2 / 13
69
Successes
The literature on teachers’ self-described successes or breakthroughs is negligible. Early
studies found that teachers defined success in terms of student behavior—not their own actions
or learning outcomes—and that the successes reported were affective rather than cognitive in
nature (Harootunian & Yarger, 1981). Placek (1983) articulated this as equating success with
students who are “busy, happy, and good [compliant].” (p. 54). More recently, Romano and
Gibson (2006) and Romano (2008) found beginning teachers experienced success most
frequently in classroom management and content/pedagogy.
Given the void in this literature, we explore beginning, mid-career, and veteran teachers’
perceptions of successes
and
struggles in their own teaching. We posit that a clear understanding
of how teachers conceptualize successes and struggles at different points in their careers can
serve beginning teachers especially well, and that the framing used by more experienced
colleagues who remained in the profession may be more constructive than the initial frames used
by beginning teachers who are at risk of leaving the profession.
Conceptual Framework
Teacher development theory serves as the framework for this study, locating teachers’
descriptions of successes and struggles within their life-career, job-specific development, and
expertise. Early models viewed teacher development as a relatively abbreviated process. For
example, Katz (1972) theorized that survival is the focus of the first weeks of teaching as
teachers navigate urgent needs, issues, and events. Consolidation occurs within the first
year, as
teachers begin to see a bigger picture and focus on student needs. Veenman (1984) also found
that beginning teachers frequently cope with the most immediate and basic needs, but these
patterns extend beyond the first year of teaching. Katz (1972) recognized teachers as fully
developed by year five—a year commonly identified in teacher literature as the last of the
beginning years.
More complete models, such as Huberman’s model (1989) and the Life Cycle of the
Career Teacher model (Steffy & Wolfe, 1997; Steffy, Wolfe, Pasch, & Enz, 2000), view
development as continuous from teacher preparation through retirement, where early years are a
time of learning and experimentation. Huberman’s model, however, theorizes that mid-career
teachers can face monotony, self-doubt, and frustration in their attempts to improve practice,
while, veteran teachers may become dogmatic and resistant to change as they begin to withdraw
from the profession emotionally and physically. Alternately, the Life Cycle model theorizes that
mid- and late-career teachers extend their professional roles through tutoring, substituting, or
mentorship, illustrating the potential for veteran growth. Likewise, expert-novice research
reveals that expert teachers rely on deep features (e.g., principles, beliefs) to conceptualize
problem representations, focus on student behavior rather than their own teaching, and take a
broader approach when analyzing classroom instruction (Sabers, Cushing, & Berliner, 1991).
Studies of world champion chess players reveal that it takes extensive deliberate practice
to develop expertise (de Groot, 1946/1978), with some arguing a minimum of 10 years
(Ericsson, Krampe, & Tesch-Römer, 1993). Although not all veteran teachers are expert
teachers, expert teachers may be more likely to be experienced teachers. Using this framework,