Mentors report on their own mentoring practices

Implementing an Australian National Curriculum will require targeting both teachers and preservice teachers. Classroom teachers in their roles as mentors are well situated for developing preservice teachers. This mixed-method study presents mentors’ reports on their mentoring of primary preservice teachers (mentees) in mathematics (n=43) and science (n=29). Mentors claimed they mentored the teaching of mathematics more than the teaching of science; 20% or more indicated they did not provide mentoring practices for 25 out of 34 survey items in the science and 9 out of 34 items in the mathematics. Mentors also claimed that professional development on effective mentoring can enhance their skills. Implementing an Australian National Curriculum necessitates professional development for mentors on effective mentoring practices in order to increase the quality and quantity of mentoring for enhancing preservice teachers’ practices. The last attempt at implementing a national curriculum failed in the 1990s largely because it was not followed through with the enactors of reform (Collins, 1994; Ellerton & Clements, 1994). From personal experience as a principal of a NSW school at the time, the national curriculum documents arrived in schools and were left on shelves. There was no professional development provided. In the current era, teachers and preservice teachers require development to ensure the Australian National Curriculum is implemented according to its documentation. Importantly, where teachers and preservice teachers meet becomes a rich environment for pedagogical discussions about new developments that can further advance the implementation of national agendas. Supporting the need for an “Education Revolution”, as part of the $42 billion stimulus package (Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, 2010), is the list of critical reviews into Australian education over the last decade or more (see Nelson, 2002; Ramsey, 2000). Most reviews highlight the necessity to improve Australia’s education system (e.g., Bradley, Noonan, Nugent, & Scales, 2008; Masters, 2009). Many reviews focus specifically on teacher education within school settings and tertiary education for those about to enter the profession (e.g., Bradley et al., 2008; House of Representatives Standing Committee on Educational and Vocational Training [HRSCEVT], 2007). Indeed, the latest results from NAPLAN (2009) and the Queensland Premier’s Green Paper (Department of Education and Training, 2010) further emphasise the need for educational reform. The Green Paper highlights the need to improve the quality of teaching, as the “quality of this training and support can impact on student learning. Bad experiences can mean that potentially talented teachers leave early in their careers” (p. 19). Surprisingly, this paper does not mention mentoring as a way to facilitate the development of preservice teachers. There are only two ways to reform an education system, namely through inservice education of existing teachers and preservice teacher education. An education revolution will need to be enacted by teachers and preservice teachers if change is to filter throughout a Australian Journal of Teacher Education Vol 35, 7, November 2010 31 system. In addition, the Australian National Curriculum is intended as part of the education revolution fabric to connect Australian states and territories more cohesively (Australian Government, 2008). This uniformity is also intended as a way for education to be more accountable across states and territories, where students who graduate in one location can be measured at the same educational standards as any other student in Australia. The National Curriculum Board has provided many documents in a consultative manner towards developing an Australian Curriculum across the range of subject areas (e.g., English, mathematics, science, and history). It also advises that there will be “sufficient flexibility and support so that educators can adapt its contents and processes according to their students’ needs” (National Curriculum Board, 2008, p. 5). However, to implement the Australian Curriculum will require targeting the key enactors of such reforms, viz: teachers and preservice teachers. Most importantly will be the dialogue that occurs between these two parties to gather cohesiveness. Consequently, mentoring is where these two enacting parties (preservice teachers and teachers) meet within school settings. Indeed, classroom teachers in their roles as mentors have a significant role to play for developing preservice teachers, where approximately one sixth of the time allocated in a 32-unit degree is held within the school setting. Preservice Inservice Figure 1. Enactors of educational reform It appeared that the enactors of reform were not supported sufficiently with professional development in the 1990s attempt at a national curriculum (Marsh, 1994). Furthermore, mentormentee interactions were not considered in this reformation. Teachers would need to develop their practices in line with current documents in order to dialogue with mentees. Hence, a learning community could come together through purposeful discussions around new innovations such as the Australian Curriculum. Teaching is an interpersonal, emotional and social profession. Similarly, mentoring requires “real-time” interactions, and although 21 Century technologies may be used to support mentoring (e.g., Maxwell, Harrington, & Smith, 2010), the personal relationship between the mentor and mentee and timely interventions are pivotal to the mentoring process (e.g., Ganser, 1996). To have an understanding of how mentors would operate in this new endeavour requires investigation of how they have worked with preservice teachers (mentees) in the past. Recognising mentoring patterns, gaps, and affirmative actions can assist to plan more effectively for mentors’ involvement in curriculum reform. The literature has grown significantly in the area of mentoring with journals dedicated to such works (e.g., Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning; International Journal of Mentoring & Coaching), and empirical evidence has been gathered to present effective mentoring practices for guiding a preservice teacher’s development. There is value in mentoring about school culture and infrastructure, which includes knowledge about the school, staff, wider M E N T O R I N G Australian Journal of Teacher Education Vol 35, 7, November 2010 32 community, codes of conduct, emergency operations, and information about school traditions and procedures; however this study focuses on classroom practices and mentoring for effective teaching. A five-factor model of mentoring for effective teaching has previously been identified, namely, Personal Attributes, System Requirements, Pedagogical Knowledge, Modelling, and Feedback (Hudson, 2007, Figure 2). There are mentoring attributes and practices associated with each factor, which have been justified statistically with empirical evidence in previous works (e.g., see Hudson, 2007, Hudson, Skamp, & Brooks, 2005); these attributes and practices are summarised as follows. Figure 2. Mentoring Model Personal Attributes: This includes being supportive of the mentee, comfortable in talking about teaching practices and attentive listening to the mentee. The mentor’s personal attributes are used to encourage the mentee’s reflection on practices, and instil confidence and positive attitudes in the mentee. System Requirements: In its simplest form, the mentor needs to articulate the aims, policies, and curricula required by an education system. However, the complexities for implementing system requirements may be noted in the pedagogical knowledge mentors need to articulate for effective teaching. Pedagogical Knowledge: Effective mentors articulate how to plan for teaching; they timetable or schedule lessons for the mentee. Preparation for teaching needs to be discussed, particularly with the location and use of resources. Teaching strategies are key to effective lesson delivery for which an effective mentor can provide experienced perspectives. A mentor needs to check on the mentee’s content knowledge to ensure it is in keeping with the system requirements and appropriate to the grade level. There are incidental problems that arise during lessons for which the mentor can assist in explaining how to problem solve. Classroom management strategies, including managing student behaviour must be discussed with the mentee, especially as the mentor has insight into the various student personalities and behavioural traits. Effective teaching requires astute questioning skills for which a mentor can discuss higher and lower-order questions along with distributing the questions in equitable ways. Lessons have a structure and so an effective mentor can discuss the implementation processes (e.g., ensuring key learnings or concepts are apparent in the introduction, body, conclusion of a lesson). Mentors can provide pedagogical knowledge about assessment and also viewpoints about effective teaching practices that link curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment. Modelling: The mentor’s enthusiasm as a teacher can present desirable teaching traits. Importantly, the teacher-student relationship is central to teaching and demonstrating a positive rapport with students can show the mentee how these behaviours can facilitate learning. The mentor also needs to model appropriate classroom language suitable for student Australian Journal of Teacher Education Vol 35, 7, November 2010 33 learning, teaching (if not what to do what not to do), effective teaching, classroom management, hands-on lessons, and well-designed lessons. Feedback: Effective mentors articulate expectations and provide advice to the mentee, they review lesson plans, observe the mentee teach, provide oral and written feedback, and further feedback on the mentee’s evaluation of their teaching and the le