In Chapter One (Section 1.2.3), the notion of mentoring as an avenue of teacher professional development was introduced. Mentoring has been variously defined. Megginson and Garvey (2004: 2) define mentoring as “a relationship between two
40 people with learning and development as its purpose”. Mentoring as method of PD can also be defined as an intentional strategy based on individual and institutional support. The aim of mentoring is to create a learning partnership that fosters professional development (Fischer, 2002: 3). Generally, mentoring involves a relationship between a more experienced person (the mentor) and a less experienced individual (the mentee) (Shulman & Sato, 2006:2). The primary focus of this relationship is the growth and development of the mentee, although the mentor may also benefit (Allen, Finkelstein & Poteet, 2009: 2). A key question for this study relates to how mentoring has been understood and implemented in the specific PD programme under investigation, since mentoring is one of the components of the programme. Another important question pertains to the components that mentoring, as a vehicle for professional teacher development, should consist of or the conditions that are conducive to the professional development of the participating teachers.
In this study, mentoring was defined as the professional practice that occurs in the context of teaching, wherever an educational expert supports, challenges and guides a teacher in his/her teaching practice (adapted from Odell & Huling, 2000: xv). Sibanda and Jawahar (2012: 260) refer to the term ‘school visit mentors’ because the latter also lend classroom support to in-service teachers on a short term basis. These ‘school visit mentors’ then assist with lesson planning and will submit written reports on how the lesson was conducted and which suggestions were made to improve their teaching practice. Therefore, one of the dominant roles of a mentor would be to provide feedback to the mentees on their teaching (Edwards, 1998). In addition to the feedback, support can also be provided in terms of creating a comfortable learning environment, treating the mentee as a colleague, and communicating effectively with him/her (Ambrosetti & Dekkers, 2010: 47). These different forms of support given to teachers on-site have proven more effective than PD interventions done outside of the classroom (De Clercq & Phiri, 2013:78). Teachers’ professional development aims to develop them by improving and upgrading different aspects of their competence and performance such as subject knowledge, new teaching and assessment strategies, reflective practice, and action research (Hatting, 2009: 343). In the programme under investigation, mentoring also
41 includes assistance with lesson preparation. In South Africa, professional development is steered by different role-players such as tertiary institutions which offer teachers post-graduate qualifications and opportunities to upgrade their qualifications. The Department of Education, through its different district offices or circuits, conducts ad hoc training workshops, and curriculum advisors visit schools to offer all kinds of support and do monitoring (Hatting, 2009: 343). Different non- governmental organisations (NGOs) are also involved in PD programmes (Hatting, 2009: 343). Another way in which PD is achieved at school level is through subject heads who support teachers in various respects. However, in the South African context, a subject head may be assigned a group of subjects; as a result, it might happen that he or she is not an expert in all the subjects assigned to him or her. In such a case, the subject head might not fully support the school’s Mathematics teachers. Thus, outside mentors should be assigned to support these teachers.
Existing literature reports extensively on mentoring with pre-service and novice teachers, whereas very little is said about the mentoring of in-service teachers, as confirmed by Halai (2006). If they are mindful of the South African Mathematics teachers’ challenges, mentorship interventions can assist with the alleviation of poor performance by both the teachers and the learners. This is achieved by means of mentors supporting teachers in the classroom to improve their classroom practice, lesson preparation, and content knowledge, to name but a few.
The marginal impact of some PD programmes is due to the fact that they are not being linked to the needs of both the individual teachers and the schools, that is, they are not connected to school and classroom realities. It also results from the lack of support to the promotion of reflective practices. Nevertheless this marginal impact can be increased by including mentor support which is more conducive to sustainable teacher development (Hatting, 2009: 343). One of the major methods of developing the teachers involved in the PD programme under investigation is the use of facilitators for a one-on-one mentoring of teachers inside and outside the classroom. The constructive criticism and team-teaching experience that the mentor provides to the mentee might assist in the achievement of two of the intended
42 outcomes of the PD programme, namely, the improvement of both the mentee’s competence and performance. This can be done by the mentor’s modelling of good practices to the mentees (McLaughlin & Talbert, 2006) during co-teaching which offers the mentee the opportunity to watch how the mentor teaches. In this way, the mentee may acquire a better understanding of how to interact with learners, learn other aspects of instruction, and develop through reflective conversations after the lessons (Badiali & Titus, 2010: 74). In this regard, mentoring is an intervention during which a teacher’s specific needs can be addressed. It can happen in the school context and can accommodate the participating teacher’s learning style. Mentoring provides opportunities for teachers to get individual attention, receive support, have some of their uncertainties clarified on an individual basis, and share knowledge and experience (Murray, 2010: 6). As such, mentoring has the potential to counterbalance the limitations ad-hoc workshops and seminars which are detached from context and do not address the individual needs of the participants. These interventions had been criticised for providing teachers with ideas that could not easily be tested in the teachers’ own practice (De Clercq & Phiri, 2013: 78).
It suffices to note that mentoring is very labour-intense. Hence, I agree with Fricke, Horak, Meyer and Van Lingen (2008) that the mentoring of teachers in their work environment is a sustainable way of changing the dismal state of Mathematics education in South Africa. Mentoring can improve learners’ performance in Mathematics by addressing the quality of teaching and improving the teachers’ skills, knowledge and attitudes (Luneta, 2012: 365).
Mentoring can provide teachers with new ways of doing, since regular discussions and lesson observations can foster perseverance in terms of the incorporation of new ideas (Harrison, 2005: 262). Mentoring can include assisting teachers to adopt a practice that seeks to turn the classroom into a community where teachers care about their learners’ engagement in class (Sibanda & Jawahar, 2012: 267), foster the development of relationships between learners so that they do not become over reliant on their teachers, provide opportunities for learners to struggle with Mathematics so that perseverance can be nurtured, plan Mathematics learning
43 experiences that allow learners to build on their existing experiences, interest and proficiencies (Anthony & Walshaw, 2009: 148–150). The development of critical thinking in Mathematics is central to the justification of solutions. For this reason, it must be inculcated in time and care must be taken to ensure that learners develop the ability to provide sound mathematical explanations (ibid). Thus, teachers must listen to learners attentively in the classroom in order to support learning where necessary (Lobato, Clarke & Ellis, 2005). Follow-up support should also be provided by the mentor, given that one needs to practise new ways of doing in order to perfect them. This can ensure lasting change in teacher practise. The report on the evaluation of the Quality Learning Project (2005), a 5-year teacher development PD programme which ran in all the provinces of South Africa, contained a recommendation on the inclusion of mentoring in the teacher development to increase the impact of PD programmes. This confirms the valuable role that the inclusion of mentoring can play in a teacher education PD programme. School-based professional development programmes which involve mentorship and are linked to the needs of the both individual teachers and the school are more conducive to sustainable teacher development (Hatting, 2009: 343). Though mentoring can add value to CPD programmes and has proven effective in enhancing Mathematics instruction, the mentor should be equipped with mentorship skills and knowledge (Luneta; 2010). In a study conducted by Sibanda and Jawahar (2012: 259), retired teachers with expertise in the teaching of Mathematics, Science, and Technology (MST) subjects were recruited as mentors. This was potentially challenging because retired teachers might lack the appropriate energy levels and understanding of the recent developments in Mathematics education research and might therefore not necessarily be open to new ways of doing. Some of these retired teachers might see this more as an opportunity to earn extra income to supplement their insufficient pension funds; as such, they might not have the necessary enthusiasm and vision for this kind of programme. Despite the value mentoring can add to teacher development, practitioners should guard against using mentoring for critique and evaluation purposes (Murray, 2010: 6).
44
2.5 THE CHALLENGES ENCOUNTERED IN THE MATHEMATICS