Statement of the Problem

Work to become successful often equates with negotiations surrounding power and privilege. In the world’s current business climate of goal and product orientation, the advancement of caring communities and developmental relationships is often overlooked. No person becomes a corporate leader, receives tenure at a university, or is elected to political office by showing their ability for cooperation, emotional sensitivity, and nurturing (Johnson, 2006). While this may be an oversimplification of complex institutional practices, there is very little policy that addresses what it means to mentor in a caring community.

There are other complications surrounding institutional community and developmental relationships. The institutional community members must decide what it means to mentor and must identify what they value. This is not a one-size-fits-all model. It is an all-inclusive process. Principles and practices of caring and developmental relationships will become a reflection of the institution in which they were created.

 

Methods of Inquiry, Data Collection, and Analyses

This research identified ways in which principles and practices of caring communities could be utilized to enhance developmental relationships. The work was in three specific settings: in a college of education, over seven years; with an undergraduate student population taking prerequisite coursework for education, spanning one year; and with the teachers from a K-12 urban public school department in the Orne Department of Education Living Language Work Group, Alençon, France, over one month. In all three settings, a contrast/comparative perspective grounded in anthropological inquiry and action research methods was used (Reason, 2001). Both qualitative and quantitative perspectives were integrated. Care was taken throughout to construct a unified line of inquiry across the three contexts independent of the length of the study.

 

Collection and Analyses

Data were collected from several sources in each setting to enhance reliability and include a variety of perspectives. The various forms of data collection included: (a) surveys (Fontana & Frey, 1994; Janesick, 1994); (b) interviews (e.g., formal, informal, and in-depth conversational); (c) participant observations; (d) photographs; (e) field notes; and (f) anecdotal records and documents. Surveys were constructed, collected, and analyzed with indicators of implemented principles and practices such as: a) development of a climate to address issues of equity and opportunity; (b) enhanced communication; (c) increased respect and integrity; (d) healing opportunities; and (e) overall increase in job satisfaction, to include contentedness in coming to work. Additional data specific from each site were drawn as appropriate.

The data for each setting were examined for types, sequences, processes, or patterns. The goal was to assemble the data in a meaningful fashion (Jorgensen, 1989). Multiple forms of analysis were used to safeguard the reliability and validity of findings (Atkinson & Hammersley, 1994; Woods, 1994; Clifford & Marcus, 1986; Spradley, 1979, 1980). These included document examinations for: (a) longitudinal change (particularly in the regional college of education), (b) adoption or rejection of principles and practices for community, (c) participant surveys and achievement variables, and (d) interview response patterns.

 

Case Study 1: College of Education in an Urban, Regional, Comprehensive Teaching University

 

Background

In this regional case study, the researcher wanted to identify the major working climate of the college of education’s organizational structure. From 2000-2006 the college had seen amazing growth in the student population. Within that same time there had been two deans and two interim deans. Additional pressures of state and federal changes to certification, coupled with economic challenges, created a tense working environment.

 

Outcomes and Results

In October 2006 a climate study was conducted to begin this work. Three emergent themes developed, which were wrestled with for the next five years:

• People wanted to belong to a caring college of education.
• Integration of principles and practices of caring communities would require self-transformation as well as institutional change.
• Time for communication and understanding was a constraint.

The work did not stop there. During the academic year of 2011-2012 a Leadership Development Program was created. The program was limited to 11 participants, all self-identified, including the dean, assistant dean, and department chairs. A successful leadership coach was hired to assist in this climate work. The emphasis was on managing commitments, workload, and projects; becoming successful change agents; leading and empowering; and enhancing communication and developing relationships. The overarching goal was collaborative leadership. Individual coaching sessions and group sessions were held. Work was done with the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and the Clifton StrengthsFinder assessments. Meetings were held to discuss the findings and how to build collaboration using strengths and challenges. The experience was positive, with notable areas of growth in personal and professional effectiveness. Further need arose in building successful relationships with diverse individuals and groups.

It is important to note that throughout this academic year, work was being done for a National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) visit and assessment. Group coaching sessions often became a “team huddle.” However, the work started in 2006 continued and developed based upon institutional need.

In November 2012, a survey was created to enhance the mentoring program. It was very important that all members of the college of education had a voice; the survey language modeled that importance. The responses were: staff members, 23.53%; affiliate faculty members, 14.71%; visiting faculty members, 2.94%; untenured faculty members, 17.65%; and tenured faculty members, 41.18%. The initial issues identified were practical, primarily regarding where to get pertinent information about the college’s policies and procedures. While an overwhelming 97.06% responded that they did know where to get pertinent data, common concerns were expressed about not knowing and being caught by changing policies and practices.

Another survey question inquired about how important friendship is within the college of education. The responses showed that 30.3% of the participants thought friendship was very important, 60.61% thought it was moderately important, and 9.09% gave it minimal importance. Qualitative data was then collected and ideas for promoting friendship generated, including:

• Use meetings for developing relationships.
• Have professional development teams with a focus.
• Hold informal social events and conversations.
• Share talents.
• Celebrate and recognize life events.
• Collaborate.
• Volunteer to assist others.

Other ideas and concerns were brought forward that more specifically addressed the need for developmental relationships in caring communities:

• “I'm here primarily to work intellectually, not make friends. That said, the history of my friendships, both with work and non-work, has been based upon like-minded individuals (political and social beliefs, values). I find very few COE colleagues with similar political and social beliefs, but more importantly, intellectual/theoretical orientations.”
• “I would like to feel more connected to the COE. I think feeling more of a sense of friendship would help develop that feeling. However, I think this varies between individuals, and I'm not sure how to promote it. People here are nice, but I wouldn't consider them friendly.”
• “I believe that we need people so that we feel supported on more than a superficial manner. I do believe that boundaries are important though and that friendship should not influence policy and procedures.”
• “I guess I see ‘mentoring’ as a professional activity, not a social activity.”
• “Authentic/genuine opportunities to demonstrate that we care or ownership that we don't care.”
• “Ideas, beliefs, resources, materials, etc. are highly regarded when offered by some individuals; however not by others. The mantra of ‘this is the way we have always done it,’ ‘that isn't the right way to do it,’ is off putting and discourages interest in anything other than a working professional relationship … not friendship.”
•  “One of the things about my job here is that it is very isolating and I must be engaged in promoting myself if anyone is going to know what I do. That is not something I care to do, but I do care to have people know me and to know others with whom I do not interact on a regular basis. We might even benefit from having specifically assigned topics that we need to address as we sit and eat. While this sounds junior high schoolish, there must be some antidote for the isolation that so many of us feel because of the specific positions we hold.”

The survey results were shared and most all members of the college of education engaged in thoughtful roundtable discussions. Some thoughts that were generated included a focus on developmental relationships:

• Focus on new faculty and staff acclimation, then move on to substantive concerns.
• Use small-group focused discussions on specific problems that come up.
• Capture oral histories from senior and returning/outgoing faculty/staff; they are a fountain of valuable knowledge and historical perspectives, which would otherwise be lost when they leave.
• Share the history/reasoning behind decisions.
• Develop clear expectations and goals for the mentoring process.           

It was decided to create a mentoring database for faculty and another for staff. (Appendix 1 shows the Mentoring Database form.) Bottom of FormAs of April 2013, only three faculty members had completed the Mentoring Database form.

The premise of this research is that the elements of caring have not been identified and, therefore, the work of mentoring is incomplete. The process of identifying elements of care has been deemed “not intellectual,” “too soft,” or not “research based.” The college of education has not undergone the transformative work of identifying its principles and practices of developmental relationships in its caring community. To create environments based upon principles and practices of caring communities, leaders need to promote collaboration and shift teaching attitudes toward pedagogy to improve learning and ultimately create a culture of caring (Liontos, 1992). It is imperative that educators first understand themselves and examine their alliances in relation to self and others. They can then pass this understanding on to their students, preparing them to care (Noddings, 2005).

 

Case Study 2: An Identified Student Population From the

 

Urban, Regional, Comprehensive Teaching University

 

Background

The 90 students who were part of this study were taking a course that fulfilled prerequisite requirements for the college of education as well as a general education requirement. As of fall 2012, the university’s student body was primarily white and female, mirroring data from the U.S. Department of Education (2007-2008) about the demographics of the nation’s public elementary and secondary school teachers.

The emphasis in business and education at this regional university is on preparing students for a global society. However, student experiences have often been limited by the internships available in the surrounding communities. Students work primarily with people who share their life experience. When rare opportunities arise and differences become apparent, communication and collaboration become difficult. The strong need for developmental relationships continues to be evident. It is important to develop relationships based upon shared principles and practices of caring; identifying these principles will promote equity opportunities. Care ethics endorses this new spirit of global cooperation and advises that we should rethink much of what we do in schools to prepare students for this new world (Noddings, 2012).

 

Outcomes and Results

All students surveyed strongly agreed or agreed that it is important to belong to a caring community. Where differences arose was in addressing climate at the university. Most of the students indicated that the institution creates safety and respects multiculturalism. One student commented, “… really have a hard time finding my personal beliefs always agreeing with the changing social norms. Where do I stand firm and where do I keep an open mind?” 

For the question, “I feel isolated or left out of work groups because of…” the majority of the participating students responded that age and class are the dominant themes. The sense of student connectedness — to one another, faculty, and programs of study — is important in building caring communities. Socio-emotional well-being, established through nurturing relationships and community experiences, enables children and adults to evolve into caring, nonviolent, emotionally healthy citizens (Affolter, 2004).

Concerns regarding trust, dignity, power, and healing generated varying responses. All of these issues can be addressed by employing principles and practices of caring communities in developmental relationships. Most of the undergraduate students are “feeling” their way through a liberal education, frequently changing majors. The teacher-student relationship is very important. John Macmurray states “teaching is one of the foremost of personal relations” (1964, p.17). Students want to know their faculty and want their faculty to know them.

When asked to identify some barriers or challenges to their current institutional structure, students commonly agreed to elements of time and mutual understanding. Other elements identified included trust, forgiveness, compassion, careful listening, and thoughtful speaking. Finally, the principles and practices of caring that students thought most important were respect, followed closely by dialogue.

           

Case Study 3: Teachers From a K-12 Urban Public School Department in the Orne Department of Education Living Language Work Group, Alençon, France

 

Background

There were three schools in Alençon, France, chosen to participate in this study: Emile Dupont, Montsort, and Courteille Primary Schools. The research was completed over the course of one month. The teachers were surveyed on their strategies for identifying, developing, and integrating principles and practices of caring communities into their instructional strategies and relationships. (See Appendix 2 for survey document.)

The responses were varied. All teachers wanted to be part of a caring community; 77% of the respondents strongly agreed and 23% agreed about its importance. The variance came about based upon opportunities that each school had within the socialist system. All schools start with the same base funding. Differences appear when the parents/guardians and the community become involved. Then the quality of each school will change dramatically. Additional funding will supplement the upkeep of the building, curriculum opportunities, and even affect the quality of educators. Identified challenges in mutual understanding, power, and privilege were identified:

• “At a primary school level, the opportunity for ‘primary teachers’ to share, to talk to each other about goals, ways, and common projects to make the pupils succeed is less and less available.”
• “Our educational community, in the past, has been trained to think of what to do, the way to do it with the pupils/students. … Now our government has decided to reduce the opportunity.”    

Government reduction in teacher education in France has been slowly increasing during the past 10 years. Throughout this period, teaching posts were one of the main areas for budgetary savings. From 2007-2012 approximately 80,000 teaching posts were cut in France while the number of pupils remained the same (Chevalier, 2012). Within these deteriorating working conditions was a greater malaise — the loss of respect for educators popularized by the political majority. The effect can be felt within teacher preparation programs. Becoming a teacher — just like becoming any other kind of fonctionnaire — requires taking part in a public competition aimed at picking out the Republic's ablest (Schofield, 2009). Even before graduation, teachers must compete with one another for available positions. The core concentration had been a three-year process with a two-year paid internship. Currently the candidates complete three-years of study and then finish an unpaid internship.

France has resisted collecting statistics of racial demographic change, and yet there is a plethora of sociological research that illustrates the need to address social change in schools (Judge, 2004; Keaton, 2006; Greenwalt, 2009). Disadvantaged populations in France are often relegated to — and condensed in — underprivileged communities and schools (Berchini, 2013). As Judge (2004) explains, “the crude and cruel sociological fact [is] that immigrant communities are concentrated in deprived areas, where both the cycle of disadvantage and a widespread sense of grievance and frustration are reinforced” (p. 7-8). In 2010, France disbanded its teacher education preparation programs. So how are educators being prepared to address the diverse, global society we live in?

 

Outcomes and Results

Teachers within the Orne Department of Education Living Language Work Group were very willing to address principles and practices of developmental relationships in caring communities. “The climate at my institution is one that never heals harm to relationships” was repeatedly identified (55%). Forty-four percent of the respondents stated that “The climate at my institution is one that is rarely or never aware of power differences.” These two themes ran throughout this research, with teachers wanting their administrators and state officials to enter into dialogue to create change that would include them in the discussion.

Responses to the question, “I feel isolated or left out of work groups because of …” had a small variety of answers, with age being the primary factor. Teachers at the time of this research were worried about the tenure of their positions, feeling very vulnerable to the changes surrounding them daily. Teachers were reluctant to talk about issues of politics and ideology and they did see them as challenges in their profession.

Strikingly, dialogue, respect, peaceful means, responsibility, integrity, and modeling were identified in priority order to enhance overall working climate. Seventy-seven percent of the participants surveyed wanted opportunities to collaborate (Carson, 2012). The teachers wanted to talk and have their voices heard and respected. “In France, as elsewhere, teachers cannot be considered as the mere implementers of education policies. They are the designers, the teaching specialists, and the people who are unstinting in their time and energy for their pupils. A society that respects its teachers and its schools is a society that prepares its future well” (Chevalier, 2012).

           

Conclusions

This body of work confirmed that (a) a greater comprehension is needed of the delicate balance that exists between politics, institutional structures, academic freedom, collegial and professional duties, and student engagement; (b) knowledgeable practices should be implemented to promote developmental relationships in caring communities; (c) vast work remains to be done to build caring communities; and (d) institutions need to identify their own principles and practices of caring communities.

Certain themes emerged and ran throughout this work:

• Change will be difficult; how can it be made easier?
• How can educators reclaim their work of helping people discover what they enjoy doing, what they want to do in life, and how to live as global citizens?
• What type of caring communities do we want to develop, and how can we gracefully negotiate the challenges that currently exist?
• How can caring become a sustainable aspect of education?
• How can we encourage our own and others’ transformative development in caring relationships?
• What partnerships can be formed that strengthen relationships within and across caring communities?

           

The interconnectedness of all three research studies was notable: a college of education that is struggling to preserve its place in the face of changing governmental policies and practices; students working to navigate through the system, graduate, and enter into this changing world; and a language learning group working within a system that has already subjugated the field of education. These three educational cultures identified practices to be followed, including: (a) the importance of dialogue and respect, (b) the development of a community based on integrity and responsibility, (c) the commitment and relationships it will take to transform ourselves and our institutions, and (d) the importance of collaboration. Identifying the work that must be done is the first step in the evolving nature of education. But building developmental relationships that can grow over time is instrumental to successful communities. Principles and practices of caring, if nurtured, will flourish and deepen our commitments to ourselves, our work, and our institutions.

 

REFERENCES

Atkinson, P. & Hammersley, M. (1994). Ethnography and participant observation. In Denzin & Lincoln (Eds.), The Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 248-261). Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage. 

Affolter, F. (2004). On the absence of a “Socio-emotional Enablement’ discourse component in international socio-economic development thought. Scand J Caring Sci, 18; 424-436.

Berchini, C. (2013). Are We Turning our Backs on Teacher Preparation? Lessons from France’s System of Teaching Training. Current Issues in Education, 16 (1), 1-12.

Carson, S. (2012). Principles and practices of caring communities. Ethics and Critical Thinking Journal, 2011(3), 23-51.

Chevalier, C. (2012). France: Is the long-eroded status of teachers about to improve? Retrived June 14, 2013, from http://www.ei-ie.org/en/news/news_details/2364

Clifford, J. & Marcus, G. (1986). Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Fontana, A. & Frey, J. (1994). Interviewing: The art of science. In Denzin & Lincoln (Eds.), The Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 361-376). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 

Greenwalt, K. A. (2009). Discourse, narrative and national identity: The case of France. Harvard Educational Review, 79(3), 494-519.

Janesick, V. (1994). The dance of qualitative research design: Metaphor, methodolatry, and meaning. In Denzin & Lincoln (Eds.), The Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp.209-219). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Johnson, A. (2006). Privilege, Power and Difference. NY: McGraw Hill.

Jorgensen, D. L. (1989) Participant Observation: A Methodology for Human Studies, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Judge, H. (2004). The Muslim headscarf and French schools. American Journal of Education, 111, 1- 24.

Keaton, T. (2006). Muslim girls and the other France: Race, identity politics, & social exclusion. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Liontos, L.B. (1992). Transformational leadership. Eric Digest. Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED347636).

Macmurray, J. (1964). Teachers and pupils. The Educational Forum, 29 (1), 17-24.

Noddings, N. (2005). The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education (2^nd ed.). Columbia University, New York: Teachers College Press.

Noddings, N. (2012). The caring relation in teaching. Oxford Review of Education, 38 (6), 771-781.

Reason, P. (2001). Learning and change through action research. In J. Henry (Ed.), Creative Management. London: Sage.

Schofield, H. (2009). Trials of French teacher training. Retrived June 14, 2013, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/7893049.stm

Spradley, J. (1980). Participant observation. NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Staub, E. (ed.) (2003). Basic human needs and their role in altruism and aggression. The Psychology of Good and Evil: Why Children, Adults and Groups Help and Harm Others. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS), “Public School Teacher Data Files,” 2007-2008. Retrived June 15, 2013, from http://www.nces.ed.gvo/survey/sass/

Woods, P. (1994). Symbolic interactionism: Theory and method. In LeCompte, Millroy & Preissle (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research in education. NY: Academic Press.  337-404.