Mentoring Case Narratives

Mentoring is contextually bound, with a variety of participants, settings, issues, needs, and time constraints, etc. The [mentoring] context is social, not individual (Fullan, 2001), and is defined as structure, framework, environment, situation, circumstances, and ambiance (Kochan 2002).  An effective tool in capturing mentoring contexts is the case narrative. Case narratives are defined as stories in which dilemmas are described that characterize a mentoring context grounded in actual experiences or events. They “incorporate information needed to clarify target problems” (Kagan, 1993) and “…serve as a vehicle for reflection” (Koballa & Tippins, 2000). Case narratives can reduce the complexity of [mentoring] into a manageable story situated in a specific context (Abell, Cennamo, Anderson, Bryan, Campbell & Hug, 1996). They provide a framework for conversation (Orland-Barak, 2002). Case narratives can be open (unresolved dilemmas) or closed (dilemma resolved) and characterized by a variety of writing styles. They have historically been used in medicine, business, and law, and more recently in other fields, to provide a context for exploring particular principles or problems. We recommend the construction of case narratives as a reflective tool across the disciplines for use in mentoring.

In the following section, excerpts from our mentoring case narratives are presented. A modification of the Peeling the Onion protocol developed by the National School Reform Faculty (National School Reform Faculty, n.d.) was used to help peel away layers to identify the deeper issues that lie underneath the surface of mentoring contexts. In the first round, we individually read a mentoring case narrative. In the second round, a facilitator wrote the title of the narrative as the centerpiece of a concept map on the board. We then orally shared our thoughts (e.g., mentoring layers, issues of trust, time commitment) about the case narrative. The facilitator clarified and documented thoughts on the concept map as participants shared. Questions were framed that led to discussions about mentoring contexts, attributes, and strategies. During this second round, the author of the case narrative was silent. The third round consisted of the narrative author sharing additional information about the case and affirming or negating (which was rare) insights participants shared. During the fourth round, case narrative authors wrote a response for their case identifying the possibilities, options, and interdisciplinary strategies (examining an issue or problem from multiple perspectives and selecting a plan or course of action in pursuit of a specific goal) that surfaced.

Mentoring Case Narrative Excerpts, Concept Maps, and Responses

I’m Too Old for That—Cassandra D. Allen

Steve, a second career teacher who spent most of his life in the army training new cadets finds himself teaching US History at a school that places high demands on teachers to reflect on and refine their practice.  The social studies department’s attempt to mentor Steve is an illustration of how to work with and develop second career teachers who demonstrate resistance within the teaching profession.

Steve’s point that college was lecture based and required tedious note taking gave him a sense of validity to his approach. It also stifled our departmental efforts to share our creative projects and collaborative classrooms. Steve had a point, higher education had not caught on to our progressive theories and so, why expose kids to a way of learning and understanding that would not be their final “test of intestinal fortitude in education?” Steve asked. As a social studies department we had an unspoken goal of helping Steve overcome his outdated approach to teaching. We figured that if we all worked harder at presenting our work to one another, sharing, giving feedback, that it would catch on, like a virus. How could Steve resist the peer pressure and student success stories we shared?

Using the department structure, we would create a peer feedback group that would meet regularly to share our work and our students’ work with one another. Framed much like a Critical Friends Group (CFG) (School Reform Initiative, n.d.), our peer feedback group would look at our classroom assignments and student work in a structured and supportive environment. In order to create consensus, we should first collaboratively create norms and expectations for participation in the group as well as discuss the goal(s) for the group. Once norms for the group are established, regular and purposeful meetings should be scheduled; creating time and space gives meaning to the work. As a participant, Steve should never be made to feel like the target of reform, or that he is being forced into the group.

The overall feeling of the group should be that we are all in this together. At meetings, each participant should bring work and the group will choose one member to focus on based on the immediate need of the individual, for instance, a project they intend on executing. The group should use a structured CFG protocol, one that provides safety to the presenter to examine and provide feedback to the work. This peer feedback group should be built to create community among the department, and will serve as a way to mentor Steve and the whole department. Each participant should take a role in facilitating and presenting, and the group should not need a designated leader. This strategy and peer learning community will hopefully help Steve see different approaches to teaching while also including him in reflective practice processes.

Different Worlds—Anthony D. Neely

In Different Worlds, the case narrative explores the numerous difficulties a late career teacher, Mrs. Audie, experiences in designing a student-centered learning environment. Frustrated to the point of leaving the teaching profession, Mrs. Audie reaches out to a younger teacher, John, for feedback on her teaching practice. 

From a severe lack of manners to Charlatan hussies wearing clothes that she deemed appropriate only for those pursuing the world’s oldest career, Mrs. Audie aired her grievances with this generation of students. “And don’t get me started on those cell phones…Oh Lord help me I want to break every last one of those brain shrinking devices! Pardon my French, but I blame those…darn…things for students’ inability to write, speak, or pay attention like a civilized human being.” Stopping short of offering the proverbial ‘back in my day’ speech, she returned to questioning her future at Lakemore High School.

Before mentoring ensues, one must ask if it is too late to mentor Mrs. Audie. If she is unwilling to re-evaluate her practice, in lieu of placing blame on students for the learning environment that has emerged in her classroom, the mentoring relationship may not be a worthwhile endeavor. However, if she is willing to alter her practice, then John has the monumental task of helping provide mentoring in at least five areas: (1) shifting paradigms, (2) increasing knowledge of and proficiency with educational technology, (3) constructing student-centered curriculum and pedagogy, (4) gaining knowledge of emerging trends in youth culture, and (5) effective intergenerational communication. In situations where a teacher wishes to alter practice in order to create a learning environment that caters to the needs and interests of students, mentors could utilize the strategy of Consensus Building at the onset of the mentoring relationship. This strategy will allow the mentee to gain insights from students regarding elements of class they enjoy and those practices in need of re-evaluation. Consensus Building is a strategy in which every member in the group (in this case Mrs. Audie, the students, and John) has input in decision making. Consensus Building allows for productive dialogue, debate, and a better understanding of multiple points of view.  It aids in negotiation skills, conflict resolution, and group processing. Steps include: 1. Pose a specific question to participants and have them brainstorm a list of answers (words or phrases) 2. Form small groups of three to five participants and ask them to share their individual lists. Have them search for shared or common answers. 3. Combine small groups into larger groups and repeat step #2.  3. One by one, have each group orally share their list. Allow an opportunity for questions and points-of-clarification. 4. As each group shares, document common answers across all groups. 5. From the list of common answers across all groups, have students sort answers into themes or topics to be addressed. With the feedback gained from this strategy, the mentor and mentee can map out a strategic plan for the next steps of their mentoring pursuits. 

Navigating New Terrain—Michael T. Mary

In Navigating New Terrain, a district curriculum coordinator has developed a new program that will require veteran teachers to be moved into new positions with which they have no experience.  The program coordinator possesses knowledge about the program needs, as well as, extensive knowledge about the teachers selected for the new program. Because of his personal experience, the coordinator plans to mentor the teachers through their transition.

The district was implementing a pilot program that I had designed to determine if there was a benefit to reversing the traditional science course sequence.  This program would require moving teachers into unfamiliar content areas or into a grade level which they were not previously experienced.  Considering the importance of a successful program implementation, this change in content or context made it necessary for the selected teachers to have adequate support during their transitions into their new positions.  Having observed both of the selected teachers in action dozens of times, I felt I had insight into the pedagogical strengths and weaknesses of each.  I also had a unique personal experience that may prove beneficial in my goal of mentoring these teachers.   With a degree in biology and kinesiology, I spent my first four years teaching biology courses before being reassigned as a physics teacher.  The combination of my personal experience as a teacher and knowledge about the selected teachers provided a strong foundation and framework upon which to build a successful mentoring partnership. 

A mentoring relationship, like many other professional relationships, is a complex relationship that must be based on mutual interests (Sambunjak & Marusic, 2010). In this case, the mentor has experiences that are congruent with each of the teachers and also with bridging the transition that both will face. However, due to the senior position held by the mentor, it is important to breakdown the organizational barriers that may exist (Hunt & Michael, 1983; Kram, 1985). The mentor can accomplish this by maintaining regular communication, demonstrating their shared teaching interest, and using his own similar experiences to strengthen the sense of mutual personal involvement and interest experienced by both mentor and mentee (Kram, 1985; Jacoby, 1991; Perry, Phillips, & Hutchinson, 2006; Schwille, 2008). This mentorship should be expected to extend through an entire school year; if not beyond, and therefore will allow for a greater psychosocial impact on both the mentor and the mentee (Burke, McKenna, & McKeen, 1991).

Robert is in Trouble—Josiah Johnson

Robert is currently in his final year of a teacher education program and is in his student teaching practicum. Because he is getting an all level certification, he has to spend half of his time teaching at the elementary level. Robert wants to be a high school coach and doesn’t have much interest in teaching younger students. This has led to some struggles during his student teaching and he begins to question his career goals.

Robert’s first lesson on his own was with Kindergarteners, which put him on edge because he didn’t know how to instruct children that age.  Just before the lesson, his university supervisor showed up for a surprise visit. Robert was worried because he hadn’t been keeping up with his lesson plans or student teaching journal. The lesson wasn’t horrible, but it wasn’t great either. He was distracted because of the presence of his university supervisor and he had some issues getting the kids through the lesson. This was mostly because the activities he planned were too difficult for Kindergarteners to follow.

The goal of Robert’s mentoring should be to improve his competencies in designing and implementing lessons thus leading to increased confidence. The first recommendation would be a group goal setting session with Robert, his university supervisor, and his cooperating teacher. The session should seek to provide a mutually agreed upon roadmap to success for Robert. In addition, the mentor teacher needs to model effective lesson planning and instructional strategies to provide context for how the practice of teaching occurs in a real life setting. Robert also needs constructive feedback regarding his lesson planning and teaching. Because of his self-doubt, the Sandwich strategy (praise, correction, praise) may help build his self-confidence. And, Robert needs to be receptive to mentoring and follow through with suggestions and advice from his mentors. 

What to Say?—Jamie McKenzie-Davis

Even if you think you know all there is to know about mentoring and have strategies in place, the first time you mentor, you will probably be a fish out of water.  Here, we see an example of a new mentor who is going through a first year teaching adjustment period not unlike her mentee. The mentor in this context does what she thinks is right, but second-guesses herself, thinking she has made no impact at all.  What we see, instead, is it takes a second source to validate that mentoring had an impact after all. 

My mentor professor told me, in private, that all four of my mentees had outperformed the other students in the graduate class and that she could see a change in Judy over the semester.  Judy was more confident and became more enthusiastic about teaching.  I hadn’t really seen that progression, I believe, because I was too close to Judy and couldn’t see the subtle changes that occurred over the semester.  It took another person who could examine the situation holistically, to see the forest for the trees. 

Mandated mentoring programs have been spreading, but what we typically see is mandated mentoring between a seasoned teacher and a novice teacher.  What we are left with is how to train the mentors.  Mentors cannot be expected to know how to mentor.  Mentors actually need tried-and-true models to draw from for their mentoring experience.  A new mentor needs to be mentored—it is not simply an innate process.  In this case narrative, Judy’s mentor reviewed the literature on mentoring, but struggled to put theory into practice. Mandated mentoring programs should incorporate research-based methods to guide mentors.  

What We Learned

• Mentoring is contextual. We are in agreement with Kochan (2002) in his assessment of context in relationship to mentoring. He states, “If mentoring programs and relationships are to be successful, it is vital to consider the context within which they are occurring….”
• Mentoring involves multiple perspectives. Mentoring is a social activity, thus requiring multiple perspectives (Allen, 2006). Examining the case narratives allowed for the sharing of multiple perspectives (Koballa & Tippins, 2000). When we read the case narratives, engaged in the Peeling the Onion strategy, and discussed the context of the case, multiple perspectives were voiced. These voices helped us to identify diverse approaches to mentoring identified in each case.
• Mentoring is reciprocal. Mentoring is a two-way, learning relationship (Genoni & Ritchie 1996; Jacobi, 1991).
• Mentoring requires effective professional development. What makes professional development effective is action (Pate & Thompson, 2003)—action taken by the mentor or mentee in regards to decision-making and making a change (Shea, 1994).
• Mentoring offers emotional, psychological, and professional support (Kram, 1983; Kram & Isabella, 1985; Sambunjak & Marusic, 2010).
• Mentoring relationships develop over time and require long-term commitment (Burke, McKenna, & McKeen, 1991; Cho, Ramanan, and Felding, 2011; Genoni & Ritchie, 1996; Schwille, 2008).
• Mentoring relationships develop in stages (Genoni & Ritchie 1996), and roles evolve.
• Mentoring requires communication. This includes communicating regularly (Perry, 2006) and involves interpersonal communication and listening skills (Kram, 1985).
• Mentoring requires attention to culture.  Culture includes, such things as, ethnicity, status, age, race, gender, and sexuality (Hansman 2003; Kochan & Pascarelli, 2003).
• Mentoring is reflexive. The mentor-mentee relationship should be constantly revisited and the processes altered to meet the needs of each.

 

 

REFERENCES

Abell, S. K., Cennamo, K. S., Anderson, M. A., Bryan, L. A., Campbell, L. M.,  & Hug, J. W. (1996). Integrated media classroom cases in elementary science teacher education. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 15, 137-151.

Allen, T. (2006). The relationship between formal mentoring program characteristics and perceived program effectiveness. Personnel Psychology, 59(1), 125-153.

Burke, R., McKenna, C., & McKeen, C. (1991). How do mentorships differ from typical supervisory relationships? Psychological Reports, 68, 459–466.

Cho, C. S., Ramanan, R. A., & Feldman, M. D. (2011). Defining the ideal qualities of mentorship: A qualitative analysis of the characteristics of outstanding mentors. The American Journal of Medicine, 124(5), 453-458.

Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Genoni, P. W., & Ritchie, A. (1996, October). Mentoring as continuing professional development: the ALIA (WA) Group Mentoring Programme. In Reading the Future: Proceedings of the Biennial Conference of the Australian Library and Information Association World

Congress Centre, Melbourne, Australia, 6-11 October 1996 (pp. 187-95). Australian Library and Information Association.

Hunt, D. M., & Michael, C. (1983). Mentorship: A career training and development tool. Academy of Management Review, 8, 475–485.

Jacobi, M. (1991). Mentoring and undergraduate academic success: A literature review. Review of Educational Research,61(4),505-532.

Kagan, D. M. (1993). Contexts for the use of classroom cases. American Educational Research Journal, 30(4),703-723.

Koballa, T. R., &Tippins, D. J. (Eds.). (2000). Cases in middle and secondary science education: The promise and dilemmas. Columbus, OH; Merrill.

Kochan, F. K. (Ed.). (2002). The organizational and human dimensions of successful mentoring programs and relationships. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Kochan, F. K., & Pascarelli, J. T. (Ed.). (2003). Global perspectives on mentoring: Transforming contexts, communities, and cultures. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Kram, K. E. (1983). Phases of the mentor relationship. Academy of Management Journal, 26(4), 608–625.

Kram, K. E., & Isabella, L. (1985). Mentoring alternatives: The role of peer relationships in career development. Academy of Management Journal, 28(1), 110-32.

National School Reform Faculty. (n.d.). Peeling the onion protocol. Retrieved from http://www.nsrfharmony.org/protocol/doc/peeling_onion.pdf

Orland-Barak, L. (2002). What’s in a case?: What mentors’ cases reveal about the practice of mentoring. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34(4), 451-468.

Pate, P.E., & Thompson, K. F. (2003). Effective professional development: What is it? In V. A. Anfara & P. G. Andrews (Eds.), Handbook of research in middle level education- Leaders for a movement: Professional preparation and development of middle level teachers and administrators. (pp. 123-143). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

Perry, N., Phillips, L., & Hutchinson, L. (2006). Mentoring student teachers to support self-regulated learning. The Elementary School Journal, 106(3), 237-254.

Sambunjak, D., & Marusic, A. (2010). A systematic review of qualitative research on the meaning and characteristics of mentoring in academic medicine. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 25(1), 72-78.

School Reform Initiative. (n.d). Core practices. Retrieved from http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org/core-practices/

Schwille, S.A. (2008). The professional practice of mentoring. American Journal of Education, 115(1), 139-167.

Shea, G. F. (1994). Mentoring: Helping employees reach their full potential. New York, NY: American Management Association.