FORMAL MENTORING PROGRAMS IN EDUCATION AND OTHER


PROFESSIONS: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE


Abstract



The sheer volume of literature on mentoring across a variety of disciplines is an indication of


the high profile it has been afforded in recent years. This paper draws upon a structured


analysis of over 300 research-based papers on mentoring across three discipline areas in an


attempt to make more valid inferences about the nature and outcomes of mentoring. It begins


by reporting on the findings compiled from a database of research papers from educational


contexts. These research-based papers are examined to determine the positive and more


problematic outcomes of mentoring for the mentor, mentee and the organization. A discussion


of the findings from two other databases, namely, 151 research-based papers from business


contexts and 82 papers from medical contexts, is provided and commonalities across the three


databases are highlighted. The paper concludes with a discussion of key issues that


administrators responsible for establishing mentoring programs should consider to maximise


the experience of mentoring for all stakeholders.



Key Words



Mentoring, education, business, medicine, challenges



FORMAL MENTORING PROGRAMS IN EDUCATION AND OTHER


PROFESSIONS: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE


Introduction



This paper represents an ongoing quest to synthesise our current understandings of the


mentoring phenomenon. As researchers in the field, we were conscious that a great deal of


writing in the area of mentoring in education and across other professional disciplines


reported that mentoring was an overwhelmingly positive learning process for mentors and


mentees alike (2002). Our initial investigation of mentoring in


educational contexts confirmed this since there did not appear to be a substantial body of


work which reported on the “darker side” of mentoring (1994; 1997). Thus we


became interested in examining more closely a sizeable body of the mentoring literature so


that we could begin to make more valid inferences about its potential to be a beneficial force


in educational contexts. To this end, we compiled a database of research papers from


educational contexts and undertook a structured analysis of these papers. A structured


analysis is a pre-determined set of criteria, namely a set of coding categories, that is used to


analyse literature. In this study, we coded each of the studies according to descriptive data


(i.e. positive and problematic outcomes of mentoring for the mentor, mentee and the


organization) and then identified the frequency of occurrence of the predetermined coding


categories. Findings from the analysis of the education-focused studies prompted us to


investigate the nature, frequency and outcomes stemming from mentoring in other


professional areas such as business and medicine. Following the study of educational


contexts, we repeated the process and compiled a database of research papers on mentoring


from business contexts and medical contexts. While the focus of this paper reports on the


positive and more problematic outcomes of mentoring from our structured review of papers


from education contexts, it will also illuminate the features of mentoring common to the three


different contexts (i.e. education, business and medical contexts). This paper begins with a


discussion of the meaning of mentoring, identifies some of the common strengths and


weaknesses of mentoring and then proceeds to discuss the methodological process that guided


the study.



The Meaning of Mentor and Mentoring



The original meaning of the word, mentor, refers to a “father figure” who sponsors,


guides and develops a younger person. Throughout history, mentors have played a significant


role in teaching, inducting and developing the skills and talents of others. Indeed, there are


many examples of mentors in the biographies of famous artists, scientists and musicians


(1991) who have played a key role in shaping their protégés or mentees’ destiny.


Traditional or informal mentoring arrangements where the mentor and mentee


somehow find each other (1985) continue to operate in many contexts. It was only in


the last two to three decades that formal mentoring programs were introduced in government


departments and corporations. This movement occurred because organizations could see the


advantage of implementing formal programs since they enabled potential learning and growth


for employees on the job (1999). Our concern in this paper lies with


formal mentoring programs.


Formal mentoring programs differ greatly in nature, focus and outcomes. For instance,


in her extensive review,(1991) noted that some programs train mentors, while others


do not; mentors are assigned to mentees and in other programs the mentee selects the mentor;


some programs designate the location and frequency of meetings, while others leave it to the


participants to decide. In addition, some programs are evaluated while others are not or are


“evaluated” by vague and imprecise techniques (1991). In relation to evaluations of


mentoring programs,  (1983) concluded that many “consist of testimonials and


opinions” (). After reviewing over 300 research-based papers on formal mentoring


programs, we would support Merriam’s claim.



Strengths and Weaknesses of Mentoring



Our precursory investigation of the literature revealed that there tends to be a general


acceptance that mentoring yields benefits for mentees and mentors. Career advancement and


psycho-social support are often identified as two important outcomes of mentoring for the


mentee (1985;  1978). For instance, in


terms of career outcomes,  (1979) found that 75% of the top executives in the United


States had been mentored and compared with their counterparts, earned 28% more, were more


likely to have a degree, were happier with work, and more likely to mentor others. Psychosocial


support, such as encouragement, friendship, and advice and feedback on performance


(1985), has also been identified as a positive outcome of mentoring for mentees.


As mentoring is a two-way or reciprocal process, it provides benefits also for the


mentor. For instance, the work of  (1978) found that mentoring rejuvenates


mentors’ careers since it enables them to assist and shape the professional and personal


development of mentees. According to  (1997), other benefits for the mentor include


increased confidence, personal fulfilment and assistance on projects. In relation to the


benefits for the organisation,  (1991) identify several benefits of formal


mentoring programs including increased productivity, improved recruitment efforts,


motivation of senior staff, and enhancement of services offered by the organization.


While there is a considerable body of literature that documents the merits of


mentoring for all parties,  (1997) is more cautious. According to  (1997), “under


various conditions, the mentoring relationship can actually be detrimental to the mentor,


mentee or both” (). She goes on to identify several concerns regarding mentoring


including a lack of time for mentoring; poor planning of the mentoring process; unsuccessful


matching of mentors and mentees; a lack of understanding about the mentoring process; and


lack of access to mentors from minority groups. (1997) also highlights the difficulties


that mentoring poses for organizations if there is insufficient funding or termination of


funding before the program is established. Other drawbacks of mentoring from the


organization’s point of view include problems when there is a lack of support; the difficulties


in coordinating programs within organizational initiatives; and the costs and resources


associated with mentoring (1997).


It seems that as formal mentoring programs are planned, structured and coordinated


interventions within an organisation’s human resource policies, it makes sense for those


charged with the responsibility of implementing such programs to endeavour to ensure that


the goals of the program are clear and known to key parties; that mentors and mentees are


well-matched; and that organizational support and commitment are evident. Since


organizations including schools invest considerable resources into mentoring programs, it is


incumbent on the planners, such as educational administrators, to minimise potential


problems that could arise. The final part of our paper attempts to synthesise some of the


recommendations that educational administrators should consider when planning and


implementing a formal mentoring program. Before we discuss these recommendations, the


next section of this paper turns to the methodological process that we used in analysing the


body of mentoring research reviewed.



Methodology



We used a structured analysis of the literature from three discrete disciplines in order


to arrive at our understanding of the mentoring phenomenon. For inclusion in the three


reviews, studies had to meet two criteria. Firstly, they had to report original research findings


and, secondly, they had to focus on the use of mentoring in an educational setting (such as


schools or universities), business context (government or non-government organizations) and


medical context (hospitals, universities, and other medical contexts). Databases used for the


literature search on education contexts included ERIC, AUSTROM (AEI), PsycLIT and


ProQuest. Databases used for the search in business contexts used some of these plus EBSCO


and Business Periodicals Index, Business Australia on Disk, Science Direct and Emerald.


Databases used for the analysis of mentoring in medical contexts included some of


aforementioned in addition to Health Reference Centre – Academic, Medical Library,


Webspirs, Australasian Medical Index and Google.


Our search of the selected education databases identified above revealed 159 studies


conducted between 1986 and 1999. From the search of business databases, 151 studies


between 1986 and 2000 were identified and later analysed. While 82 articles between 1995


and 2002 were found from the medical databases, only eight studies reported on the outcomes


of mentoring and were therefore eligible for use in our study. The overarching majority of the


papers from the medical field were descriptive in nature and seemed to focus on the value of


engaging in mentoring. This suggests to us that research in the area of mentoring in medical


contexts is variable and relatively new in comparison with other fields such as education and


business. It is important to appreciate that while mentoring in the medical field has been


around for many years, “most … is informal and by its nature, often invisible” (1999)


All of the studies were analysed according to a coding sheet which was developed


from a preliminary reading of 14 articles in the area of educational mentoring. Two main


categories of data were coded. These were factual data comprising the year of publication,


source (eg journal, research report), country of study, sample size and data collection


techniques employed; and descriptive data comprising the reporting of positive and


problematic outcomes associated with mentoring for the mentor, mentee and organization


across the three databases. The descriptive data underwent content–analysis to identify


underlying themes or categories ( 1990).


The findings discussed in this paper refer to the descriptive outcomes that emerged


from the three sets of analyses. In this article, the four most frequently identified positive and


problematic outcomes for mentors, mentees and the organization will be highlighted. We have


reported elsewhere precise details concerning both the factual and descriptive findings from


the studies (2003 September)



Findings



Positive Outcomes of Mentoring from Education Studies


Of the education studies reviewed, 35.8% reported only positive outcomes as a result


of mentoring and four studies (or 2.5%) reported exclusively problematic outcomes. In


relation to the benefits for mentors, less than half (47.8%) of the education studies that


reported some positive outcome associated with mentoring identified benefits for the mentor.


In contrast, substantially more studies noted positive outcomes for mentees (82.4%) than for


mentors. This can be attributed to the fewer studies that sought opinions from mentors.


Insert Figure I here


Figure I presents the four most frequently cited positive outcomes (in percentages) of


mentoring for mentors and mentees in the education studies. As illustrated, the most


commonly cited mentor outcome was that of collegiality and networking. Almost 21% of the


education studies reported benefits associated with collaborating, networking or sharing ideas


with colleagues. For instance, school principals in (1993) Australian qualitative study


noted “cross fertilisation of ideas” as being a beneficial outcome of mentoring. Similarly, a


teacher in a mentoring program in the USA noted that mentoring provided “a unique


opportunity for teachers to share and exchange ideas with other teachers” ( 1986)


Reflection was the second most frequently cited outcome for mentors with 19.5% of


studies attributing reflection or reappraisal of beliefs, practices, ideas and/or values to their


mentoring activities. For instance, a mentor teacher in a university pre-service teacher


education program in Australia commented that “you reflect on your own teaching … its


some incentive to improve, work harder, try other things” (1994). Mentoring was


also said to facilitate the professional development of mentors. Just over 17% of studies made


reference to the important outcome of professional development. As an illustration, a mentor


teacher in a study by  (1998) described her experience as “a


worthwhile professional experience in its own right” (), while (1996) quoted a


mentor in her United Kingdom study as saying that mentoring “added another dimension to


his experience” ()


Personal satisfaction, reward or growth (16.4% of studies) was the fourth most


frequently cited outcome for mentors. This sentiment was exemplified by a teacher mentor


in  (1991) study who commented, “I love working with these students and learn so


much from them as well as about myself”


As indicated in Figure I also, the most frequently cited positive outcome for mentees,


evident in 42.1% of studies, related to support, empathy, encouragement, counselling and


friendship. Both mentee teachers and headteachers indicated that support was an important


outcome of mentoring. For instance, a mentee headteacher in  (1995)


United Kingdom study stated “knowing that there is somebody in the background I can turn


to is a great source of comfort” (). Similarly, a beginning teacher in an Australian study


by  (1995) commented, “I feel very comfortable around her


[mentor] and know she is there to help where she can”


Assistance with classroom teaching was the second most frequently cited positive


outcome for mentees. Just over 35% of the studies pinpointed help with teaching strategies,


content, resources, classroom planning and or discipline. This high percentage is reflective of


the large number of studies in the review that focused on mentoring for pre-service or


beginning teachers. As an illustration, a pre-service teacher in  (1999) United


Kingdom study noted, “I gained a lot of subject knowledge on areas I was not experienced in”


The third most frequently cited positive outcome for mentees, noted in 32.1% of


studies, related to contact with others and discussion. This category included discussing or


sharing ideas, information, problems and gaining advice from peers. As an illustration, a


mentoring program for black /ethnic minority school and university students in the United


Kingdom “acted as a positive form of networking” that enabled students to “establish that


their problems are not unique to them alone” (1996).


Feedback via positive reinforcement or constructive criticism was the fourth most


frequently cited outcome of mentoring for mentees. More than one in four of the studies (or


27.7%) reported that feedback was beneficial. For instance, in his investigation of educational


administration in Singapore,  (1995) cites one mentee as saying, “everyday a session is


provided for me to go through the completed tasks and my mentor would give me her


evaluation and feedback. This is most useful” ().


Common to both mentors and mentees are issues relating to sharing ideas and


knowledge. Although not shown in Figure I, other common positive outcomes for mentors


and mentees were reflection and professional development. Whereas these outcomes were


rated more frequently by mentors, reflection was reported in 15.1% of studies and


professional development was reported in 13.8% of studies for mentees.


Problems Associated with Mentoring from Education Studies


Almost half (48.4%) of the studies that reported problems identified problems for


mentors, while slightly fewer studies (42.8%) identified problems for mentees. As Figure II


reveals, the difficulties associated with mentoring were similar for both mentors and mentees


and, for this reason, will be discussed together. The two most frequently cited outcomes were


lack of time, and professional expertise and/or personality mismatch. Lack of time was noted


in 27.7% of studies for mentors and 15.1% of studies for mentees. As an illustration, 14 of the


15 mentors in  (1992) study of preservice teacher mentoring in the United


States claimed that lack of time was their “greatest impediment” (p.17) while a mentor


headteacher in Bush and Coleman’s United Kingdom study noted there is “such a shortage of


time these days to do everything that you need to do” (). In terms of a mentee’s


perspective, one trainee teacher in a study of teacher education partnerships in the United


Kingdom reported, “my mentor never has time; he is always so busy that I feel acutely


embarrassed if I need to bother him ( 1995).


Insert Figure II here


Professional expertise or personality mismatch was the second most frequently cited


problematic outcome for both mentors and mentees. Unsuccessful matches between mentors


and mentees were reported in 17% of studies for mentors and 12.6% of studies for mentees.


The mismatches were either the result of personality, ideological or expertise differences. As


an illustration,(1995) noted that professional and personality mismatches were a


major concern for mentor teachers in his United States study. These mentors expressed


anxiety about not getting on with their mentee, having to assist mentees who were working at


different levels or whose teaching philosophy differed from their own. Some of the studies


revealed that personality differences were instrumental in the failure of some relationships.


For instance, two mentees in a study by  (1993) attributed their ineffective mentoring


relationships to incompatibility with their mentors.


Equal numbers of studies (i.e. 15.1%), reported a lack of training or understanding of


program goals and the extra burden or responsibility as problematic outcomes associated with


mentoring. For instance, a mentor in (1992) study admitted, “I have no idea what my


responsibilities are and I suspect he [the mentee] probably doesn’t either” (). In relation to


the added burden created by mentoring, a mentor in  (1996) study explained, “you


are having to add the role of mentor to an already full workload” (). For mentees, the


third and fourth most frequently cited problematic outcome of mentoring related to mentors


who were critical, out of touch, defensive or untrusting (10.7% of studies) and the difficulty


of meeting, being observed or observing their mentor (9.4% of studies). Referring to the


former, mentees in some studies indicated that their mentors had been overly harsh, critical


and out-of date in their thinking. A lack of flexibility and trust were apparent not only for


mentee teachers but also mentee principals. For instance, a potential school principal mentee


in  (1995) study noted, “the principal did not trust me to run the school as she did not


want to be held accountable for any mistakes that I might make” (). The other


problematic outcome for mentees, difficulty in meeting, often stemmed from timetable


clashes that resulted in limited opportunities to observe mentors (1997).


As indicated above, comparison of mentor and mentee problematic outcome


categories reveals some commonality across the groups. Both groups were reported to have


experienced problems stemming from lack of mentor time and professional expertise or


personality mismatch. The other categories for mentors were a lack of training and


understanding about the program and the perception that mentoring was yet another


responsibility or burden.


Positive and Problematic Outcomes of Mentoring for the Educational Organization


In addition to identifying positive and problematic outcomes of mentoring for the


mentor and mentee, our review also considered the outcomes for the organization. Just over


16% of studies cited one or more positive outcome that impacted upon the organization within


educational settings. The most frequently cited outcome that emerged from our review was


improved education or grades or attendance or behaviour of students (evident in 6.3% of


studies). For example, according to an Australian study of peer mentoring among law


students,  (1994) noted that mentoring resulted in increased levels of


attendance at lectures. The next three most frequently cited outcomes included “support or


funds for the school” (3.1% of studies), “contributes to or is good for the profession” (2.5% of


studies); and “less work for principals / staff” (2.5% of studies).


Only 8.8% of studies revealed one or more problems that directly impacted on the


organization. These problems were disparate and only two, costs and lack of partnership, were


reported in more than one study. For instance,  (1993) and (1996) reported


that schools in the United Kingdom receive inadequate funding for the implementation of preservice


or beginner mentor programs while lack of partnership or communication with and /


or commitment from organizations was reported in a small number of studies. In the next


section we provide a discussion of the positive and more problematic aspects of mentoring


derived from the business and medical studies reviewed.


Outcomes from Business and Medical Studies


As anticipated, there were numerous outcomes for the mentor and mentee reported in


the business studies. However, due to the nature and the small sample of the medical studies


(N=8), it was not possible to distinguish between outcomes for mentors and mentees.


Positive Outcomes for Mentors and Mentees


The most frequently cited response from the business studies for mentors related to


networking and collegiality with 7.9% of business studies nominating collegiality /


networking as constructive outcomes from a mentoring experience. In the medical literature,


networking and a sense of community was also deemed important for the profession. The


prominence of this positive outcome was not surprising given that mentoring relationships


involve the sharing of knowledge and expertise and, as such, the process has the potential to


foster collegiality and collaboration. The other three most frequently cited positive outcomes


for mentors included “career satisfaction / motivation / promotion” (7.3%); “improved


skills/job performance” (6.6%) and “pride/personal satisfaction”’ (6.6%).


Similar frequently cited outcomes pertaining to career and skill development were


apparent for mentees from the business studies. A review of these studies revealed that


“career satisfaction / motivation / plans / promotion” was the most frequently cited response


(50.3% of studies), “coaching / feedback/ strategies” was rated in second place (30.5%), while


“challenging assignments / improved skills / performance” was the third most frequently cited


positive outcome for mentees (23.2%). That career development and skill enhancement


emerged prominently in the analysis was not unexpected since both outcomes are commonly


cited for mentors and mentees alike in the business literature. Indeed  (1985, 1983),


whose work was acknowledged in approximately 42% of the business papers, maintains that


key functions of mentoring are career development and skill development.


The fourth most frequently cited positive outcome for mentees was “counselling /


listening / encouragement” (21.9%). This type of outcome is akin to  (1985, 1983)


notion of the “pyscho-social” outcomes associated with mentoring. In all of the medical


studies, personal growth appeared as a positive outcome of mentoring for mentors and


mentees alike. In some instances, these were simply general comments indicating personal


growth, while other medical papers referred to enhanced confidence, interpersonal contact,


and being more valued as a person.


Problematic Outcomes for Mentors and Mentees


Many of the problematic outcomes experienced by mentors and mentees were similar


across the education, business and medical reviews. For example, frequently cited in the


reviews was “lack of time”. Lack of time was the most commonly noted problem by mentors


in the business studies (6%). It was also identified as a problematic outcome of mentoring in


the medical studies.


The second and third most frequently cited problematic outcomes for mentors in the


business review, were “negative mentee attitude / lack of trust / cooperation” (5.3%) and


“little training or little knowledge about the goals of the program” (4.6%). In the medical


context, a lack of mentor training was viewed by mentors and mentees as detrimental to the


well-being of the program. The fourth most frequently cited problematic outcome for mentors


was “jealousy / negative attitudes of others”. While jealousy was not an outcome that


emerged in the medical studies, what did emerge as a problematic workload issue was the


extra burden or responsibility that mentoring created for mentors.


In contrast to the mentor outcomes, the two most frequently cited problems for


mentees in the business studies were issues relating to race and gender (7.9% of studies) and


cloning or conforming or over-protection (7.3% of studies). The race or gender issues tended


to arise as a consequence of matching female mentees with male mentors as well black


mentees with white mentors. Similar to the problems experienced by mentors discussed


earlier, mentees reported particular mentor characteristics and behaviours as being


problematic. Problematic attitudes of others was noted as the fourth most frequently cited


negative outcome of mentoring for mentees (6% of business studies) and ineffective and


untrained mentors were seen as the third most frequently cited outcome for mentees (6.6% of


business studies.


An important problematic outcome of mentoring that was unique to the medical


studies was the perception of mentees that seeking help signalled a type of weakness or


inability to cope. Yet, mentoring by definition is a process that is based on support and


development. Perhaps this outcome can be explained in terms of the predominance of


informal mentoring arrangements in the medical field which can emerge if and when mentees


approach mentors for help.


Positive and Problematic Outcomes for the Organization


In contrast to the education studies reviewed in this paper, almost twice as many


business studies (30.5%) cited one or more positive outcome for the organization. The most


frequently cited benefit reported in 13.9% of studies was improved productivity or


contribution or profit by employees. Other outcomes from the business studies included


retention of talented employees (11.9%), promotes loyalty (6.6%) and improves workplace or


communications or relations (4%).


As was the trend in the education literature, the business literature featured fewer


studies reporting problematic outcomes of mentoring for the organization. Of these


problematic outcomes, two problems were cited in more than a single study. These were high


staff turnover which was seen to hamper the development of long-term relationships between


mentors and mentees, and gender or cultural bias in the organization which resulted in good


staff being overlooked in the mentoring process. In the medical studies, on the other hand,


organizational or attitudinal barriers was the most frequently cited problematic outcome of


mentoring. It was reported in seven out of eight of the studies. Problematic organizational


barriers included ambivalence to the project by management, minimal support from


management, issues relating to the use of resources, problems arranging schedules and a


belief that mentoring should not be formalised. In contrast, the belief that mentoring should


not be formalised was an issue that did not emerge from either the business or education


databases.



Discussion



The results from our study revealed, not surprisingly, considerable commonalities in


outcomes across the three reviews of the literature. For mentors, for instance, lack of time and


training, personal or professional incompatibility, undesirable mentee behaviours and


attributes such as lack of commitment and unrealistic expectations were issues that caused


problems for mentoring relationships. In addition, for some mentors, mentoring was a burden


or workload issue that often went unnoticed by others. Mentees, too, were concerned by a


lack of mentor interest and training and a host of problematic mentor attributes and


behaviours (e.g. critical or defensive behaviours). Professional or personal incompatibility or


incompatibility based on other factors such as race or gender was also seen by both mentors


and mentees as impediments to the success of the relationship. Organizations, too, were


confronted with difficulties arising from mentoring programs. Lack of commitment from the


organization, lack of partnership and funding problems were reported in some studies, while


in others, cultural or gender biases meant that some mentees’ experiences were not positive.


Despite the shortcomings of mentoring, our findings suggested that mentoring appears


to offer far-reaching benefits for mentors and mentees. Many of the reviewed studies


indicated that mentoring provided both personal and emotional support as well as career


development and satisfaction. For mentees, mentoring provided opportunities to develop


competencies and skills, knowledge and improve performance. For mentors, it promoted


professional and personal development. Benefits of mentoring for both groups included


improved skills, access to new ideas and personal growth.


The aforementioned discussion has highlighted the major themes and common


outcomes that emerged from our three reviews. While word limitations prevent us from


identifying all of the points of divergence that we found, some attention will be afforded in


the following discussion to two important points. These are the issue of “reflection”, which


emerged as a positive outcome unique to the education studies, and “gender and race” that


emerged as a significant focus and source of incompatibility between mentors and mentees in


business settings.


Reflection


The first issue, reflection, was a significant outcome of mentoring in the education


studies only. This is unsurprising given that reflection is a term that has been used in the


education field for the last two decades or more and described as the “sine qua non of the


“teacher-researcher”, “action research” and “reflective practitioner” movements” (1993)


 (1987), a proponent of the “reflective practitioner” movement, suggests that the


key to development for teachers lies in their ability to reflect on their own learning. This


process is also called, “reflection in action”. (1983, 1987) maintains that the process or


act of reflecting has considerable power in enabling a person to change his or her work


practices and / or personal beliefs. Thus, the mentoring process has been identified as a


vehicle in facilitating reflection since it provides opportunities for mentors and mentees


together and alone to reflect upon their practice, reconsider what they are doing and why and


work towards improving their professional practice. Our review confirmed in educational


contexts that mentors, in particular, and mentees to a lesser extent, consider reflection to be


fundamental to the overall development of an educator.


Gender and Race Issues


The second issue emerging from the comparative analysis relates to the prominence,


in the business studies, of gender and race issues. Our review of these studies revealed that


30.5% examined gender, 6% examined race, and a further 6% examined both race and gender


issues. In contrast, gender and equity were the focus in only a very small sample (2.5% and


1.9%) of the education studies that we reviewed. As identified earlier in the paper, the most


widely investigated mentoring focus in the education studies, accounting for nearly two-thirds


of all studies reviewed, was mentoring for practice or beginning teachers. This is not to say


that issues of gender and equity are unimportant within the field of education. On the


contrary, there is a growing body of research that has specifically investigated the outcomes


of mentoring processes and programs for women and people of colour across a range of


educational contexts (1996; 1995;2000)


. What is more likely is that the interest in gender


and race so apparent in the business literature has coincided with the introduction of


formalised mentoring programs within organisations.


Indeed, one of the reasons that formal mentoring programs were introduced into


organizations in the United States and to a lesser extent in Australia, was to address


affirmative action legislation (1995). It was thought that such programs would help


make mentoring more accessible to women and members of minority groups (2000;


1997; 1988;  1989). It appears, however, that even when members of


minority groups participate in mentoring programs, problems can and do occur. As our review


of business studies findings revealed, gender and race misunderstandings were frequently the


source of incompatibility between mentors and mentees (1989; 1990). These


problems highlight the need for planners of mentoring programs to be vigilant in the matching


process so that cultural, racial and gender factors are taken into account. As was discussed


previously, the dimensions of personality and professional ideology are also critical in the


matching process of mentors and mentee within all three professions – medicine, education


and business. The issue of matching is also highlighted in the latter part of the paper as one of


the key challenges facing administrators charged with the responsibility of implementing


formal programs.


In summary, then, our study of mentoring from three diverse areas indicated not only


many common themes and points of convergence, but also that mentoring seems to offer


considerably more benefits than drawbacks. We state this on the strength of the numbers of


studies reporting exclusively problematic outcomes compared with those reporting


exclusively positive outcomes. Our analysis suggests, too, that mentoring is a highly complex,


dynamic and interpersonal relationship that requires, at the very least, time, interest and


commitment of mentors and mentees and strong support from educational or organisational


leaders responsible for overseeing the program. Our analysis confirmed a conclusion that we


reached elsewhere that suggests “the negative [or more problematic] outcomes associated


with mentoring can be minimised by time and effort being directed toward the design and


implementation of theoretically sound programs” (1999). With this


thought in mind, the final part of the paper highlights five important issues educational


administrators or planners of mentoring programs should consider in order to minimise a


range of potential problems from arising.



Issues and Challenges for Educational Administrators



The decision by a school, an educational district or a state department to engage in a


mentoring program should not be the consequence of some chance event. In our examination


of the educational literature, it appeared that some programs resulted from a hasty decision


that mentoring had much to offer. The resultant programs often lacked intellectual rigour,


were poorly planned and inadequately resourced. In addition, mentors were untrained and


participants were unaware of program objectives. If such programs were evaluated, there was


a tendency for this to be simplistic and based on anecdotal evidence. Unfortunately, the


reports of such programs do little for education as a professional discipline. It seems,


therefore, that there are several major challenges facing educational administrators


contemplating a mentoring program. These challenges are discussed next.


Awareness


In the light of the vast literature on mentoring, it seems inexcusable for those


educational administrators considering the implementation of a mentoring program not to


consult this resource. If asked to recommend starting points for the development of such


awareness high on any list would be the work of  (1997), (1997) and


 (in press).  (1997) provides a summation of past studies and


makes several recommendations about possible programs. Awareness of the dangers of


negativity in the early stages of planning,  (1997) balances the rosy picture that


mentoring equates to satisfaction and positive outcomes. As Long warns, there can be a dark


side to mentoring, but we believe that this can be minimised by awareness of potential


problems.


Support for the Program


Although the responsibility for coordinating an educational mentoring program may


be vested in human resources personnel, the initial starting point is the strategic plans of the


organization. Establishing the need for mentoring and making sure the financial resources and


personnel are available commences with the overall strategic plan. Depending on the size of


the educational structure involved, the objectives of the mentoring program may also be


determined at this stage. This would likely be the case with a statewide project but not


necessarily the manner in which an individual school would proceed. In a number of studies


we reviewed there was mention that the program did not seem to have the complete support of


senior administrators. For a mentoring program to be effective staff need to know the senior


executive officers of the district or region are actively supporting the development. It is


difficult for a mid-level administrator to drive a program if the staff members are aware that


he/she is not supported at the most senior levels. In fact, feedback loops to senior levels


during the implementation of the program seem to be beneficial. During the early planning


stages, it is important that administrators make it known that there will be transparency


concerning the nature of the program, how personnel will be selected, expectations of


participants and the evaluative requirements.


Mentor Training


Educational administrators must make numerous decisions about the mentoring


program but perhaps the most difficult decisions relate to who the mentors will be and how


they will be trained. Irrespective of the nature of an organization, not all personnel are suited


to be mentors. For instance, in a single school program, how does the principal tell some


Heads of Department or key teachers they are not required in the program? While some


educational programs call for volunteers to act as mentors, there is the possibility that the


volunteers may be those least suited to the role of mentor. This challenge is allied to the


knowledge that mentoring is an additional load for already busy staff. Having selected the


mentors, the administrators must determine how, or perhaps whether, mentors are to be


rewarded in some manner. Administrators must also consider the issue of training, commonly


cited in the literature as a key to the success of mentor programs. Decisions may need to be


made, for example, about whether training should be provided in-house or conducted by


external consultants.


Selection of Participants


Decisions surrounding who will be mentored must be made. Will educational


administrators call for volunteers or select staff on the basis of a set of predetermined criteria?


To a certain extent, this decision is probably determined by the objectives of the program.


Based on the literature, the two other issues that warrant scrutiny relate to the gender of


participants and the representation of minority groups. There is much literature that suggests it


has been women who have missed out on mentoring opportunities (1988;  1989)


and some studies report the potential for sexual discrimination against women in mentoring


settings (1989;  1984). Similar problems are reported with respect to


minority groups ( 1997; 1990). In educational settings where administrators have


ensured that equity policies have been fully implemented, it would be anticipated that gender


and minority group issues would not create serious issues. However, the question as to


whether mentors and mentees should be matched is clearly a question that must be resolved


by administrators.


Evaluation of the Program


Rigorous evaluation is essential and educational administrators will need to decide on


the model of evaluation to implement. Good practice suggests that there should be ongoing


evaluative tasks during the life of a mentoring program and a follow-up assessment some time


after the completion of the program. Much has been written about the relative strengths of


qualitative versus quantitative evaluation models. However, equally, if not more importantly,


is ensuring the validity and reliability of the procedures used.



Conclusion



An important finding to emerge from our structured analysis of over 300 researchbased


papers on mentoring across the areas of education, business and medicine, was that


mentoring has enormous potential to bring about learning, personal growth and development


for professionals. While the majority of reviewed studies revealed that mentoring does


provide a range of positive outcomes for mentors, mentees and the organization, it is not,


however, without its dark side. In some cases, poor mentoring can be worse than no


mentoring at all. Our belief is that the potential problems of mentoring are not


insurmountable. With careful and sensitive planning and skilful leadership, most problems


can be minimised. In the paper we identified several critical issues that educational


administrators should consider during the planning and implementation stages of formal


programs. Amongst these were the necessity for planners to be aware of the growing body of


research literature on mentoring; the need for program support at various levels; the


importance of mentor training; the careful selection of participants; and the need for ongoing


evaluations. If resources (both human and financial) are to be invested in mentoring


programs, those responsible for planning and implementing programs must be willing to


commit time, resources and energy to such programs. Indeed, all parties have a responsibility


to make mentoring work so that it can be a positive force for the individuals and their


organizations.


At this juncture, it is important to acknowledge several limitations associated with our


review. Firstly, the studies selected for review were limited in terms of their origin and scope.


Our review did not incorporate a true cross-section of studies from around the world; with


most emanating from the USA and other English-speaking countries. Although we searched


from a selected number of databases, by not searching others, such as “dissertation abstracts”


and favouring those from English speaking countries, we have limited the findings.


Consequently, it is possible that we may overlooked some key research studies from other


databases. Secondly, most studies we reviewed were dated from the mid 1980s to 2000. By


focusing on this time-frame, and not on more current research papers, we may have also


inadvertently neglected more contemporary mentoring issues and key outcomes for mentors,


mentees and organisations. For instance, it is possible that more recent studies, i.e. those


conducted from 2000 to the present time, may have reported on the “darker side of


mentoring” to a greater extent than those featured in our review. Thus, our findings need to


be considered in the light of the scope and time-frame of our study and therefore approached


with some reservations. Despite these limitations, we believe that our study contributes to the


growing knowledge base on this highly interpersonal, complex and dynamic learning


relationship.




Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com


0 comments:

Post a Comment

 
Top