The induction year is the most formative period in a teacher’s career. It is important to provide a strong foundation or professional base at this time of greatest receptiveness and willingness to learn and develop (Flores, 2007). Yet, across the world, the first year as a teacher is seen as very difficult (Jokinen et al, 2012; Long, et al, 2012). Research chronicles the high wastage rates of new teachers especially in schools serving high-poverty communities  (Wechsler, et al, 2010).

England has had Induction policy regulations for thirteen years. Empirical research evaluating the impact of the first two years of the policy 1999-2001 (Bubb et al, 2002) showed that it was largely successful. Many headteachers and induction tutors considered that the structure of induction had accelerated the progress of their new teachers, enabling them to get to grips with aspects of teaching earlier than previously. It had also raised expectations of what should be achieved in the first year of teaching. 

This paper will investigate the impact of induction experiences on new teachers in an inner London local authority over the last thirteen years, asking:

 Which parts of the induction regulations are being complied with and which are proving most problematic? 

What is the impact of induction on new teachers and schools?

 It will consider whether the structure of induction helps both the strongest and the weakest new staff to become effective teachers who make a positive impact on their students. As such, this paper will be of importance in understanding the issues related to the impact of induction in the first year of teaching.

Bubb, S., Earley, P. & Totterdell, M. (2005) ‘Accountability and responsibility: ‘Rogue’ school leaders and the induction of new teachers in England’, The Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 31, no. 2, pp251-268. Bubb, S., Heilbronn, R., Jones, C., Totterdell, M. & Bailey, M. (2002) Improving Induction: research based best practice, London: Routledge. Flores, M. (2007). 'Looking at Induction of Beginning Teachers in Portugal: Meanings and Paradoxes'. Professional Inductions of Teachers in Europe and Elsewhere, 236. Fransson, G. (2010). 'Mentors assessing mentees? An overview and analyses of the mentorship role concerning newly qualified teachers'. European Journal of Teacher Education, 33 (4), 375-390. Jensen, B., Sandoval-Hernández, A., Knoll, S. and Gonzalez, E. J. (2012). The Experience of New Teachers: Results from TALIS 2008. Paris: OECD Publishing. Jokinen, H., Heikkinen, H. L. T. and Morberg, Å. (2012). 'The Induction Phase as a Critical Transition for Newly Qualified Teachers'. In P. Tynjälä, M.-L. Stenström and M. Saarnivaara (Eds), Transitions and Transformations in Learning and Education (pp. 169): Springer. Killeavy, M. and Moloney, A. (2010). 'Reflection in a social space: Can blogging support reflective practice for beginning teachers?'. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26 (4), 1070-1076. Long, J. S., McKenzie-Robblee, S., Schaefer, L., Steeves, P., Wnuk, S., Pinnegar, E. and Clandinin, D. J. (2012). 'Literature Review on Induction and Mentoring Related to Early Career Teacher Attrition and Retention'. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 20 (1), 7-26. Musset, P. (2010). 'Initial Teacher Education and Continuing Training Policies in a Comparative Perspective: Current Practices in OECD Countries and a Literature Review on Potential Effects'. OECD Education Working Papers. Schleicher, A. (2011). Building a High-Quality Teaching Profession: Lessons from Around the World. Paris: OECD Publishing. Wechsler, M., Caspary, K., Humphrey, D. and Matsko, K. (2010). Examining the Effects of New Teacher Induction: Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.