- Email: [email protected]
Repositioning mentoring as educative: Examining missed opportunities for professional learning
Teaching and Teacher Education 68 (2017) 127e133
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Teaching and Teacher Education journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tate
Repositioning mentoring as educative: Examining missed opportunities for professional learning Helen Trevethan*, Susan Sandretto University of Otago College of Education, 145 Union Street East, PO Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand
h i g h l i g h t s Mentoring student teachers has potential to be an opportunity for teacher learning. Teachers saw mentoring as distinct from professional learning. Educative mentoring provides a framework for viewing reciprocal learning opportunities through mentoring.
a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 9 March 2017 Received in revised form 18 August 2017 Accepted 23 August 2017
1. Introduction: Educative mentoring and professional learning in the New Zealand landscape Teacher professional learning manifests in various ways (Kennedy, 2005), but enhancing teaching and learning comprise the driving focus (Avalos, 2011). We privilege the term professional learning over professional development, where we position professional learning as “continuing, active, social, and related to practice” (Webster-Wright, 2009, p. 703). Professional development, on the other hand, has connotations of teacher deficits that need to be corrected (Kennedy, 2005). We believe that there are potential learning opportunities in socially situated work with others such as mentoring when viewed from a professional learning perspective. While mentor teachers are not required to learn from the mentoring relationship, in this paper we argue that if mentors of preservice teachers adopt an educative mentoring stance, they are more likely to be able to reap the benefits of professional learning from the mentoring relationship. Briefly, educative mentoring is a conception of mentoring which features reciprocity, collaboration and openness in the mentoring
* Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (H. Trevethan), susan.sandretto@ otago.ac.nz (S. Sandretto). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.08.012 0742-051X/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
relationship (Schwille, 2008). This (re)positioning shifts mentor teachers away from the role of expert to a stance of inquiring into teaching and learning in collaboration with the student teacher. Educative mentoring can support professional learning when mentors position themselves as co-learners in the mentor-mentee relationship (Trevethan, 2017). A current emphasis on “evidence informed inquiry” (Sinnema, Sewell, & Milligan, 2011, p. 247) as a way to improve teaching and learning is evident in the most recent changes to professional learning in New Zealand. Teachers, alone and together, are encouraged to inquire into their practices with a view to improving and transforming their teaching (Lieberman & Miller, 2011). In this context, professional learning can be viewed as a process of investigating and trialling different approaches to practice. When professional learning is conceptualised in this way, mentoring student teachers could be a catalyst for new learning for teachers (Arnold, 2002; Beck & Kosnik, 2000; Hudson, 2013; Minott & Willett, 2011; Torrez & Krebs, 2012). This is a tantalising prospect, especially in light of changes to the professional learning environment in New Zealand. Traditionally much of the professional learning for teachers in New Zealand was managed nationally and provided by the Ministry of Education funded School Support Service (Sankar & Chauvel, 2010). Specialist advisers would go to primary schools on request to give support and guidance. Since 2011, local providers have been replaced by large Ministry of Education funded consortia and some private providers (Whatman & Bull, 2014). The latest professional learning focus has been on raising student achievement in mathematics, science, reading, writing and digital fluency (Education Services, 2017). Changes in the provision and type of professional learning available may make it more difficult for teachers to access external support to meet their individual learning needs in future, particularly in areas outside of those currently prioritised by the government. In light of the changing professional learning and
128
H. Trevethan, S. Sandretto / Teaching and Teacher Education 68 (2017) 127e133
development landscape in New Zealand it is timely to investigate alternative ways of supporting teacher learning. Langdon (2014), writing in the context of mentoring beginning teachers, suggests that there is limited understanding of how mentoring affects mentor learning. This is also true of mentoring in initial teacher education where there are conflicting views about potential gains for mentor teachers (Simpson, Hastings, & Hill, 2007). In an endeavour to better understand teachers’ experiences of professional learning from mentoring, this paper explores the research question: To what extent do mentor teachers recognise mentoring student teachers as an opportunity for professional learning? In the sections that follow we examine the research literature connecting mentoring with teacher learning, and explore the relevance of a community of practice model of professional learning to think about mentoring. Next we describe the study and then present teachers’ experiences of professional learning and mentoring, before considering to what degree professional learning opportunities were recognised by these teachers. We then explore the implications for mentors and schools. We argue teachers can capitalise on the professional learning opportunities available through mentoring when they reposition themselves as educative mentors. 2. Mentoring and professional learning Many mentors find mentoring a rewarding experience. Mentors can gain new perspectives and new ideas from mentees (Gilles & Wilson, 2004). Mentees can also support mentor learning by sharing new ideas and educational theories with mentors (Gilles & Wilson, 2004). Simpson et al. (2007) listed positive outcomes for mentors as personal, technical, and professional. At a personal level, the presence of a student teacher can provide positive affirmation for a teacher. Student teachers can also be the reason for an increase in teachers’ sense of commitment to the profession, and a source of renewed energy to continue to develop their practices (Beck & Kosnik, 2000; Jaspers, Meijer, Prins, & Wubbels, 2014). Technical rewards come from teachers being introduced to new ideas and resources by student teachers, which may be incorporated into their teaching (Hudson, 2013; Simpson et al., 2007). Bradbury and Koballa (2007) provide an example where a mentee was able to share their skill with technology to enhance mentor teaching. Professionally, an extra pair of hands in the classroom can allow teachers to work with smaller groups. Teachers also report taking more care in planning, being more organized, and having heighted awareness of what they do because of the presence of a student teacher (Arnold, 2002; Torrez & Krebs, 2012). In addition, studies frequently report that the presence of a student teacher stimulates mentor teacher reflection. 70% of the participants in a Hong Kong study of 259 teachers reported that being a mentor had been beneficial for them due to self-reflection and a desire to demonstrate good practice for student teachers (Lopez-Real & Kwan, 2005). Granted, reflection is important for professional learning; however learning and reflection are not synonymous concepts (Day, 1993). Reflection is only one of many conditions for learning (Hoban, 2002). Teacher learning is a complex system where the teacher, the school and the learning activity are all important (Opfer & Pedder, 2011). We position teacher professional learning as something deeper than simply reflection, and more likely to alter teacher actions and thinking over time. The mentoring relationship can provide professional learning opportunities for both mentor and mentee (Giebelhaus & Bowman 2002; Hudson, 2010). We view professional learning as “a social phenomenon constituted in the experienced, lived-in world, through legitimate peripheral participation in ongoing social
practice” (Lave, 1991, p. 64). Mentor teachers may be able to take advantage of the opportunities created for professional learning when they abandon the expert-novice model and view mentoring as a social, collaborative endeavour where all member of the community have opportunities to learn (Trevethan, 2017). Professional learning can be theorised as a collaborative, situated activity, and the same is true for mentoring (Schwille, 2008). The structure of mentoring relationships defines the style of mentoring. When the mentor and mentee are both co-learners within a school learning community, there are opportunities for professional learning through relationships within communities of practice (Riveros, Newton, & Burgess, 2012). Ferrier-Kerr (2009) suggests that mentoring relationships should be developed carefully and that they require “reciprocal commitment to each other's development and professional learning” (p. 790). 2.1. Educative mentoring The complexities of professional learning for mentor teachers are highlighted through the educative mentoring model (FeimanNemser, 2001). Educative mentoring positions the role of mentor as more than emotional support, giving feedback and helping with resourcing. Implicit in educative mentoring is an expectation that professional experience in schools should provide opportunities for collaborative inquiry, testing new ideas, and professional conversations (Schulz, 2005). The educative mentor role requires teachers to be able to share their thinking and help student teachers to learn how to examine their own teaching in order to improve their teaching and children's learning (Kane & Broadley, 2005; Timperley, 2001). Educative mentoring thrives in a setting where critical reflection is encouraged and teaching is seen as a process of inquiry (Langdon & Ward, 2015). When teachers and student teachers inquire into teaching and learning together in an open and trusting way there are genuine learning opportunities for both parties (Simpson et al., 2007). In other words, educative mentoring is consistent with a community of practice framework (Wenger, 1998). 3. Community of practice The proposition of a community of practice is predicated on a view of learning as social and situated (Mclaughlin, 2003). From a sociocultural perspective, learning and knowing are made up of learning as belonging, learning as becoming, learning as doing and learning as experience. Wenger (1998) uses these ideas as an entry point for exploration of the term “community of practice”, which provides a useful way of looking at professional learning as it relates to mentor teachers. Community of practice is a generic term and communities of practice are not defined by size, location, membership, or longevity (Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002). Eckert and McConnell-Ginet (1992) define a community of practice as “an aggregate of people who come together around mutual engagement in an endeavour … practices emerge in the course of this mutual endeavour” (p. 464). In a community of practice, learning is a process of learning the culture and moving into a community (Lai, Pratt, Anderson, & Stigter, 2006) where experiences and ideas are exchanged (Buysse, Sparkman, & Wesley, 2003). One might view the mentormentee setting as a community of practice in itself, or as a place where student teachers negotiate entry to a school community of practice, or to the teaching community as a whole. Social engagement is integral to the notion of communities of practice. Wenger (1998) suggests that the social and the learning aspects of these groups are inextricably linked. Members are often diverse in degrees of expertise and are brought together by a shared
H. Trevethan, S. Sandretto / Teaching and Teacher Education 68 (2017) 127e133
purpose (Meyerhoff, 2002) rather than interpersonal compatibility. This resonates in the context of learning to be a teacher, and is particularly relevant to the mentor-mentee context, where members of the community come together and form relationships in order for learning to occur through mutual participation (Wenger et al., 2002). From a community of practice perspective, the mentor teacher and student teacher both contribute to the knowledge base of the community and learn from each other: a process that unfolds within a participatory framework. As a result, learning is distributed among many participants within the community in which people with diverse expertise (i.e., experts, novices and those in between) are transformed through their own actions and those of other participants (Buysse et al., 2003, p. 266). Barab and Duffy (2000) suggest that what distinguishes communities of practice from other types of community is a commitment to selfdevelopment through legitimate participation in the community. In a community of practice mentoring model, as members learn together, they develop shared perspectives and a common language and culture. Mentoring is thus a joint activity with opportunity for learning as a process of collaborative inquiry (FeimanNemser, 2001). In summary, mentoring has great potential to provide professional learning opportunities for the mentor, as well as the mentee. Educative mentoring within a community of practice highlights the potential for mutual engagement and participation where mentors and mentees can learn with and from each other, inquire, and critically reflect. We use the concept of educative mentoring taking place within a community of practice to explore the ways in which a group of mentor teachers viewed, or did not view, mentoring as an opportunity for professional learning. 4. Research design Nine teachers (five male and four female) participated in a yearlong research project designed to explore their role as mentor teachers and their experiences of professional learning. The participating teachers had a range of experience. They ranged from four to thirty-three years in the profession, and from two to twenty years of experience as mentors at the time of the study. Many of them had been working with student teachers for a long time with almost no professional development about their role. Most of the teachers had taught in a small number of schools and many of them had been in their current school for most, if not all, of their teaching careers up until that time. This study provides a snapshot of how these teachers in this school viewed mentoring and professional learning. The project was divided into two phases. In the first phase, the teachers participated in initial, semi-structured interviews (II), and reflected on the role of mentor through professional readings and on-line discussions. In the second phase, they were offered the opportunity for some individual professional learning in an area of their choice, supported by the first author. A variety of areas were explored in the second phase including: guided reading instruction, use of new assessment tools, and a focus on how to give feedback to student teachers. The teachers participated in exit interviews (EI) at the completion of the second phase. In this paper, we draw upon the initial (II) and exit interviews (EI) to explore the research question stated above: To what extent do mentors teacher recognise mentoring student teachers as an opportunity for professional learning? Semi-structured initial and exit interviews allowed for comparison between the interview responses, and supported teachers to express their beliefs in their own way (Patton, 2002). The teachers received question outlines prior to their interviews in
129
order to give them time to consider possible responses and to reduce any potential anxiety (Legard, Keegan, & Ward, 2003). The audio-recorded interviews were transcribed. We returned the transcripts to the participants so that they could make any changes, or check that they had not been misrepresented, and to make sure that they did not contain information that they did not wish to share (Tuckett, 2005). None of the participants elected to make any changes. Pseudonyms were used to maintain confidentiality. The first author completed the first round of analysis using an inductive approach focussing on the participants' beliefs and experiences of mentoring, identifying key themes, differences and commonalities (Thomas, 2006). In the second round of analysis, the first author interrogated the transcripts to consider how the elements of a community of practice were evident, or not, in the teachers' experiences of professional learning and mentoring (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Finally, the second author confirmed the key findings through an independent analysis of a random selection of transcripts (Tuckett, 2005). Next, we consider the teachers’ experiences of professional learning.
5. Participants’ experiences of professional learning In order to understand to what extent the participating teachers viewed their mentoring role as an opportunity for professional learning we began by examining their prior experiences and preferences. The mentor teachers’ professional learning preferences and experiences form the background that they bring to the mentoring role. As we will see, their prior experiences can enhance or detract from the possibility that they will view mentoring as a form of professional learning. Many of the teachers referenced collaborative groups as their most valuable professional learning to date. Three teachers described the Numeracy Project as one example of a highly valuable learning experience that was extremely beneficial for their teaching (Linterman & Browne, 2007). This was a nationwide professional learning initiative that introduced primary school teachers to a new way of teaching mathematics focussed on developing children's strategic ability to use numbers to solve problems. Anne (II) described the process: someone would come into the classroom and would demonstrate a session … then they would talk to us about what we wanted to model next and then we would model one for them … and then they would observe and then they would come in and do another observation, so I found those really good because it was more hands on and applicable to exactly what I was doing in the classroom. This model of learning involved an external facilitator, a school based lead teacher and teaching staff. The national Numeracy Project was socially situated and included “teacher reflection, inclass observations and discussion with peers within a supportive learning community” (Linterman & Browne, 2007, p. 38.) The programme was designed to be collaborative as well as responsive to the needs of each teacher, and contextualised in their own classrooms and schools. Another teacher explained his preference for learning through relationships with relevant content for the learner stating that: [The] Numeracy [Project] has probably been the most influential in that the person that took it was very good, had a great attitude, very kind and it was essential … because it touched base with some areas of Maths generally but also the Numeracy process, you know which I needed to do. (Kevin, II)
130
H. Trevethan, S. Sandretto / Teaching and Teacher Education 68 (2017) 127e133
Working and learning with others in this way was a popular approach to professional learning for more than half of the participating teachers. Preferences for learning though social interaction were further highlighted when two teachers described a Ministry of Education physical activity initiative that involved curriculum planning as well as physical activity, sustained over time. The School Community Physical Activity Project (New Zealand Ministry of Education, 2007) took a whole-school/community approach, and the teachers involved engaged in sustained, in-depth work for two years. Specialists from the School Advisory Service, working collaboratively with the Health sector and Regional Sports Trusts, supported teacher learning. One teacher felt this was valuable because, “It was about changing the way we teach P.E.” (David, II). He enjoyed discussing pedagogy and reflecting on his practice. Another teacher, involved in the same project in another school, agreed: [the facilitator] would come … [and] model for us and she would talk to us first just about what we were doing in our programmes. … Then she'd come and model something for us, and actually I think being able to see somebody showing you what they are expecting in a way … I think that's the most valuable for me. (Tania, II) Both of these teachers valued the opportunity to reflect on their teaching and to learn through interaction with others. They enjoyed talking about teaching, having someone observing their teaching and watching someone else teaching their class. Their experiences illustrate the power of collaboration and communication for learning as a social process (Lave & Wenger, 1991). The teachers developed their professional practice as part of a community of learners, enabling them to move from peripheral participation in the communities of mathematics and physical education pedagogies, to fuller participation in these communities. The two learning programmes highlighted by the participants featured teachers practicing their new learning in the context of their own classrooms. This illustrates the importance of “the dialectic between persons acting and the settings in which their activity is constituted” (Lave & Kvale, 1995, p. 219). These learning opportunities were situated in the context of their own classrooms and supported by reflection with a facilitator. Not all of the teachers subscribed to a view of learning that privileged mutual engagement in a shared activity. Five of the eleven teachers said that their ‘best’ professional learning experiences had occurred off the school site. In other words, the professional learning was not situated in the context of their schools or classrooms. One teacher, for example, described a week-long residential music course that he attended in another city. He said that this full immersion was very valuable: [I] wrote down some of my ideas about what I could be doing as a teacher and my relationship with music. It was a really good course, and I came back from that not afraid to sing in front of others, and to experiment with music with kids. (Kevin, II) Kevin's experiences were isolated from the wider community of practice in his school in this individual, transmission model of professional learning (Ambrosetti, 2014). Once the course was completed, he no longer had opportunities to be involved in the professional relationships that would further support his legitimate peripheral participation in the community of music practitioners. In this more traditional approach to professional learning, teachers return to their classrooms and implement their new learning in
isolation. Without further collaboration with the community of music practitioners and opportunities for learning, it is less likely that Kevin would ever become a full participant in the wider music practitioner community. Several other teachers also preferred individualised professional development. Naomi valued professional learning from inspirational presenters at off-site courses. She enjoyed being given new resources and using them with her class “straight away” (II). In his final interview, Nick lamented that “there don't seem to be the courses out there or the professional development opportunities run through the college … anymore”. He recognised there was now “more of a whole staff focus on professional development … over the last few years since I've been here we've looked at the ICT cluster, [that] was the main one and we've looked at, sort of inhouse things” (EI). He felt that he had less opportunity to pursue his personal professional development needs and interests than he had previously. Nick has captured the shift in New Zealand from isolated, transmission models of professional learning (Knight, 2002), to models of professional learning that emphasise “an extended period of legitimate peripherality [which] provides learners with opportunities to make the culture of practice theirs” (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 95). Individual teacher dispositions and preferences are important for legitimate, effective professional learning. We argue those teachers who see professional learning as an individual activity, rather than as part of a community of learning, may be less likely to be open to opportunities for learning through mentoring student teachers. 6. Participants’ experiences of mentoring The mentor teachers in this study largely described personal, technical and professional benefits when asked about the value of mentoring (Simpson et al., 2007). Mentor teachers described a number of personal benefits from mentoring (Jaspers et al., 2014; Simpson et al., 2007). For example, one of the teachers said that having a student teacher in the class “helps me to be clearer about what I'm doing … and it makes me more organized” (Irene, II). Hosting a student teacher can also increase self-awareness and can be an affirming experience. Another teacher referred to the boost in confidence it gave her to realise that the things she does and takes for granted are appreciated by student teachers. In addition, student teachers can be helpful in a school community (Arnold, 2002; Jaspers et al., 2014). Naomi mentioned the benefits of extra hands for group teaching and for pupil to adult ratios at offsite activities such as schools camp. Kelvin celebrated the resources that student teachers develop and share with teachers, and three participants said that they had been exposed to new resources by their student teacher. While these technical and professional benefits (Simpson et al., 2007) can be useful, in our view they do not constitute professional learning for the mentor teacher. Mentoring has the potential to afford significant learning opportunities for teachers as well as their mentees when the mentoring relationship is conceptualised in collegial ways. In this study, however, the majority of mentor teacher participants interpreted their relationships with student teachers as hierarchical; positioning themselves as the experts and the student teacher as the novices or learners. Their views were apparent in the way they talked about student teachers. Clare illustrated how she viewed the relationship between teacher and student teacher when she said, “sometimes you have to … sit them down like your own students in your class and say listen you are here to learn”(II). She said that a student teacher who thinks they “know it all” (II) is a problem. Diane observed that students like that are rare, but when you do meet them “you just want to shake them and say look mate, I've
H. Trevethan, S. Sandretto / Teaching and Teacher Education 68 (2017) 127e133
done this job for a long time. You need to listen because if you don't listen you're not going to learn” (II). Nick explained his strategy for dealing with those students as letting them “crash and then when they sort of wake up and go why did that happen? We are charged with teaching them the lessons they need to learn.” These comments are stark reminders that not all teachers see mentoring as collective, collaborative work. Positioning the mentoring relationship as hierarchical means that there is limited potential for reciprocal professional learning relationships.
7. Mentoring as professional learning In this study, it appeared that most teachers believed that the success, or otherwise, of mentorestudent teacher relationships was predetermined by like-mindedness or personal compatibility, rather than by their deliberate actions as a mentor and professional colleague (Trevethan, 2014). Trust, sharing, support, and working together are important aspects of mentoring relationships (Awaya et al., 2003), and also of professional learning through collaboration with others (Ampartzaki, Kypriotaki, Voreadou, Dardioti, & Stathi, 2013). Few of the teachers in this study saw their mentoring relationships in this way. We suggest this represents missed opportunities for professional learning through mentoring. Restructuring mentoring relationships through the lens of educative mentoring has great potential, in our view, to enhance potential professional learning for both mentor and mentee. Educative mentoring is embedded in relationships, and closely aligned to learning as social practice where members of a community collaborate (Schulz, 2005). Two teachers provided us with brief insight into the potential of educative mentoring for professional learning. One teacher, Barry, acknowledged that through mentoring, mentor teachers can develop and grow as professionals. In his initial interview, he said that this was one of the most enjoyable aspects of the mentor teacher role and referred to a recent student as a “co-teacher”, rather than a student teacher. The term “co-teacher” suggests Barry has restructured the mentoring relationship away from a top-down model. In his final interview he said that he was conscious of not “forcing” his ideas on his student teachers and said that within the lesson, as in within my observation.. I just made a wee note, next step you could try this, it was always just an option for them to try … rather than you need to be doing this … because then it just becomes forced upon them rather than them think that's a good idea. (Barry, EI) He felt that both he and his student teachers benefit from reflecting and inquiring into lessons that do not go well, whether they are the student teacher's lessons or his own. In his final interview he said that he said that he thinks that his mentoring role is to: Let them experience lessons that I've taught that don't go well and sit down and reflect on it and let them see me reflecting on lessons that go well and don't go well and identifying that. (Barry, EI) This mentor located himself as a learner as well as a teacher, and thus was better positioned to take advantage of mentoring as a form of professional learning. Learning occurs through mutual engagement where there is a shared focus on moving forward within a community of practice (Wenger, 1998). Barry could see the potential for improving his own practices, as well as those of his student teacher, through working together. Thus, he was becoming
131
aware of the mutually educative potential of the mentoring relationship. Ryan provided us with another glimpse of mentoring as professional learning. He acknowledged that his guided reading lessons and those of his student teacher were quite different (New Zealand Ministry of Education, 2005). He was aware that his practice needed some attention and positioned himself as learner, open to learning alongside and from his student teacher. A number of conversations with the first author, the mentor and the student teacher led to a professional learning initiative where Ryan and the student teacher each planned and taught a guided reading lesson to a small group of children. Those lessons were video recorded and then viewed by the mentor teacher, the student teacher and the first author, and compared to the policy guidelines (New Zealand Ministry of Education, 2005). The mentor teacher and the student teacher then planned and taught another lesson each, which were also recorded, viewed, and discussed. In this small-scale initiative, learning was part of a social activity situated in the context of the classroom in which mentor and mentee were co-participants (Lave & Kvale, 1995). The teacher acknowledged himself as a co-learner and was willing to engage in a collaborative learning relationship. He explained, “it proved to be an absolutely wonderful and inspiring sort of little thing, because he [the student teacher] raised the question why do you do what you do? And why do I do see things a little bit different?” (EI). Ryan may not have reflected on his reading programme if he had not had the opportunity to compare his practices with those of his student teacher. Thus, the student teacher was a catalyst for the mentor's professional learning, and they engaged in learning as a situated social activity. He said that his student teacher worked “collaboratively … outside of the guided reading session or the reading programme, you know we did a lot of interaction with math[ematics] and everything else too” (EI). Ryan's comments illustrate the potential of the mentoring relationship as an opportunity to deepen legitimate peripheral participation in the community of skilled practitioners. It is an example of learning “through mutual engagement in an activity which is defined by the meaning both inside and outside the community” (Fuller, Hodkinson, Hodkinson, & Unwin, 2005, p. 52), in particular the teaching of guided reading. Ryan was willing to take the opportunity to re-examine his own practices in light of those of his student teacher and to engage in professional learning. 8. Moving towards educative mentoring This study set out to investigate if mentor teachers recognised mentoring student teachers as an opportunity for professional learning, where we view professional learning as a collaborative, social and situated activity. There was evidence that working with a student teacher was seen as beneficial; however, there was limited evidence of teachers linking mentoring with professional learning as we have defined it - continuing, active, social, and related to practice. We suggest that educative mentoring has the potential to be a powerful professional learning opportunity for both the mentor teacher and the student teacher. This study demonstrates that the relationship between mentoring and opportunities for professional learning cannot be taken for granted. One participating teacher in particular became more aware of the potential of professional learning through mentoring during the year of the study. In her exit interview, she said that she had “learnt so much” from the student teachers she had mentored. She showed that she was much more aware of them as learning partners and she emphasised, “now I feel that I can ask them well what do you think I should be doing?” Integral to both a sociocultural view of learning and educative mentoring is the notion of reciprocity (Le Cornu, 2009; Schulz, 2005). Communities of practice are
132
H. Trevethan, S. Sandretto / Teaching and Teacher Education 68 (2017) 127e133
founded on reciprocity as mutual engagement is one of the defining features of that model of learning. A disposition towards reciprocity includes engaging in dialogue with others, negotiating mutual sense and interest, communicating with others … giving an opinion, taking into account the perspectives of others, sharing responsibility, communicating ideas, and valuing being and becoming a group member. (Carr et al., 2010, p. 24, p. 24) Teachers who are able to access professional learning opportunities from their mentoring with student teachers need to be invested in the learning relationship, to be resilient and to be open to alternative points of view. Educative mentoring within a community of practice underscores the importance of developing shared perspectives, and a common language and culture, which may support the negotiation of power differentials as members learn together. In this case mentors contribute to the common goal of supporting student teachers to enter the teaching community as full members. One significant factor in determining the potential for professional learning from mentoring seems to be how mentor teachers position the other members of learning community. In the Numeracy Project and the physical activity initiative, the other members of the community were peers and an expert facilitator. In the mentor teacher-student teacher community, the student teachers were frequently positioned as novices. A sociocultural view of learning suggests that effectiveness of a community of practice “depends on a variety of interpersonal factors … such as collegiality, trust, mutual respect, a sense of belonging” (Ampartzaki et al., 2013, p. 5). It does seem that some of these mentor teachers did not see their student teacher mentees as colleagues, and were therefore not able to engage in professional learning from their shared experiences. How teachers position themselves as mentors, in addition to how they position other members of the learning community, is central to their ability to capitalise on professional learning opportunities through mentoring. One core principle of sociocultural learning theory is the acknowledgement that old-timers can continue to learn as well as novices, suggesting, “everyone's participation is peripheral in some respect” (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 117). Educative mentoring reflects this view and recognises that mentors can learn more about their own teaching through working with student teachers. Feiman-Nemser (1998) states that “the tools of mentoring e observation, co-planning, joint inquiry, critical conversation and reflection e are also the tools of continuous improvement in teaching” (p. 73), however, most of the teachers in this study did not interpret mentoring in that way. This may be due in part to a lack of professional learning about the mentoring role. Without significant support, many mentor teacher teachers mentor their student teachers in the same ways they themselves were mentored (Trevethan, 2014; Langdon, 2017). Educative mentoring and communities of practice are both premised on principles of trust and open-mindedness. Some of the teachers in this study seemed to be unwilling to be open about their own learning needs. One striking illustration came from a teacher who rationalised “having a very capable student … prying into the dark recesses of your teaching ignorance is undermining” (Kevin, II). Teachers who are not able to acknowledge their own learning needs are not likely to be able to access opportunities for professional learning from mentoring. In order to capitalise on the opportunities that may arise for professional learning while mentoring, we contend that teachers will need support to reposition themselves as educative mentors.
9. Concluding thoughts The key findings from this study suggest the need for caution when linking professional learning with mentoring. In this study of teachers in one school there was a range of preferences for professional learning, various interpretations of the mentoring role and different views of the professional learning potential of the mentoring role. Thus, the simplistic answer to the research question ‘To what extent do mentor teachers recognise mentoring student teachers as an opportunity for professional learning?’ seems to be to e somewhat. Overall, the majority of teachers in this study did not see mentoring as professional learning despite the fact that over half of them celebrated collaborative, situated learning as their most valuable professional learning experiences. They valued watching others teaching their classes, and having professional conversations about teaching; yet ironically, they did not see that the same opportunities are available to them from mentoring student teachers. The reasons seem to be related to how they regard the student teachers and how they interpreted the role of mentor. One limitation of the study was that the teachers were all from the same school and most of them had limited experience of other schools. The culture of a school may be a factor in how the mentoring role was interpreted and had this research been conducted in a different school, or across schools, the findings may have been different. While it would be unwise to generalise from this small study, nonetheless it raises important considerations for future research and policy related to both teacher learning and learning to mentor. Importantly, it does appear that caution is necessary when making links between mentoring and teacher professional learning. Understandings of the mentor role are significant when considering mentor professional learning opportunities. Working with a student teacher is unlikely to be a form of professional development for teachers unless they see their role as co-learners within respectful, reciprocal learning relationships. Teachers need opportunities and support to examine their role and possibly ‘unlearn’ their understandings of professional learning and of the role of mentor, which one teacher said has “become automatic when you do it year after year”. Future research in which mentor teachers are supported to reposition themselves as educative mentors within a community of practice can extend this small-scale study and contribute both to the mentoring literature and the professional learning of the mentors and mentees involved. The conclusions in this study emphasise the importance of professional learning for mentoring student teachers in order to capitalise on the potential of professional learning while mentoring student teachers. References Ambrosetti, A. (2014). Are you ready to be a mentor? Preparing teachers for mentoring pre-service teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(6), 30e42. Ampartzaki, M., Kypriotaki, M., Voreadou, C., Dardioti, A., & Stathi, I. (2013). Communities of practice and participatory action research: The formation of a synergy for the development of museum programmes for early childhood. Educational Action Research, 21(1), 4e27. Arnold, P. (2002). Cooperating teachers' professional growth through supervision of student teachers and participation in a collegial study group. Teacher Education Quarterly, 29(2), 123e132. Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in Teaching and Teacher Education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10e20. Awaya, A., McEwan, H., Heyler, D., Linsky, S., Lum, D., & Wakukawa, P. (2003). Mentoring as a journey. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(1), 45e56. Barab, S. A., & Duffy, T. M. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments, 1(1), 25e55. Beck, C., & Kosnik, C. (2000). Associate teachers in pre-service education: Clarifying and enhancing their role. Journal of Education for Teaching, 26(3), 207e224. Bradbury, L. U., & Koballa, T. R. (2007). Mentor advice giving in an alternative
H. Trevethan, S. Sandretto / Teaching and Teacher Education 68 (2017) 127e133 certification program for secondary science teaching: Opportunities and roadblocks in developing a knowledge base for teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(6), 817e840. Buysse, V., Sparkman, K. L., & Wesley, P. W. (2003). Communities of practice: Connecting what we know with what we do. Exceptional Children, 69(3), 263e277. Carr, M., Smith, A. B., Duncan, J., Jones, C., Lee, W., & Marshall, K. (2010). Learning in the making. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Day, C. (1993). Reflection: A necessary but not sufficient condition for professional development. British Educational Research Journal, 19(1), 83e93. Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S. (1992). Think practically and look locally: Language and gender in community-based practice. Annual Review of Anthropology, 21(1), 461e490. Education Services. (2017). Professional learning and development. Retrieved from: http://services.education.govt.nz/pld/. Feiman-Nemser, S. (1998). Teachers as teacher educators. European Journal of Teacher Education, 21(1), 63e74. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). Helping novices learn to teach: Lessons from an exemplary support teacher. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(1), 17e30. Ferrier-Kerr, J. (2009). Establishing professional relationships in practicum settings. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(6), 790e797. Fuller, A., Hodkinson, H., Hodkinson, P., & Unwin, L. (2005). Learning as peripheral participation in communities of practice: A reassessment of key concepts in workplace learning. British Educational Research Journal, 31(1), 49e68. Giebelhaus, C. R., & Bowman, C. L. (2002). Teaching mentors: Is it worth the effort? The Journal of Educational Research, 95(4), 246e254. Gilles, C., & Wilson, J. (2004). Receiving as well as giving: Mentors' perceptions of their professional development in one teacher induction program. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 12(1), 87e106. Hoban, G. (2002). Teacher learning for educational change. Buckingham, England: Open University Press. Hudson, P. B. (2010). Mentors report on their own mentoring practices. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35(7), 30e42. Hudson, P. (2013). Mentoring as professional development: ‘growth for both’ mentor and mentee. Professional Development in Education, 39(5), 771e783. Jaspers, W. M., Meijer, P. C., Prins, F., & Wubbels, T. (2014). Mentor teachers: Their perceived possibilities and challenges as mentor and teacher. Teaching and Teacher Education, 44, 106e116. Kane, R., & Broadley, G. (2005). Learning from experience within professional relationships. In P. Adams, K. Vossler, & C. Scrivens (Eds.), Teachers' work in Aotearoa New Zealand (pp. 307e319). Southbank, Victoria: Thompson/Dunmore Press. Kennedy, A. (2005). Models of continuing professional development: A framework for analysis. Journal of In-Service Education, 21(2), 235e250. Knight, P. (2002). A systemic approach to professional development: Learning as practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(3), 229e241. Lai, K. W., Pratt, K., Anderson, M., & Stigter, J. (2006). Literature review and Synthesis: Online communities of practice: A report submitted to the Ministry of education. New Zealand: Ministry of Education. Langdon, F. (2014). Evidence of mentor learning and development: An analysis of New Zealand mentor/mentee professional conversations. Professional Development in Education, 40(1), 36e55. Langdon, F. (2017). Learning to mentor: Unravelling routine practice to develop adaptive mentoring expertise. Teacher Development, 1e19. Langdon, F., & Ward, L. (2015). Educative mentoring: A way forward. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 4(4), 240e254. Lave, J. (1991). Situating learning. In L. Resnick, J. Levine, & S. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 63e82). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Lave, J., & Kvale, S. (1995). What is anthropological research? An interview with Jean Lave by Steinar Kvale. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 8(3), 219e228. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK.: Cambridge University Press. Le Cornu, R. (2009, June). Crossing Boundaries: Challenges of academics working in professional experiences. In Paper presented at the Australian teacher education
133
association. Albury, Australia. Legard, R., Keegan, J., & Ward, K. (2003). In-depth interviews. In J. Ritchie, & J. Lewis (Eds.), Qualitative research practice (pp. 138e169). London: Sage Publications. Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (2011). Learning communities. Journal of Staff Development, 32(4), 16e20. Linterman, L., & Browne, R. (2007). Getting the most out of professional development. SET: Research Information for Teachers, 1, 38e42. Lopez-Real, F., & Kwan, T. (2005). Mentors' perceptions of their own professional development during mentoring. Journal of Education for Teaching, 31(1), 15e24. Mclaughlin, T. H. (2003). Teaching as a practice and a community of practice: The limits of commonality and the demands of diversity. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 37(2), 339e352. Meyerhoff, M. (2002). Communities of practice. In J. K. Chambers, P. Trudgill, & N. Schilling-Estes (Eds.), The handbook of language variation and change (pp. 428e447). Oxford,UK: Blackwell Publishers. Minott, M. A., & Willett, I. L. (2011). Student-teachers' supervision as a professional development activity: Building work-related skills. Professional Development in Education, 37(4), 537e550. New Zealand Ministry of Education. (2005). Guided reading: Years 5-8. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media Ltd. New Zealand Ministry of Education. (2007). Physical activity for healthy confident kids. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media Ltd. Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376e407. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods Thousand Oaks. California: Sage Publications. Riveros, A., Newton, P., & Burgess, D. (2012). A situated account of teacher agency and learning: Critical reflections on professional learning communities. Canadian Journal of Education, 35(1), 202e216. Sankar, M., & Chauvel, F. (2010). Provision of school support Services, an evaluation. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education. Schulz, R. (2005). The practicum: More than practice. Canadian Journal of Education, 28(1/2), 147e167. Schwille, S. A. (2008). The professional practice of mentoring. American Journal of Education, 115(1), 139e167. Simpson, T., Hastings, W., & Hill, B. (2007). ‘I knew that she was watching me’: The professional benefits of mentoring. Teachers & Teaching, 13(5), 481e498. Sinnema, C., Sewell, A., & Milligan, A. (2011). Evidence-informed collaborative inquiry for improving teaching and learning. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 39(3), 247e261. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Thomas, D. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(2), 237e246. Timperley, H. (2001). Mentoring conversations designed to promote student teacher learning. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 29(2), 111e123. Torrez, C. A. F., & Krebs, M. M. (2012). Expert voices: What cooperating teachers and teacher candidates say about quality student teaching placements and experiences. Action in Teacher Education, 34(5e6), 485e499. Trevethan, H. (2014). Associate teachers in New Zealand: Great expectations. (Unpublished EdD thesis). Dunedin, New Zealand: University of Otago. Trevethan, H. (2017). Educative mentors? The role of classroom teachers in initial teacher education. A New Zealand study. Journal of Education for Teaching, 43(2), 219e231. Tuckett, A. G. (2005). Part II. Rigour in qualitative research: Complexities and solutions. Nurse Researcher, 13(1), 29e42. Webster-Wright, A. (2009). Reframing professional development through understanding authentic professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 702e739. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Cambridge, UK.: Cambridge University Press. Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. Whatman, J., & Bull, A. (2014). The work of PLD facilitators. Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Teaching and Teacher Education journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tate
Repositioning mentoring as educative: Examining missed opportunities for professional learning Helen Trevethan*, Susan Sandretto University of Otago College of Education, 145 Union Street East, PO Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand
h i g h l i g h t s Mentoring student teachers has potential to be an opportunity for teacher learning. Teachers saw mentoring as distinct from professional learning. Educative mentoring provides a framework for viewing reciprocal learning opportunities through mentoring.
a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 9 March 2017 Received in revised form 18 August 2017 Accepted 23 August 2017
1. Introduction: Educative mentoring and professional learning in the New Zealand landscape Teacher professional learning manifests in various ways (Kennedy, 2005), but enhancing teaching and learning comprise the driving focus (Avalos, 2011). We privilege the term professional learning over professional development, where we position professional learning as “continuing, active, social, and related to practice” (Webster-Wright, 2009, p. 703). Professional development, on the other hand, has connotations of teacher deficits that need to be corrected (Kennedy, 2005). We believe that there are potential learning opportunities in socially situated work with others such as mentoring when viewed from a professional learning perspective. While mentor teachers are not required to learn from the mentoring relationship, in this paper we argue that if mentors of preservice teachers adopt an educative mentoring stance, they are more likely to be able to reap the benefits of professional learning from the mentoring relationship. Briefly, educative mentoring is a conception of mentoring which features reciprocity, collaboration and openness in the mentoring
* Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (H. Trevethan), susan.sandretto@ otago.ac.nz (S. Sandretto). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.08.012 0742-051X/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
relationship (Schwille, 2008). This (re)positioning shifts mentor teachers away from the role of expert to a stance of inquiring into teaching and learning in collaboration with the student teacher. Educative mentoring can support professional learning when mentors position themselves as co-learners in the mentor-mentee relationship (Trevethan, 2017). A current emphasis on “evidence informed inquiry” (Sinnema, Sewell, & Milligan, 2011, p. 247) as a way to improve teaching and learning is evident in the most recent changes to professional learning in New Zealand. Teachers, alone and together, are encouraged to inquire into their practices with a view to improving and transforming their teaching (Lieberman & Miller, 2011). In this context, professional learning can be viewed as a process of investigating and trialling different approaches to practice. When professional learning is conceptualised in this way, mentoring student teachers could be a catalyst for new learning for teachers (Arnold, 2002; Beck & Kosnik, 2000; Hudson, 2013; Minott & Willett, 2011; Torrez & Krebs, 2012). This is a tantalising prospect, especially in light of changes to the professional learning environment in New Zealand. Traditionally much of the professional learning for teachers in New Zealand was managed nationally and provided by the Ministry of Education funded School Support Service (Sankar & Chauvel, 2010). Specialist advisers would go to primary schools on request to give support and guidance. Since 2011, local providers have been replaced by large Ministry of Education funded consortia and some private providers (Whatman & Bull, 2014). The latest professional learning focus has been on raising student achievement in mathematics, science, reading, writing and digital fluency (Education Services, 2017). Changes in the provision and type of professional learning available may make it more difficult for teachers to access external support to meet their individual learning needs in future, particularly in areas outside of those currently prioritised by the government. In light of the changing professional learning and
128
H. Trevethan, S. Sandretto / Teaching and Teacher Education 68 (2017) 127e133
development landscape in New Zealand it is timely to investigate alternative ways of supporting teacher learning. Langdon (2014), writing in the context of mentoring beginning teachers, suggests that there is limited understanding of how mentoring affects mentor learning. This is also true of mentoring in initial teacher education where there are conflicting views about potential gains for mentor teachers (Simpson, Hastings, & Hill, 2007). In an endeavour to better understand teachers’ experiences of professional learning from mentoring, this paper explores the research question: To what extent do mentor teachers recognise mentoring student teachers as an opportunity for professional learning? In the sections that follow we examine the research literature connecting mentoring with teacher learning, and explore the relevance of a community of practice model of professional learning to think about mentoring. Next we describe the study and then present teachers’ experiences of professional learning and mentoring, before considering to what degree professional learning opportunities were recognised by these teachers. We then explore the implications for mentors and schools. We argue teachers can capitalise on the professional learning opportunities available through mentoring when they reposition themselves as educative mentors. 2. Mentoring and professional learning Many mentors find mentoring a rewarding experience. Mentors can gain new perspectives and new ideas from mentees (Gilles & Wilson, 2004). Mentees can also support mentor learning by sharing new ideas and educational theories with mentors (Gilles & Wilson, 2004). Simpson et al. (2007) listed positive outcomes for mentors as personal, technical, and professional. At a personal level, the presence of a student teacher can provide positive affirmation for a teacher. Student teachers can also be the reason for an increase in teachers’ sense of commitment to the profession, and a source of renewed energy to continue to develop their practices (Beck & Kosnik, 2000; Jaspers, Meijer, Prins, & Wubbels, 2014). Technical rewards come from teachers being introduced to new ideas and resources by student teachers, which may be incorporated into their teaching (Hudson, 2013; Simpson et al., 2007). Bradbury and Koballa (2007) provide an example where a mentee was able to share their skill with technology to enhance mentor teaching. Professionally, an extra pair of hands in the classroom can allow teachers to work with smaller groups. Teachers also report taking more care in planning, being more organized, and having heighted awareness of what they do because of the presence of a student teacher (Arnold, 2002; Torrez & Krebs, 2012). In addition, studies frequently report that the presence of a student teacher stimulates mentor teacher reflection. 70% of the participants in a Hong Kong study of 259 teachers reported that being a mentor had been beneficial for them due to self-reflection and a desire to demonstrate good practice for student teachers (Lopez-Real & Kwan, 2005). Granted, reflection is important for professional learning; however learning and reflection are not synonymous concepts (Day, 1993). Reflection is only one of many conditions for learning (Hoban, 2002). Teacher learning is a complex system where the teacher, the school and the learning activity are all important (Opfer & Pedder, 2011). We position teacher professional learning as something deeper than simply reflection, and more likely to alter teacher actions and thinking over time. The mentoring relationship can provide professional learning opportunities for both mentor and mentee (Giebelhaus & Bowman 2002; Hudson, 2010). We view professional learning as “a social phenomenon constituted in the experienced, lived-in world, through legitimate peripheral participation in ongoing social
practice” (Lave, 1991, p. 64). Mentor teachers may be able to take advantage of the opportunities created for professional learning when they abandon the expert-novice model and view mentoring as a social, collaborative endeavour where all member of the community have opportunities to learn (Trevethan, 2017). Professional learning can be theorised as a collaborative, situated activity, and the same is true for mentoring (Schwille, 2008). The structure of mentoring relationships defines the style of mentoring. When the mentor and mentee are both co-learners within a school learning community, there are opportunities for professional learning through relationships within communities of practice (Riveros, Newton, & Burgess, 2012). Ferrier-Kerr (2009) suggests that mentoring relationships should be developed carefully and that they require “reciprocal commitment to each other's development and professional learning” (p. 790). 2.1. Educative mentoring The complexities of professional learning for mentor teachers are highlighted through the educative mentoring model (FeimanNemser, 2001). Educative mentoring positions the role of mentor as more than emotional support, giving feedback and helping with resourcing. Implicit in educative mentoring is an expectation that professional experience in schools should provide opportunities for collaborative inquiry, testing new ideas, and professional conversations (Schulz, 2005). The educative mentor role requires teachers to be able to share their thinking and help student teachers to learn how to examine their own teaching in order to improve their teaching and children's learning (Kane & Broadley, 2005; Timperley, 2001). Educative mentoring thrives in a setting where critical reflection is encouraged and teaching is seen as a process of inquiry (Langdon & Ward, 2015). When teachers and student teachers inquire into teaching and learning together in an open and trusting way there are genuine learning opportunities for both parties (Simpson et al., 2007). In other words, educative mentoring is consistent with a community of practice framework (Wenger, 1998). 3. Community of practice The proposition of a community of practice is predicated on a view of learning as social and situated (Mclaughlin, 2003). From a sociocultural perspective, learning and knowing are made up of learning as belonging, learning as becoming, learning as doing and learning as experience. Wenger (1998) uses these ideas as an entry point for exploration of the term “community of practice”, which provides a useful way of looking at professional learning as it relates to mentor teachers. Community of practice is a generic term and communities of practice are not defined by size, location, membership, or longevity (Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002). Eckert and McConnell-Ginet (1992) define a community of practice as “an aggregate of people who come together around mutual engagement in an endeavour … practices emerge in the course of this mutual endeavour” (p. 464). In a community of practice, learning is a process of learning the culture and moving into a community (Lai, Pratt, Anderson, & Stigter, 2006) where experiences and ideas are exchanged (Buysse, Sparkman, & Wesley, 2003). One might view the mentormentee setting as a community of practice in itself, or as a place where student teachers negotiate entry to a school community of practice, or to the teaching community as a whole. Social engagement is integral to the notion of communities of practice. Wenger (1998) suggests that the social and the learning aspects of these groups are inextricably linked. Members are often diverse in degrees of expertise and are brought together by a shared
H. Trevethan, S. Sandretto / Teaching and Teacher Education 68 (2017) 127e133
purpose (Meyerhoff, 2002) rather than interpersonal compatibility. This resonates in the context of learning to be a teacher, and is particularly relevant to the mentor-mentee context, where members of the community come together and form relationships in order for learning to occur through mutual participation (Wenger et al., 2002). From a community of practice perspective, the mentor teacher and student teacher both contribute to the knowledge base of the community and learn from each other: a process that unfolds within a participatory framework. As a result, learning is distributed among many participants within the community in which people with diverse expertise (i.e., experts, novices and those in between) are transformed through their own actions and those of other participants (Buysse et al., 2003, p. 266). Barab and Duffy (2000) suggest that what distinguishes communities of practice from other types of community is a commitment to selfdevelopment through legitimate participation in the community. In a community of practice mentoring model, as members learn together, they develop shared perspectives and a common language and culture. Mentoring is thus a joint activity with opportunity for learning as a process of collaborative inquiry (FeimanNemser, 2001). In summary, mentoring has great potential to provide professional learning opportunities for the mentor, as well as the mentee. Educative mentoring within a community of practice highlights the potential for mutual engagement and participation where mentors and mentees can learn with and from each other, inquire, and critically reflect. We use the concept of educative mentoring taking place within a community of practice to explore the ways in which a group of mentor teachers viewed, or did not view, mentoring as an opportunity for professional learning. 4. Research design Nine teachers (five male and four female) participated in a yearlong research project designed to explore their role as mentor teachers and their experiences of professional learning. The participating teachers had a range of experience. They ranged from four to thirty-three years in the profession, and from two to twenty years of experience as mentors at the time of the study. Many of them had been working with student teachers for a long time with almost no professional development about their role. Most of the teachers had taught in a small number of schools and many of them had been in their current school for most, if not all, of their teaching careers up until that time. This study provides a snapshot of how these teachers in this school viewed mentoring and professional learning. The project was divided into two phases. In the first phase, the teachers participated in initial, semi-structured interviews (II), and reflected on the role of mentor through professional readings and on-line discussions. In the second phase, they were offered the opportunity for some individual professional learning in an area of their choice, supported by the first author. A variety of areas were explored in the second phase including: guided reading instruction, use of new assessment tools, and a focus on how to give feedback to student teachers. The teachers participated in exit interviews (EI) at the completion of the second phase. In this paper, we draw upon the initial (II) and exit interviews (EI) to explore the research question stated above: To what extent do mentors teacher recognise mentoring student teachers as an opportunity for professional learning? Semi-structured initial and exit interviews allowed for comparison between the interview responses, and supported teachers to express their beliefs in their own way (Patton, 2002). The teachers received question outlines prior to their interviews in
129
order to give them time to consider possible responses and to reduce any potential anxiety (Legard, Keegan, & Ward, 2003). The audio-recorded interviews were transcribed. We returned the transcripts to the participants so that they could make any changes, or check that they had not been misrepresented, and to make sure that they did not contain information that they did not wish to share (Tuckett, 2005). None of the participants elected to make any changes. Pseudonyms were used to maintain confidentiality. The first author completed the first round of analysis using an inductive approach focussing on the participants' beliefs and experiences of mentoring, identifying key themes, differences and commonalities (Thomas, 2006). In the second round of analysis, the first author interrogated the transcripts to consider how the elements of a community of practice were evident, or not, in the teachers' experiences of professional learning and mentoring (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Finally, the second author confirmed the key findings through an independent analysis of a random selection of transcripts (Tuckett, 2005). Next, we consider the teachers’ experiences of professional learning.
5. Participants’ experiences of professional learning In order to understand to what extent the participating teachers viewed their mentoring role as an opportunity for professional learning we began by examining their prior experiences and preferences. The mentor teachers’ professional learning preferences and experiences form the background that they bring to the mentoring role. As we will see, their prior experiences can enhance or detract from the possibility that they will view mentoring as a form of professional learning. Many of the teachers referenced collaborative groups as their most valuable professional learning to date. Three teachers described the Numeracy Project as one example of a highly valuable learning experience that was extremely beneficial for their teaching (Linterman & Browne, 2007). This was a nationwide professional learning initiative that introduced primary school teachers to a new way of teaching mathematics focussed on developing children's strategic ability to use numbers to solve problems. Anne (II) described the process: someone would come into the classroom and would demonstrate a session … then they would talk to us about what we wanted to model next and then we would model one for them … and then they would observe and then they would come in and do another observation, so I found those really good because it was more hands on and applicable to exactly what I was doing in the classroom. This model of learning involved an external facilitator, a school based lead teacher and teaching staff. The national Numeracy Project was socially situated and included “teacher reflection, inclass observations and discussion with peers within a supportive learning community” (Linterman & Browne, 2007, p. 38.) The programme was designed to be collaborative as well as responsive to the needs of each teacher, and contextualised in their own classrooms and schools. Another teacher explained his preference for learning through relationships with relevant content for the learner stating that: [The] Numeracy [Project] has probably been the most influential in that the person that took it was very good, had a great attitude, very kind and it was essential … because it touched base with some areas of Maths generally but also the Numeracy process, you know which I needed to do. (Kevin, II)
130
H. Trevethan, S. Sandretto / Teaching and Teacher Education 68 (2017) 127e133
Working and learning with others in this way was a popular approach to professional learning for more than half of the participating teachers. Preferences for learning though social interaction were further highlighted when two teachers described a Ministry of Education physical activity initiative that involved curriculum planning as well as physical activity, sustained over time. The School Community Physical Activity Project (New Zealand Ministry of Education, 2007) took a whole-school/community approach, and the teachers involved engaged in sustained, in-depth work for two years. Specialists from the School Advisory Service, working collaboratively with the Health sector and Regional Sports Trusts, supported teacher learning. One teacher felt this was valuable because, “It was about changing the way we teach P.E.” (David, II). He enjoyed discussing pedagogy and reflecting on his practice. Another teacher, involved in the same project in another school, agreed: [the facilitator] would come … [and] model for us and she would talk to us first just about what we were doing in our programmes. … Then she'd come and model something for us, and actually I think being able to see somebody showing you what they are expecting in a way … I think that's the most valuable for me. (Tania, II) Both of these teachers valued the opportunity to reflect on their teaching and to learn through interaction with others. They enjoyed talking about teaching, having someone observing their teaching and watching someone else teaching their class. Their experiences illustrate the power of collaboration and communication for learning as a social process (Lave & Wenger, 1991). The teachers developed their professional practice as part of a community of learners, enabling them to move from peripheral participation in the communities of mathematics and physical education pedagogies, to fuller participation in these communities. The two learning programmes highlighted by the participants featured teachers practicing their new learning in the context of their own classrooms. This illustrates the importance of “the dialectic between persons acting and the settings in which their activity is constituted” (Lave & Kvale, 1995, p. 219). These learning opportunities were situated in the context of their own classrooms and supported by reflection with a facilitator. Not all of the teachers subscribed to a view of learning that privileged mutual engagement in a shared activity. Five of the eleven teachers said that their ‘best’ professional learning experiences had occurred off the school site. In other words, the professional learning was not situated in the context of their schools or classrooms. One teacher, for example, described a week-long residential music course that he attended in another city. He said that this full immersion was very valuable: [I] wrote down some of my ideas about what I could be doing as a teacher and my relationship with music. It was a really good course, and I came back from that not afraid to sing in front of others, and to experiment with music with kids. (Kevin, II) Kevin's experiences were isolated from the wider community of practice in his school in this individual, transmission model of professional learning (Ambrosetti, 2014). Once the course was completed, he no longer had opportunities to be involved in the professional relationships that would further support his legitimate peripheral participation in the community of music practitioners. In this more traditional approach to professional learning, teachers return to their classrooms and implement their new learning in
isolation. Without further collaboration with the community of music practitioners and opportunities for learning, it is less likely that Kevin would ever become a full participant in the wider music practitioner community. Several other teachers also preferred individualised professional development. Naomi valued professional learning from inspirational presenters at off-site courses. She enjoyed being given new resources and using them with her class “straight away” (II). In his final interview, Nick lamented that “there don't seem to be the courses out there or the professional development opportunities run through the college … anymore”. He recognised there was now “more of a whole staff focus on professional development … over the last few years since I've been here we've looked at the ICT cluster, [that] was the main one and we've looked at, sort of inhouse things” (EI). He felt that he had less opportunity to pursue his personal professional development needs and interests than he had previously. Nick has captured the shift in New Zealand from isolated, transmission models of professional learning (Knight, 2002), to models of professional learning that emphasise “an extended period of legitimate peripherality [which] provides learners with opportunities to make the culture of practice theirs” (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 95). Individual teacher dispositions and preferences are important for legitimate, effective professional learning. We argue those teachers who see professional learning as an individual activity, rather than as part of a community of learning, may be less likely to be open to opportunities for learning through mentoring student teachers. 6. Participants’ experiences of mentoring The mentor teachers in this study largely described personal, technical and professional benefits when asked about the value of mentoring (Simpson et al., 2007). Mentor teachers described a number of personal benefits from mentoring (Jaspers et al., 2014; Simpson et al., 2007). For example, one of the teachers said that having a student teacher in the class “helps me to be clearer about what I'm doing … and it makes me more organized” (Irene, II). Hosting a student teacher can also increase self-awareness and can be an affirming experience. Another teacher referred to the boost in confidence it gave her to realise that the things she does and takes for granted are appreciated by student teachers. In addition, student teachers can be helpful in a school community (Arnold, 2002; Jaspers et al., 2014). Naomi mentioned the benefits of extra hands for group teaching and for pupil to adult ratios at offsite activities such as schools camp. Kelvin celebrated the resources that student teachers develop and share with teachers, and three participants said that they had been exposed to new resources by their student teacher. While these technical and professional benefits (Simpson et al., 2007) can be useful, in our view they do not constitute professional learning for the mentor teacher. Mentoring has the potential to afford significant learning opportunities for teachers as well as their mentees when the mentoring relationship is conceptualised in collegial ways. In this study, however, the majority of mentor teacher participants interpreted their relationships with student teachers as hierarchical; positioning themselves as the experts and the student teacher as the novices or learners. Their views were apparent in the way they talked about student teachers. Clare illustrated how she viewed the relationship between teacher and student teacher when she said, “sometimes you have to … sit them down like your own students in your class and say listen you are here to learn”(II). She said that a student teacher who thinks they “know it all” (II) is a problem. Diane observed that students like that are rare, but when you do meet them “you just want to shake them and say look mate, I've
H. Trevethan, S. Sandretto / Teaching and Teacher Education 68 (2017) 127e133
done this job for a long time. You need to listen because if you don't listen you're not going to learn” (II). Nick explained his strategy for dealing with those students as letting them “crash and then when they sort of wake up and go why did that happen? We are charged with teaching them the lessons they need to learn.” These comments are stark reminders that not all teachers see mentoring as collective, collaborative work. Positioning the mentoring relationship as hierarchical means that there is limited potential for reciprocal professional learning relationships.
7. Mentoring as professional learning In this study, it appeared that most teachers believed that the success, or otherwise, of mentorestudent teacher relationships was predetermined by like-mindedness or personal compatibility, rather than by their deliberate actions as a mentor and professional colleague (Trevethan, 2014). Trust, sharing, support, and working together are important aspects of mentoring relationships (Awaya et al., 2003), and also of professional learning through collaboration with others (Ampartzaki, Kypriotaki, Voreadou, Dardioti, & Stathi, 2013). Few of the teachers in this study saw their mentoring relationships in this way. We suggest this represents missed opportunities for professional learning through mentoring. Restructuring mentoring relationships through the lens of educative mentoring has great potential, in our view, to enhance potential professional learning for both mentor and mentee. Educative mentoring is embedded in relationships, and closely aligned to learning as social practice where members of a community collaborate (Schulz, 2005). Two teachers provided us with brief insight into the potential of educative mentoring for professional learning. One teacher, Barry, acknowledged that through mentoring, mentor teachers can develop and grow as professionals. In his initial interview, he said that this was one of the most enjoyable aspects of the mentor teacher role and referred to a recent student as a “co-teacher”, rather than a student teacher. The term “co-teacher” suggests Barry has restructured the mentoring relationship away from a top-down model. In his final interview he said that he was conscious of not “forcing” his ideas on his student teachers and said that within the lesson, as in within my observation.. I just made a wee note, next step you could try this, it was always just an option for them to try … rather than you need to be doing this … because then it just becomes forced upon them rather than them think that's a good idea. (Barry, EI) He felt that both he and his student teachers benefit from reflecting and inquiring into lessons that do not go well, whether they are the student teacher's lessons or his own. In his final interview he said that he said that he thinks that his mentoring role is to: Let them experience lessons that I've taught that don't go well and sit down and reflect on it and let them see me reflecting on lessons that go well and don't go well and identifying that. (Barry, EI) This mentor located himself as a learner as well as a teacher, and thus was better positioned to take advantage of mentoring as a form of professional learning. Learning occurs through mutual engagement where there is a shared focus on moving forward within a community of practice (Wenger, 1998). Barry could see the potential for improving his own practices, as well as those of his student teacher, through working together. Thus, he was becoming
131
aware of the mutually educative potential of the mentoring relationship. Ryan provided us with another glimpse of mentoring as professional learning. He acknowledged that his guided reading lessons and those of his student teacher were quite different (New Zealand Ministry of Education, 2005). He was aware that his practice needed some attention and positioned himself as learner, open to learning alongside and from his student teacher. A number of conversations with the first author, the mentor and the student teacher led to a professional learning initiative where Ryan and the student teacher each planned and taught a guided reading lesson to a small group of children. Those lessons were video recorded and then viewed by the mentor teacher, the student teacher and the first author, and compared to the policy guidelines (New Zealand Ministry of Education, 2005). The mentor teacher and the student teacher then planned and taught another lesson each, which were also recorded, viewed, and discussed. In this small-scale initiative, learning was part of a social activity situated in the context of the classroom in which mentor and mentee were co-participants (Lave & Kvale, 1995). The teacher acknowledged himself as a co-learner and was willing to engage in a collaborative learning relationship. He explained, “it proved to be an absolutely wonderful and inspiring sort of little thing, because he [the student teacher] raised the question why do you do what you do? And why do I do see things a little bit different?” (EI). Ryan may not have reflected on his reading programme if he had not had the opportunity to compare his practices with those of his student teacher. Thus, the student teacher was a catalyst for the mentor's professional learning, and they engaged in learning as a situated social activity. He said that his student teacher worked “collaboratively … outside of the guided reading session or the reading programme, you know we did a lot of interaction with math[ematics] and everything else too” (EI). Ryan's comments illustrate the potential of the mentoring relationship as an opportunity to deepen legitimate peripheral participation in the community of skilled practitioners. It is an example of learning “through mutual engagement in an activity which is defined by the meaning both inside and outside the community” (Fuller, Hodkinson, Hodkinson, & Unwin, 2005, p. 52), in particular the teaching of guided reading. Ryan was willing to take the opportunity to re-examine his own practices in light of those of his student teacher and to engage in professional learning. 8. Moving towards educative mentoring This study set out to investigate if mentor teachers recognised mentoring student teachers as an opportunity for professional learning, where we view professional learning as a collaborative, social and situated activity. There was evidence that working with a student teacher was seen as beneficial; however, there was limited evidence of teachers linking mentoring with professional learning as we have defined it - continuing, active, social, and related to practice. We suggest that educative mentoring has the potential to be a powerful professional learning opportunity for both the mentor teacher and the student teacher. This study demonstrates that the relationship between mentoring and opportunities for professional learning cannot be taken for granted. One participating teacher in particular became more aware of the potential of professional learning through mentoring during the year of the study. In her exit interview, she said that she had “learnt so much” from the student teachers she had mentored. She showed that she was much more aware of them as learning partners and she emphasised, “now I feel that I can ask them well what do you think I should be doing?” Integral to both a sociocultural view of learning and educative mentoring is the notion of reciprocity (Le Cornu, 2009; Schulz, 2005). Communities of practice are
132
H. Trevethan, S. Sandretto / Teaching and Teacher Education 68 (2017) 127e133
founded on reciprocity as mutual engagement is one of the defining features of that model of learning. A disposition towards reciprocity includes engaging in dialogue with others, negotiating mutual sense and interest, communicating with others … giving an opinion, taking into account the perspectives of others, sharing responsibility, communicating ideas, and valuing being and becoming a group member. (Carr et al., 2010, p. 24, p. 24) Teachers who are able to access professional learning opportunities from their mentoring with student teachers need to be invested in the learning relationship, to be resilient and to be open to alternative points of view. Educative mentoring within a community of practice underscores the importance of developing shared perspectives, and a common language and culture, which may support the negotiation of power differentials as members learn together. In this case mentors contribute to the common goal of supporting student teachers to enter the teaching community as full members. One significant factor in determining the potential for professional learning from mentoring seems to be how mentor teachers position the other members of learning community. In the Numeracy Project and the physical activity initiative, the other members of the community were peers and an expert facilitator. In the mentor teacher-student teacher community, the student teachers were frequently positioned as novices. A sociocultural view of learning suggests that effectiveness of a community of practice “depends on a variety of interpersonal factors … such as collegiality, trust, mutual respect, a sense of belonging” (Ampartzaki et al., 2013, p. 5). It does seem that some of these mentor teachers did not see their student teacher mentees as colleagues, and were therefore not able to engage in professional learning from their shared experiences. How teachers position themselves as mentors, in addition to how they position other members of the learning community, is central to their ability to capitalise on professional learning opportunities through mentoring. One core principle of sociocultural learning theory is the acknowledgement that old-timers can continue to learn as well as novices, suggesting, “everyone's participation is peripheral in some respect” (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 117). Educative mentoring reflects this view and recognises that mentors can learn more about their own teaching through working with student teachers. Feiman-Nemser (1998) states that “the tools of mentoring e observation, co-planning, joint inquiry, critical conversation and reflection e are also the tools of continuous improvement in teaching” (p. 73), however, most of the teachers in this study did not interpret mentoring in that way. This may be due in part to a lack of professional learning about the mentoring role. Without significant support, many mentor teacher teachers mentor their student teachers in the same ways they themselves were mentored (Trevethan, 2014; Langdon, 2017). Educative mentoring and communities of practice are both premised on principles of trust and open-mindedness. Some of the teachers in this study seemed to be unwilling to be open about their own learning needs. One striking illustration came from a teacher who rationalised “having a very capable student … prying into the dark recesses of your teaching ignorance is undermining” (Kevin, II). Teachers who are not able to acknowledge their own learning needs are not likely to be able to access opportunities for professional learning from mentoring. In order to capitalise on the opportunities that may arise for professional learning while mentoring, we contend that teachers will need support to reposition themselves as educative mentors.
9. Concluding thoughts The key findings from this study suggest the need for caution when linking professional learning with mentoring. In this study of teachers in one school there was a range of preferences for professional learning, various interpretations of the mentoring role and different views of the professional learning potential of the mentoring role. Thus, the simplistic answer to the research question ‘To what extent do mentor teachers recognise mentoring student teachers as an opportunity for professional learning?’ seems to be to e somewhat. Overall, the majority of teachers in this study did not see mentoring as professional learning despite the fact that over half of them celebrated collaborative, situated learning as their most valuable professional learning experiences. They valued watching others teaching their classes, and having professional conversations about teaching; yet ironically, they did not see that the same opportunities are available to them from mentoring student teachers. The reasons seem to be related to how they regard the student teachers and how they interpreted the role of mentor. One limitation of the study was that the teachers were all from the same school and most of them had limited experience of other schools. The culture of a school may be a factor in how the mentoring role was interpreted and had this research been conducted in a different school, or across schools, the findings may have been different. While it would be unwise to generalise from this small study, nonetheless it raises important considerations for future research and policy related to both teacher learning and learning to mentor. Importantly, it does appear that caution is necessary when making links between mentoring and teacher professional learning. Understandings of the mentor role are significant when considering mentor professional learning opportunities. Working with a student teacher is unlikely to be a form of professional development for teachers unless they see their role as co-learners within respectful, reciprocal learning relationships. Teachers need opportunities and support to examine their role and possibly ‘unlearn’ their understandings of professional learning and of the role of mentor, which one teacher said has “become automatic when you do it year after year”. Future research in which mentor teachers are supported to reposition themselves as educative mentors within a community of practice can extend this small-scale study and contribute both to the mentoring literature and the professional learning of the mentors and mentees involved. The conclusions in this study emphasise the importance of professional learning for mentoring student teachers in order to capitalise on the potential of professional learning while mentoring student teachers. References Ambrosetti, A. (2014). Are you ready to be a mentor? Preparing teachers for mentoring pre-service teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(6), 30e42. Ampartzaki, M., Kypriotaki, M., Voreadou, C., Dardioti, A., & Stathi, I. (2013). Communities of practice and participatory action research: The formation of a synergy for the development of museum programmes for early childhood. Educational Action Research, 21(1), 4e27. Arnold, P. (2002). Cooperating teachers' professional growth through supervision of student teachers and participation in a collegial study group. Teacher Education Quarterly, 29(2), 123e132. Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in Teaching and Teacher Education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10e20. Awaya, A., McEwan, H., Heyler, D., Linsky, S., Lum, D., & Wakukawa, P. (2003). Mentoring as a journey. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(1), 45e56. Barab, S. A., & Duffy, T. M. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments, 1(1), 25e55. Beck, C., & Kosnik, C. (2000). Associate teachers in pre-service education: Clarifying and enhancing their role. Journal of Education for Teaching, 26(3), 207e224. Bradbury, L. U., & Koballa, T. R. (2007). Mentor advice giving in an alternative
H. Trevethan, S. Sandretto / Teaching and Teacher Education 68 (2017) 127e133 certification program for secondary science teaching: Opportunities and roadblocks in developing a knowledge base for teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(6), 817e840. Buysse, V., Sparkman, K. L., & Wesley, P. W. (2003). Communities of practice: Connecting what we know with what we do. Exceptional Children, 69(3), 263e277. Carr, M., Smith, A. B., Duncan, J., Jones, C., Lee, W., & Marshall, K. (2010). Learning in the making. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Day, C. (1993). Reflection: A necessary but not sufficient condition for professional development. British Educational Research Journal, 19(1), 83e93. Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S. (1992). Think practically and look locally: Language and gender in community-based practice. Annual Review of Anthropology, 21(1), 461e490. Education Services. (2017). Professional learning and development. Retrieved from: http://services.education.govt.nz/pld/. Feiman-Nemser, S. (1998). Teachers as teacher educators. European Journal of Teacher Education, 21(1), 63e74. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). Helping novices learn to teach: Lessons from an exemplary support teacher. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(1), 17e30. Ferrier-Kerr, J. (2009). Establishing professional relationships in practicum settings. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(6), 790e797. Fuller, A., Hodkinson, H., Hodkinson, P., & Unwin, L. (2005). Learning as peripheral participation in communities of practice: A reassessment of key concepts in workplace learning. British Educational Research Journal, 31(1), 49e68. Giebelhaus, C. R., & Bowman, C. L. (2002). Teaching mentors: Is it worth the effort? The Journal of Educational Research, 95(4), 246e254. Gilles, C., & Wilson, J. (2004). Receiving as well as giving: Mentors' perceptions of their professional development in one teacher induction program. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 12(1), 87e106. Hoban, G. (2002). Teacher learning for educational change. Buckingham, England: Open University Press. Hudson, P. B. (2010). Mentors report on their own mentoring practices. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35(7), 30e42. Hudson, P. (2013). Mentoring as professional development: ‘growth for both’ mentor and mentee. Professional Development in Education, 39(5), 771e783. Jaspers, W. M., Meijer, P. C., Prins, F., & Wubbels, T. (2014). Mentor teachers: Their perceived possibilities and challenges as mentor and teacher. Teaching and Teacher Education, 44, 106e116. Kane, R., & Broadley, G. (2005). Learning from experience within professional relationships. In P. Adams, K. Vossler, & C. Scrivens (Eds.), Teachers' work in Aotearoa New Zealand (pp. 307e319). Southbank, Victoria: Thompson/Dunmore Press. Kennedy, A. (2005). Models of continuing professional development: A framework for analysis. Journal of In-Service Education, 21(2), 235e250. Knight, P. (2002). A systemic approach to professional development: Learning as practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(3), 229e241. Lai, K. W., Pratt, K., Anderson, M., & Stigter, J. (2006). Literature review and Synthesis: Online communities of practice: A report submitted to the Ministry of education. New Zealand: Ministry of Education. Langdon, F. (2014). Evidence of mentor learning and development: An analysis of New Zealand mentor/mentee professional conversations. Professional Development in Education, 40(1), 36e55. Langdon, F. (2017). Learning to mentor: Unravelling routine practice to develop adaptive mentoring expertise. Teacher Development, 1e19. Langdon, F., & Ward, L. (2015). Educative mentoring: A way forward. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 4(4), 240e254. Lave, J. (1991). Situating learning. In L. Resnick, J. Levine, & S. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 63e82). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Lave, J., & Kvale, S. (1995). What is anthropological research? An interview with Jean Lave by Steinar Kvale. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 8(3), 219e228. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK.: Cambridge University Press. Le Cornu, R. (2009, June). Crossing Boundaries: Challenges of academics working in professional experiences. In Paper presented at the Australian teacher education
133
association. Albury, Australia. Legard, R., Keegan, J., & Ward, K. (2003). In-depth interviews. In J. Ritchie, & J. Lewis (Eds.), Qualitative research practice (pp. 138e169). London: Sage Publications. Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (2011). Learning communities. Journal of Staff Development, 32(4), 16e20. Linterman, L., & Browne, R. (2007). Getting the most out of professional development. SET: Research Information for Teachers, 1, 38e42. Lopez-Real, F., & Kwan, T. (2005). Mentors' perceptions of their own professional development during mentoring. Journal of Education for Teaching, 31(1), 15e24. Mclaughlin, T. H. (2003). Teaching as a practice and a community of practice: The limits of commonality and the demands of diversity. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 37(2), 339e352. Meyerhoff, M. (2002). Communities of practice. In J. K. Chambers, P. Trudgill, & N. Schilling-Estes (Eds.), The handbook of language variation and change (pp. 428e447). Oxford,UK: Blackwell Publishers. Minott, M. A., & Willett, I. L. (2011). Student-teachers' supervision as a professional development activity: Building work-related skills. Professional Development in Education, 37(4), 537e550. New Zealand Ministry of Education. (2005). Guided reading: Years 5-8. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media Ltd. New Zealand Ministry of Education. (2007). Physical activity for healthy confident kids. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media Ltd. Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376e407. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods Thousand Oaks. California: Sage Publications. Riveros, A., Newton, P., & Burgess, D. (2012). A situated account of teacher agency and learning: Critical reflections on professional learning communities. Canadian Journal of Education, 35(1), 202e216. Sankar, M., & Chauvel, F. (2010). Provision of school support Services, an evaluation. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education. Schulz, R. (2005). The practicum: More than practice. Canadian Journal of Education, 28(1/2), 147e167. Schwille, S. A. (2008). The professional practice of mentoring. American Journal of Education, 115(1), 139e167. Simpson, T., Hastings, W., & Hill, B. (2007). ‘I knew that she was watching me’: The professional benefits of mentoring. Teachers & Teaching, 13(5), 481e498. Sinnema, C., Sewell, A., & Milligan, A. (2011). Evidence-informed collaborative inquiry for improving teaching and learning. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 39(3), 247e261. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Thomas, D. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(2), 237e246. Timperley, H. (2001). Mentoring conversations designed to promote student teacher learning. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 29(2), 111e123. Torrez, C. A. F., & Krebs, M. M. (2012). Expert voices: What cooperating teachers and teacher candidates say about quality student teaching placements and experiences. Action in Teacher Education, 34(5e6), 485e499. Trevethan, H. (2014). Associate teachers in New Zealand: Great expectations. (Unpublished EdD thesis). Dunedin, New Zealand: University of Otago. Trevethan, H. (2017). Educative mentors? The role of classroom teachers in initial teacher education. A New Zealand study. Journal of Education for Teaching, 43(2), 219e231. Tuckett, A. G. (2005). Part II. Rigour in qualitative research: Complexities and solutions. Nurse Researcher, 13(1), 29e42. Webster-Wright, A. (2009). Reframing professional development through understanding authentic professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 702e739. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Cambridge, UK.: Cambridge University Press. Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. Whatman, J., & Bull, A. (2014). The work of PLD facilitators. Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER.