WMCETT Mentoring Survey Report
24 institutions were approached and 16 (67%) of them agreed to take part in the survey.
All the respondents are FE colleges except for University of Worcester (HE) and Hereford College of Arts, which classes itself as a HE/FE specialist college.
2 non-FE/HE institutions were approached but did not respond.
13 (81%) of the respondents are teacher training providers themselves. The other 3 (19%) receive their teacher training from partner organisations as follows:

Hereford College of Arts from University of Gloucestershire and
Hereford College of Technology

Royal National College for the Blind from Hereford College of
Technology

Derwen College from Walford and N Shrops College and NEWI
General Mentoring and Support
All of the respondents said that they have in place a system for mentoring and of providing support for their staff:
All of the respondents have mentoring provision for:

Teachers in training

New staff

Underperforming staff
Furthermore, the following percentages of respondents also provide extra mentoring support for the following specific needs:
Dyslexia
Mental health and disability
Literacy and numeracy support
IT
Staff moving into new specialisms
Behaviour management
Classroom coaching
19%
13%
13%
13%
13%
6%
6%
Respondents were asked if they had a generic pool of mentors who covered everything or if they had only specialised mentors who focus on particular areas

44% had both a generic pool and specialised mentors

19% have only a generic pool

37% have only specialised mentors

50% of the respondents said their mentors were also learning coaches
This is a list of all the colleges in order of largest number of mentors to smallest number of mentors:
Organisation name
Telford College of Arts and
Technology
Warwickshire College
NEW College
Shrewsbury College of Arts and
Technology
University of Worcester
Stratford upon Avon College
City College Coventry
Derwen College
Kidderminster College
Royal National College for the
Blind
North Warwickshire and Hinckley
College
Henley College Coventry
Evesham and Malvern Hills
College
Hereford College of Arts
Walford and North Shropshire
College
Ludlow College
TOTAL:
Of this total number of mentors:

41% are managers

33% are senior teachers

26% are other
Number of mentors
145
93
50
50
41
39
37
31
30
25
23
20
17
14
6
4
625
Selection of Mentors
All of the respondents invite/handpick their mentors but 19% also have an internal application and selection procedure.
Other methods of selection include:

Mentors volunteering themselves


Heads and deputy heads of departments automatically being designated as mentors

Selection being based on “advanced practitioner status” of staff

Trainees being expected to arrange their own mentor
Training
All the respondents said they provide some sort of training for their mentors.
The break down is as follows
Name
North East Worcs College
Accredited internal
0
0
Warwickshire College
City College
6.5
0
University of Worcester
North Warwickshire and Hinckley
College
Telford College of Arts &
Technology
0
0
0
Henley College Coventry
0
Stratford upon Avon College
Derwen College
Shrewsbury College of Arts and
Technology
Walford and North Shropshire
College
0
0
Evesham and Malvern Hills College
Royal National College for the Blind
0
0
0
0
Kidderminster College
0
Ludlow College
0
Hereford College of Arts
6.5
Total Days
Accredited external
0
Non accredited internal
5.5
Non accredited external
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
8
4
0
10
0
0
4
0
31
2
4
3
2
0.5
2
1
6
1
0
3
1
2
0
1
34
4
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0.5
0
8.5
This means that of all the training days provided by this sample of colleges:


8% are accredited, internally provided

39% are accredited, externally provided

42% are non-accredited, internally provided

11% are non-accredited, externally provided
87% of the respondents said they would like more training provision for mentors than is currently available.
Respondents were asked to give suggestions as to what kind of training they would like to see available.
Nearly half the respondents said they would like to have more accredited training made available. Other themes that emerged were: training should be short due to time and work constraints on staff and low in cost.

44% of the colleges have not written policies and procedures relating to mentoring in their organisation

19% have no supporting guidance/documentation for mentors
Mentoring and Support for Teachers in Training
Allocating mentors
Colleges were asked how trainees were matched with their mentors

19% said mentors were allocated by others on behalf of the trainee

31% said mentors were self selected by the trainees

50% said they used both methods – allocation by others on behalf of the trainee, and self selected by trainee
Of the mentors that are allocated

73% are allocated according subject specialism

18% are allocated because they are senior teachers

9% are allocated because they are managers
Asked if ITT mentors are part of the overall mentoring system

19% said all their ITT mentors are part of the overall mentoring system

56% said that some ITT mentors are part of the overall mentoring system

25% said no, their ITT mentors are separate from other mentors
25% of the respondents said they are always able to find their trainees a mentor
75% said they sometimes have difficulty in finding suitable mentors

Those who sometimes have difficulty in finding suitable mentors said it was in:
Minority and very specialist subject areas, areas new to the college, finding mentors for students with learning difficulties.
And this is a list of the difficult subject areas gathered from their responses:
Advanced literacy and numeracy
Art
Construction
Counselling
Engineering
Farriery
French
Hair and beauty
Health and Care
History
Languages
Law
Managing challenging behaviour
Media
Motor vehicle technology
Performing arts
Psychology
Retail
Science
Sociology
Upholstery
When a suitable mentor cannot be found colleges turn to a number of measures. These are the measures that are implemented to remedy the situation:

Local links are made

ITT staff take on the role of mentors

They go for the nearest match

The trainee’s line manager becomes the mentor

A mentor will be allocated according to experience if a subject specialist cannot be found

The college teaching and learning mentor will become the mentor

The college will draw upon their pool of generic mentors

It is left to the student to find a suitable mentor.
Some colleges are taking extra measures to deal with situations when there is a shortage of mentors:

Encourage more teachers to become accredited Teaching and
Learning Coaches (City College Coventry)

Supporting a member of staff to gain a Level 5 mentoring qualification
(Ludlow College)


Implement training and improvement in Quality Assurance procedures for mentoring (University of Worcester)

Network with other partnership colleges – so far we have provided a list of mentors to University of Worcester for a database to be set up
(Kidderminster College)

Feeling the need to recruit more staff (North Warwickshire and
Hinckley College)
Making Links
All except one of the colleges thought it would be useful to make links with local training and educational institutions in order to share mentoring resources
They were then asked to give advantages and disadvantages for making local links
Advantages Disadvantages
Access a range of mentoring expertise
Share good practice
Share ideas
Possible joint training events
HE institutions are not always up-todate with FE environment
Time
Cost (increased expenses)
Mentors from other colleges may not be aware of our college’s systems
Sharing material and resources
Easier to find mentors in very specialised areas
Finding solutions to problems with the help of others
Geographical location (travel time)
Communication problems when dealing with another institution
We have very limited resources to offer to others
When there is difficulty find a mentor Some of our methods may not be relevant to others
Not reinventing the wheel Impractical
Lack of consistent standards
Confidentiality
Increased work load for mentors if they take on trainees from other institutions
Thinking of ways to reciprocate
Expectations of Mentors
Respondents were asked what their mentors were expected to do

100% said they are expected to have regular meetings with trainees

100% said they are expected to observe trainees’ teaching

88% said they are expected to give written/verbal feedback

81% said they are expected to support lesson planning

63% said they are expected to liaise with trainees’ assessors

31% said they are expected to liaise with trainees’ managers


19% said they are expected to team teach with trainees
When asked how frequently mentors and mentees had meetings, the responses were as follows:
19% said weekly
19% said monthly
19% said termly
43% said other
Asked if mentor observation was linked to the college’s general observation scheme?
56% said Yes
44% said No
Mentoring Models
The entire questionnaire gives an indication of they types of models used.
But the respondents were also asked to describe in their own words their mentoring model. They were all very similar. The only difference was that some colleges are more formal in their application and others are informal.
The following is a list of aspects contained in the models described:

Advanced practitioners provide mentoring to staff and NQTs

Subject Learning Coaches provide support for the ITT programme

Poorly performing staff are placed in the capability and disciplinary procedure

Induction mentoring – all new staff are provided with a mentor

ITT mentors are separate from other mentors

Curriculum Area Manager provides mentoring to all new staff and trainees

New managers are allocated a mentor for first few months

The mentor observes teaching practice and provides feedback

A buddying scheme for new staff

Subject specialist mentors for ITT trainees

Clutterbuck’s Mentoring Model 1985

No formal model – mentors are allocated and problem are dealt with as they arise
Evaluation
Respondents were asked how they currently evaluate their mentoring provision. These are the types of methods that were mentioned:

Through evaluation questionnaires

Through written trainees’ assignments

Through tutorials with trainees

Through informal discussion


Through Training Needs Analysis Evaluations

Through course committee meetings

Through mentoring logs maintained by the mentees

As part of the performance review

Through group meetings

Through course reviews

Through mentoring meetings

Through placement agreements

Through SCITT

Through Partnership meetings

In end of academic year reviews

By the the professional development manager

Through review and development meetings

On Team away days

As part of annual self-assessment

As part of quality assurance

Overseen by the HR department

Through C&G 7401 Mentoring assessments

In Informal discussions

Mentoring evaluation needs further development

The evaluation method is being reviewed

Evaluation takes place on an ad hoc basis

No formal evaluation
50% of the respondents use informal methods to evaluate their mentoring provision
IMPACT
The responses show that the impact of mentoring on the organisations has been largely positive. This shows the range of comments:

Confidence that staff are supported

The impact has never been evaluated

Contributing to the stability of the work force

Success depends on the personalities of the mentors

Still too underdeveloped to say

Support in personal and professional development

Increased awareness

Collaborative professional dialogues

Strengthened partnerships between institutions

Improvement in the quality of teaching/standards

Confidence in delivery

Those teachers who are given support do better than those who were not

Provides a communication network

Sharing of good practice

Has helped staff retention in the early stages of employment


Led to staff taking qualification in mentoring

Mentors and mentees find it beneficial

Fewer issues and problems have been raised since the implementation of mentoring

Positive impact on staff morale

The grade profile of lessons has improved

Improved lesson observation grades for students who have mentors
The negative comments are as follows:

Mentoring is undermined by OFSTED who are more concerned with grading observations of staff instead of supporting them

Differences between different mentors – variation in standards

There are problems when mentors are not fully committed to their mentees
Examples
Respondents were asked for examples to illustrate the impact mentoring has had on their organisation. The following are extracts from the more detailed reponses:

“The College Inspection report makes comments about the observation process. The College has quite a large proportion of qualified teaching staff - due to mentoring and referrals” (City College, Coventry)

“A mentor in ILT has supported a team of new ILT/Key Skills teachers and the success rates have improved to hit targets. In general in the
College, the grade profile for teaching sessions observed recorded in the SAR for 2006-2007 has improved and grade 4 sessions have been eliminated” (Stratford Upon Avon College)

ATP Mentor - I have examples of new staff who did not know even how to access their emails until the ATP mentor arranged for the IT team to show them. (Warwickshire College)

Staff who have struggled with theoretical and other elements of the
PGCE successfully passing the qualification (Shrewsbury College of
Arts)

The university has delivered more mentor training sessions across the partnership with FE than the year before The database has just been updated to highlight those mentors that are in need of training
(University of Worcester)

Examples would include that the majority of our trainees achieve good or better in the internal observation process which, arguably is partly due to the support they get.
(North East Worcs College)


Previously there was an issue with delivery staff also acting as mentors. When problems arose there was no impartial third party to turn to. This type of issue has not happened since the development of a mentor system. ITT - some staff did not always have a subject specialist as a mentor. Issues have arisen over observations in the past. This has not happened since subject specialists are mentors.
(Derwen College)

Good example - In the 14-16 curriculum area, the mentor allocated supports the professional, academic and personal development of his mentees. He provides advice and guidance on the practical and theoretical elements of the course in relation to the subject specialism thus assisting his trainees with 'theory into practice'. Poor example -
Where a manager has taken on the role of mentor unwillingly. This has impacted on the mentoring experience of the trainee i.e. the trainee has been unable to secure regular meetings with the mentor to discuss progress and achievement on the programme re: their subject specialism. This has had an indirect impact on the trainee's attendance and motivation on the ITT programme NB: negative examples tend to relate to the experiences of part time rather than full time staff (North
Warwickshire and Hinckley College)

We have monitored teachers who have been graded as inadequate or satisfactory, and have demonstrated how they have received better grades following formal or informal mentoring. In some cases, discussions with mentors have led staff to decide that they wanted to look for a career that better reflected their abilities.
(Henley College)
Successes and Challenges
Respondents were asked to give examples of what was good about mentoring at their institution and what kind of challenges they face. Below are extracts from the more detailed responses:
Sucesses
High standards in the team of
Advanced Practitioners (City College
Coventry)
A small team has achieved well and received positive feedback from mentees (Ludlow College)
There is a structured system for mentoring (Warwicksire College)
Training staff in generic mentoring skills (University of Worcester)
Building trust and a basis for good teamwork (Royal National College for the Blind)
Challenges
Providing remitted time for mentoring
(City College Coventry)
Keeping up with the rate of growth within the college (Stratford upon
Avon College)
Trying to create a sustainable programme that will still be valuable in 5 years time (Warwickshire
College)
Monitoring the quality of Mentors
(Derwen College)
Cost – in terms of resources and remission time (Walford and North
Shrops College)

Teachers are more inclined to experiment with methods and resources. Teachers aren’t afraid to admit they need help. (Evesham and
Malvern Hills College)
Mentoring has contributed to higher standards across the college (Telford
College of Arts and Technology)
Achieving formalisation of a system that used to operate informally (North
East Worcs College)
Ensuring that all ITT trainees have a mentor (North Warwickshire and
Hinckley College)
Having a highly motivated and well trained team of Advanced practitioners who undertake mentoring (Henley College)
Lack of suitable mentors in certain curriculum areas (North Warwickshire and Hinckley College)
Ensuring we have sufficient numbers of mentors in the future((Henley
College)
Creating time and opportunity to attend training sessions
(Kidderminster College)
Amongst the “challenges” the theme that kept recurring was time and cost.
Just over half the colleges mentioned that this would be their biggest challenge.
Future
The respondents were asked how they intend to develop their Mentoring provision in the future. It’s very clear that they all feel they will be or will want to invest in it in one way or another. These are some examples from respondents who gave more detailed answers

Use injection of Government funds to strengthen provision, though this money will not be available next year. (City College Coventry)

We aim to use our Level 5 trained colleague as trainer of other mentors. We would like to enable more staff to gain L4/5qualification in mentoring (Ludlow College)

We plan to update our policies and offer further training to ensure that all staff needs are being met. In addition we need to review the relationship between mentoring and our advanced practitioner scheme to use both systems effectively and appropriately. The strategies recommended will be discussed at the highest level, the Executive, next term (Stratford Upon Avon College)

Use some of the funds allocated to us to widen our ATP team, so there is an ATP within each programme area. This should ensure that the majority of staff have a subject specialist who can support them through their training. (Warwickshire College)


By stronger partnership working including sharing of mentoring resources with partners (University of Worcester)

To formalise mentoring provision during 2008 and to include appropriate training and development in mentoring skills for established specialist teachers.(Royal National College for the Blind)

We have allocated funds to each Curriculum Area to allow them to react to needs as they arise. As the Teaching and Learning Coach, I will co-ordinate this process and link it to the Curriculum Area Review and ITT provision of Mentoring (Evesham and Malvern Hills College)

Through further work with University of Worcester parntership for LLQT and in house reviews for non-UW ITT course. (Kidderminster College)

We have yet to fully establish the system for the new programmes as the CTLLS and DTLLS have only just started but, given that we have
49 trainees and mentors on the flexi programme of the Cert Ed,I do not see that this will present us with a big issue (North East Worcs College)

We are currently firming up a programme of training and package of rewards to offer subject mentors. We hope the WMCETT’s mentoring project will result in additional training and networking opportunities for our future mentoring provision (Henley College)

Work within the framework and guidance provided by Staffordshire
University which will lay down minimum requirements for trainee teachers. This entails training 'key' mentors who can then train subject specific mentors across the college as and when (Walford and North
Shrops College)