the effects of new teacher induction. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 111(2), 387–416. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “The objective of this research is to explore comprehensively the effect of induction on new teachers. Through a mixed-method design, the authors examine both the inputs of induction (i.e., the types of support provided for new teachers, its content, and frequency) and a variety of outcomes (i.e., teacher efficacy, teacher-reported growth, teacher retention, and student achievement). The authors also pay particular attention to the school context in which new teachers teach because their previous research identified school context as an important factor in induction supports and outcomes (Wechsler, Caspary, & Humphrey, 2008). The focus for this research is the state-funded induction programs in Illinois. In 2006, Illinois established the State-Funded Mentoring and Induction Program, funding 10 pilot programs to provide targeted support to first- and second-year teachers. Since then, the state has supported 63 new teacher induction programs (funded by 67 individual grants) that collectively serve more than 4,500 first- and second-year teachers in over 1,500 schools statewide (Illinois New Teacher Collaborative, 2010). A variety of organizations, including school districts, regional offices of education, colleges and universities, and other professional development organizations operate these induction programs. The programs in Illinois provide a package of supports for new teachers. This research strongly suggests that teacher induction makes important contributions to new teachers’ sense of efficacy and their professional growth. However, this research did not reveal a link between induction and improved teacher retention or between induction and student achievement. Further, the influence of school context was ubiquitous. (Contains 1 table and 10 notes.)”

What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Intervention Report. (2015). New teacher center induction model. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from

From the description: “The New Teacher Center (NTC) Induction Model is a comprehensive and systemic approach to support beginning teachers (i.e., teachers new to the profession). The induction model aims to accelerate the effectiveness of beginning teachers at increasing student learning by providing one-on-one mentoring and professional development in a supportive school environment. The NTC works with school districts and state departments of education to design, develop, and implement induction programs that are aligned with both district priorities and NTC standards.”

Other Relevant Resources

Bastian, K. C., & Marks, J. T. (2017). Connecting teacher preparation to teacher induction: Outcomes for beginning teachers in a university-based support program in low-performing schools. American Educational Research Journal, 54(2), 360–394. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “Given concerns with the performance and attrition of novice teachers, North Carolina allocated $7.7 million from Race to the Top to create the New Teacher Support Program (NTSP), an induction model developed and implemented by the state’s public university system and targeted at low-performing schools. In this study, we assess the associations between participation in the university-based program and the performance and retention of novice teachers. Overall, NTSP teachers were more likely to return to the same school. Outcomes varied by NTSP region, cohort, and dosage, with positive performance and retention results for teachers in the region and cohort with the most intensive participation and teachers receiving more coaching. These findings contribute to efforts to develop and retain teachers.”

Bullough, R. V. (2012). Mentoring and new teacher induction in the United States: A review and analysis of current practices. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 20(1), 57–74. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “In this article, current practices were reviewed in mentoring and induction across three large states—New York, Texas, and California—and one small state, Utah. Patterns and trends are described in the United States, program results and evolving views of mentoring are discussed, gaps in the research literature are identified, and the future of mentoring is pondered.”

Carver, C. L., & Feiman-Nemser, S. (2009). Using policy to improve teacher induction: Critical elements and missing pieces. Educational Policy, 23(2), 295–328. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “To understand the relationship between induction policies, programs, and practices, we conducted case studies of three long-standing induction programs. Drawing on interviews, observations, and policy documents, we asked the following: (a) What policy tools operate in these contexts, and how do they effect local induction practices? (b) What can we learn about the relationship between induction policy and practice, including its influence on mentors and work? Our analysis finds that how the problem of induction is defined shapes the nature and duration of support offered and the programmatic tools and resources provided. Our analysis further shows that mentoring emerged the favored policy instrument, although provisions for mentor training varied considerably. To support the kind of teaching demanded by today’s reforms, beginning teachers will need mentors who are skilled in helping them learn in and from practice. Consequently, induction policy will need to focus attention equally on new teachers and their mentors. (Contains 10 notes and 3 tables.)”

Freiberg, H. J. (2002). Essential skills for new teachers. Educational Leadership, 59(6), 56–60. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “Describes professional development for new teachers based on three categories of research-based instructional strategies: organizing, including planning, advance work, and classroom management; instructing, more student-centered than teacher-centered; and assessing, both student assessment and self-assessment.”

Helms-Lorenz, M., van de Grift, W., & Maulana, R. (2016). Longitudinal effects of induction on teaching skills and attrition rates of beginning teachers. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 27(2), 178–204. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “The teaching profession faces a shortage as well as a decline of teaching skills. A possible way to mitigate this is to implement evidence-based induction arrangements. Seventy-one schools with 338 beginning secondary education teachers were randomly allocated to an experimental or a control group. The experimental schools used induction arrangements; the authors measured the effects of these arrangements by using repeated lesson observations and by comparing the rates at which beginners in the control and experimental groups left the teaching profession. Three years later, 14% of the control group and 12% of the experimental group had left. Leaving the profession could be explained by a lack of certification and low initial teaching skill levels. The experimental group exhibited greater improvement in teaching skills compared to the control group. Workload reduction influenced the skill level negatively, and coaching and observing had a strong positive influence on the skill level in Year 3.”

Huling, L., Resta, V., & Yeargain, P. (2012). Supporting and retaining novice teachers. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 48(3), 140–143. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “Novice teacher attrition has long been a concern among educators and policy makers who have responded with various types of induction and mentoring programs and increased efforts to recruit more teachers. Yet, these efforts have not created the stable work force needed to implement school reform efforts. The school staffing challenge is further compounded by the fact that more than 50 percent of U.S. teachers and principals are Baby Boomers who are expected to retire soon. These school staffing challenges have been on the horizon for a number of years and, in response, teacher educators in the Texas State University System have implemented and evaluated an innovative induction support model designed to increase teacher retention and to capitalize on the expertise of newly retired master teachers. The Novice Teacher Induction Program (NTIP) was launched in 2002, and researchers have since tracked three cohorts of program participants (a total of 954 new teachers) into their fifth year of teaching. Retention research was completed in 2009, and results indicate that program participants have remained in the profession at higher rates than nonparticipants. Furthermore, reflections from both novice teachers and mentor teachers indicate that they not only greatly valued the experience as it was occurring, but also have continued to recognize its merits in subsequent years. Based on these research findings, NTIP is proving to be a promising induction support model that has great potential for use in other school districts across the nation. (Contains 3 tables and 1 figure.)”

Kelley, L. M. (2004). Why induction matters. Journal of Teacher Education, 55(5), 438–448. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “Retention of a competent teaching force is a growing concern among the nation’s educators and policy makers. Providing new teachers with quality induction programs may mitigate significant teacher attrition and teacher staffing issues now facing many school districts in the United States. This article reports positive results in the long-term retention of novice teachers who participated in an induction partnership jointly administered by the University of Colorado and six school districts. The study tracks 10 cohorts of inductees into their 5th year of teaching and researches components of the program that impact retention. The article also describes program characteristics—initially developed from prior research and refined by data from ongoing program evaluations—that have proven effective in raising teacher competence and retention rates. Finally, the author suggests how this induction research might inform the decisions of local and national policy makers.”

Spooner-Lane, R. (2017). Mentoring beginning teachers in primary schools: Research review. Professional Development in Education, 43(2), 253–273. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “While mentoring programmes have proven to be successful in reducing attrition and improving teaching ability in beginning teachers, there remains a lack of research delineating the key components of effective mentoring programmes in primary education. This integrative research review examines empirical studies conducted since 2000 on the nature and effectiveness of mentoring programmes for beginning teachers in primary school. The sample comprised 10 articles. The research literature is summarised to provide greater clarity about the features of mentoring programmes and their corresponding outcomes. This review calls attention to the need for research studies to provide a clear definition of mentoring and how it may be distinguished from induction so that the impact of mentoring can be disentangled from that of induction. It also highlights limited research that currently exists on the effects of mentoring in a primary school setting. Implications for conducting rigorous studies investigating the outcomes of mentoring for primary beginning teachers are discussed.”

Wang, J., 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. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “Drawing on literature since 1997, this review explores the effects of teacher induction on beginning teachers’ conceptions and practice of teaching, and it identifies three approaches to understanding such effects, as found in the literature. The first approach addresses the assumed effects of teacher induction components on beginning teachers’ teaching using theoretical assumptions as a base. The second approach analyzes the effects through teachers’ self-reports. The third explores the effects of using multiple data sources. Although teacher induction affects beginning teachers’ ideas about teaching, few studies capture its effects on teaching practice and student achievement. Thus, this review suggests directions for future research. (Contains 1 note.)”

Wayne, A. J. (2012). Key lessons about induction for policy makers and researchers. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 111(2), 491–498. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “The purpose of this chapter is to digest the core chapters of this volume, which draws together some of the most sophisticated thinking on new teacher induction from the last decade. This chapter attends to five key understandings about induction programs, including their context, design, implementation, and outcomes. These understandings emerge as highly relevant to those who design induction programs as well as researchers as they continue to build the knowledge base on teacher induction.”

Wiebke, K., & Bardin, J. (2009). New teacher support: A comprehensive induction program can increase teacher retention and improve performance. Journal of Staff Development, 30(1), 34–36. Retrieved from

From the abstract: “New teachers need help. From day one, new teachers, largely on their own, are responsible for running a classroom and ensuring student learning, as well as fulfilling administrative requirements. Little wonder that 14% of new teachers leave by the end of their first year, 33% leave within three years, and almost 50% leave in five years (Ingersoll, 2003). Teachers cite lack of support and poor working conditions as primary factors. The Arizona K-12 Center, which provides professional development—including new teacher support—throughout Arizona, has studied the topic extensively in order to develop best practices for its programs. This has been especially relevant for the Arizona Master Teacher Mentor Program, which is designed to reduce new teacher attrition and improve performance. In this article, the authors share what they have learned about comprehensive induction programs.”

Additional Organizations to Consult

Center for the Future of Teaching & Learning –

From the website: “The Center for the Future of Teaching & Learning at WestEd advances teacher growth and innovation to improve student success, building a brighter future for all learners.”

Center on Great Teachers and Leaders –

From the website: “The Center on Great Teachers and Leaders (GTL Center) is dedicated to supporting state education leaders in their efforts to grow, respect, and retain great teachers and leaders for all students. The GTL Center continues the work of the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality (TQ Center) and expands its focus to provide technical assistance and online resources designed to build systems that:

  • Support the implementation of college and career standards.
  • Ensure the equitable access of effective teachers and leaders.
  • Recruit, retain, reward, and support effective educators.
  • Develop coherent human capital management systems.
  • Create safe academic environments that increase student learning through positive behavior management and appropriate discipline.
  • Use data to guide professional development and improve instruction.”

New Teacher Center –

From the website: “New Teacher Center’s mission is to improve student learning by accelerating the effectiveness of new teachers, experienced teachers and school leaders. Our mission is supported with generous contributions from a number of philanthropic organizations.”

The New Teacher Project –

From the website:TNTP’s mission is to end the injustice of educational inequality by providing excellent teachers to the students who need them most and by advancing policies and practices that ensure effective teaching in every classroom.”


Keywords and Search Strings

The following keywords and search strings were used to search the reference databases and other sources:

Teacher induction mentoring programs; beginning teachers and mentoring programs

Databases and Resources

We searched ERIC for relevant resources. ERIC is a free online library of more than 1.6 million citations of education research sponsored by the Institute of Education Sciences. Additionally, we searched Google Scholar and PsychInfo.

Reference Search and Selection Criteria

When we were searching and reviewing resources, we considered the following criteria:

  • Date of the Publication: References and resources published for the last 15 years, from 2002 to present, were included in the search and review.
  • Search Priorities of Reference Sources: Search priority is given to study reports, briefs, and other documents that are published and/or reviewed by IES and other federal or federally funded organizations and academic databases, including ERIC, EBSCO databases, JSTOR database, PsychInfo, PsychArticle, and Google Scholar.
  • Methodology: The following methods/priorities/considerations were given in the review and selection of the references: (a) study types—randomized controlled trials, quasi-experiments, surveys, descriptive data analyses, literature reviews, policy briefs, etc., generally in that order; (b) target population, samples (representativeness of the target population, sample size, volunteered or randomly selected, etc.), study duration, etc.; and (c) limitations, generalizability of the findings and conclusions, etc.

This memorandum is one in a series of quick-turnaround responses to specific questions posed by educational stakeholders in the West Region (Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah), which is served by the Regional Educational Laboratory West at WestEd. This memorandum was prepared by REL West under a contract with the U.S. Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences (IES), Contract ED-IES-17-C-00014524, administered by WestEd. Its content does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of IES or the U.S. Department of Education nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.