THE STRUCTURE AND PROCESS OF A GENERIC MENTORING FRAMEWORK

5.1 Introduction

In using the functionalist approach — particularly the contributions of Parsons and Merton (chapter 2), this guided the design of a generic mentoring framework which has capacity to enable actors and collectives to utilise mentoring (chapter 3) as a means of transformation (change and development) through which to optimise best educational practice (chapter 4).

By adapting the mentoring framework, the design of a fit-for-purpose mentoring system is enabled and will serve to motivate actors and collectives of actors towards whole school development. In turn, this will encourage development of whole school culture; the latter, which is characterised by gratification of needs and in the process enhance quality education for all.

In essence, this implies that all schools, especially those that are self- or otherwise defined as dysfunctional (chapter 4), can take ownership to ensure quality educational outcomes. The latter serves to motivate actors and collectives who are in an interdependent relationship and will, therefore, be in a position to work towards optimising and achieving best educational practice. Furthermore, those schooling systems that have been defined as dysfunctional and per implication experience systemic disequilibrium (Parsons, 1951) can be positioned through a fit-for-purpose mentoring system to prevent further deterioration.

As outlined in chapter one and two, the researcher, by using the functionalist approach suggests that mentoring can be utilised to encourage a process of transformation (chapter 3). By so doing, actors and collectives of actors within a schooling system can work together within an interdependent relationship towards optimising best educational practice or quality education for all (chapter 4).

118

This chapter, with its purpose to detail the generic mentoring framework from which a fit-for-purpose mentoring system can be adapted, is presented in two parts. The first provides the theoretical framework highlighting a number of premises which was derived from the functionalist approach and serves to position the generic mentoring framework. Part 2 suggests how this framework can be designed and operationalised to ensure development of WSC through a fit-for-purpose mentoring system to optimise quality education for all or best educational practice.

5.2 Theoretical underpinning: positioning of analysis

The general premise suggests that a generic mentoring framework developed

within context of the functionalist perspective provides a vehicle through which a fit-for-purpose mentoring system can be designed to serve schools to regain and maintain equilibrium as social systems to ensure quality education for all.

The contribution of Merton and especially those by Parsons, led to the understanding of schooling systems at the micro-level of analysis. In turn, this enabled to position insights for the design of the generic mentoring framework. A number of premises strengthen the theoretical base for the design of the mentoring framework. These premises are that a mentoring framework should:

 provide for a structural and processual design to enable each of the sub-

systems to optimise their interrelated and interdependent nature to sustain the character of WSD (Parsons, 1951). This implies a design that should

 assist in identifying and attaining appropriate resources;  enable achievable goals;

 facilitate, achieve and maintain solidarity between actors and collectives of actors;

 ensure consensus of values; and

 and integrate the above mentioned into the context of a WSC that is characterised by optimised stability to ensure best educational practice or quality education for all.

 enable definition and operationalisation of the manifest functions of each sub-system towards optimising a WSC that envisions best educational

119 practice or quality education for all (Merton, 1949, 1968). This implies a design

that

 ensures understanding of the role and position of the manifest functions of each sub-system and how these contribute towards a schooling system‘s functional status or equilibrium;

 enables insight in how dysfunctional consequences that are caused by internal and external forces can be harnessed ; and

 to facilitate change and development by means of the Parsonian AGIL-scheme to ensure enhanced equilibrium of the schooling system; especially during the process of transformation.

 ensure understanding of the dynamics of each action system (Parsons, 1951),

and how it enables transformation that ensures WSD through which best educational practice or quality education for all is envisioned. This implies a

design that enables

 opportunity for enhanced adaptation;  articulation of social relationships;  gratification of needs; and

 on-going motivation to ensure the above.

 encourage actors or collectives of actors to utilise either expressive or

instrumental modes of interchange or a combination thereof (Parsons, 1951) in order to optimise a path towards best educational practice or quality of education for all. This implies that the nature of relations and interactions within

situations of transformation should enable  optimised gratification;

 direct motivation;

 values that enhance WSC;

 emphasise quality and scope of actor / collective attributes; and

 and ensure obligation and accountability towards collectively envisioned ends.

In addition to the above, the following premises emphasising both structural and processual aspects should be embraced when adapting the generic mentoring framework to design and operationalise a fit-for-purpose mentoring system that will guide a process of transformation towards quality education for all. These premises

120

are that a generic mentoring framework should:

 enable understanding of the dynamic thrust of each action system (chapter 2) and how these enable transformation towards WSD that envisions WSC characterised by best educational practice or quality education for all (Parsons, 1951).

 facilitate motivational significance; implying that motivation which is embedded within action-situations be used to identify and define the needs and ends of actors and/or collectives of actors to enhance gratification or prevent deprivation (Parsons, 1951).

 aid infrastructural functionality through acquisition of internal and external resources in order to optimise best educational practice or quality education for all (Parsons, 1951).

 ensure relational functionality; thereby optimising stability of equilibrium to ensure an on-going process of best educational practice or quality education for all (Parsons, 1951).

 contribute towards enhancing a schooling system‘s regulatory functions (e.g. mentoring policy; performance appraisals; mentoring agreement) to amongst other things ensure collective goal attainment in an attempt to institutionalise cultural aspects, including cultural symbols that enlivens best educational practice or quality educational for all (Parsons, 1951); encourage actors or collectives of actors to utilise expressive and/or instrumental modes of

interchange or a combination thereof (pattern variables) during mentoring to

optimise and sustain best educational practice or quality of education for all (Parsons, 1951).

 facilitate community of practice and collaborative team work to enhance interactive and interdependent relationships or exchange, and to enable synchronisation of needs and gratification to meet normative and expected standards whereby a shared culture of best educational practice or educational for all can be institutionalised (Parsons, 1951).

 provide opportunity for capacity development and empowerment of actors or collectives through enabling competencies, skills and attitudes which will enhance role performance and goal attainment that are aligned with the

121

philosophy of WSD and culture to optimise best educational practice or quality education for all (Parsons, 1951).

 encourage consensus of values, communal purpose, and vested interest to ensure that transformation in one subsystem positively affects the other; thereby to ensure that WSD will result in optimising best educational practice or quality education for all (Parsons, 1951).

 provide understanding of the requisite position or function of each sub-system within the boundaries of the whole school system while enabling means to optimise WSD and culture towards best educational practice or quality education for all (Parsons, 1951).

 enable consensus-achieved normative and goal-induced scaffolding whereby transformation of WSD will ensure a culture of best educational practice or quality education for all (Parsons, 1951).

 enable definition and operationalisation of the manifest functions of each sub- system towards optimising a WSC that facilitates a continuous process of whole school development through which best educational practice or quality education for all is envisioned (Merton, 1949, 1968).

Against the background of the above mentioned, Diagramme 5.1 is presented to depict the proposed generic mentoring framework.

122

GENERIC MENTORING FRAMEWORK

STRUCTURAL