Developing a mini community of practice within FE with a
specific focus on improving mentoring provision (to link with
teacher educator teams, their external mentors and subject
learning coaches)
Key words
Further Education, Mentoring, Community of Practice
Abstract
Three Lead Teacher Educators representing their Teacher Education Teams in three Colleges
of Further Education took part in this study which was designed to create a Community of
Practice. The aim of this Action Research project was to improve the quality of mentoring
provision for trainee teachers in the Further Education sector with a particular focus on
External Mentors. The Project Leader investigated the experience of the Lead Teacher
Educators and the External Mentors by means of questionnaires, follow up telephone calls
and a focus group
The key outcomes were as follows:Recruitment and information will be improved as one college intends to ensure that the
identification of a mentor is made when a potential trainee applies to go on an ITT course.
The other 2 colleges plan to give more information on the DTLLS course to External Mentors
as requested.
Databases are being tightened in 2 colleges and they will ensure that they are updated
periodically. One college now intends to set up a mentor database.
Agreements between External Mentors, Mentees, Teacher Educator teams and Employers are
being considered.
Improved co –ordination is being introduced with one college recruiting a 0.5 post to oversee
its mentoring provision and one college nominating a particular person to oversee mentoring.
Two colleges already offer mentor training and the third college will offer this from
September. All 3 colleges have updated their mentoring handbooks and these are available to
mentors electronically.
An area of the WMCETT (West Midlands Centre for Excellence in Teacher Training) site
has been dedicated to resources for mentors and the handbooks have been uploaded on this to
share with the Partnership. One college will have a dedicated area on its website for mentors.
Links between Mentors and Teacher Educators will be strengthened with one college making
additional visits to the workplace and another including an additional meeting between the
tutor and mentor either physically or via webcam or Skype.
1
Context
Three Colleges of Further Education took part in this study. They were situated in central
England. Two were Beacon colleges and two were very large providers operating on many
sites.
College A has 2 full time Teacher Educators and three who take on the role as part of their
remit. The Teacher Educator team makes links with Senior Teachers (who work in an
Advanced Practitioner role) and not with Subject Learning Coaches. This is for historical and
pragmatic reasons. It is considered that the Senior Teachers particularly enjoyed working
collaboratively and had the requisite skills.
College B has 6 full time Teacher Educators and 3 who work part time. This college has not
identified any Subject Learning Coaches.
College C has 2 full time and a number of servicing Teacher Educators. This college has a
team of Advanced Teaching and Learning Practitioners who are in a „Subject Learning
Coach‟ role within the college. Some of these ATPs are part of the Subject Learning Coach
programme from LSIS (Learning and Skills Improvement Service).
For the purposes of this study, we chose to explore the role of External Mentors on selected
DTLLS courses in the Teacher Education programmes. The 3 colleges work with 3 different
Higher Education Institutions on the DTLLS courses offered. We chose courses with two of
these HEIs. Each college identified a specific DTLLS course of their choice. These were all
year 2 courses.
College A ran one CTLLS course, one first year DTLLS and one second year DTLLS course.
They identified a second year course as their year one group was not due to start until
February. This college identified 8 External Mentors on their designated course.
College B chose a second year DTLLS course. Their first year is with a different HEI owing
to a college merger. They identified 10 External Mentors on their designated course. This
later turned out to be 9 External Mentors as one who was thought to be external was in fact,
internal. They also run one CTLLS course.
College C offers two CTLLS and two first year and two second year DTLLS. In both year
one and year two of the DTLLS course they had only one external candidate and therefore
only one External Mentor. It later emerged that they had 12 External Mentors on their
CTLLS course.
2
College A had 19 internal and 8 external mentors on its selected DTLLS Year 2 Course
71%
College B had 22 internal and 9 external mentors on its selected DTLLS Year 2 Course
3%
96%
College C had 27 internal and 1 external mentor on its selected DTLLS Year 2 Course
3
40%
(For comparison) College C had 8 internal and 12 external mentors on its CTLLS Course
Aims and Objectives
My aim was
To form a community of practice for external mentors within a network of Further Education
Colleges across the teacher education provision.
My objectives were
1. Sharing expertise and good practice including work with Subject Learning Coaches
2. Sharing organisational structures, processes and models of mentoring
3. Exploring issues and difficulties in external mentoring and mentoring provision
within the community of organisations and developing strategies for overcoming them
4. To develop a network of external mentors who support each other and who support
trainees within the mentoring community
5. To develop frameworks and protocols for mentor exchange within the community
6. To further develop mentors as reflective practitioners
7. To explore and further develop the pedagogy of mentoring
8. To develop mentor confidence and increase motivation
Although my aim and objectives appeared to change at times throughout the life of the
project, in fact, they remained the same and all but one (To develop frameworks and
protocols for Mentor exchange within the community) were met at least in part.
Strategies
Having identified three colleges who were willing to participate in the project, I set about
devising two questionnaires (see appendices 2 and 3). One questionnaire was aimed at the
Project Leaders in each college and the second was aimed at External Mentors. They were
both designed at gaining a clearer picture of how the mentoring was organised at each college
and what the key issues were for both the external mentors and the colleges concerned. I
4
emailed the relevant questionnaires to the project leaders. I followed up their responses with a
face to face interview with two of the Project Leaders and a follow up telephone interview
with the third. I attempted to organise a 4 way meeting with the three Project Leaders and
myself with a view to sharing the content of the questionnaires and creating a Community of
Practice. In reality, this was impossible to co-ordinate as Project Leaders were incredibly
busy with their role as Teacher Educators often working on several sites at great distance
from each other. The timing of the project was also thought to be unhelpful in that Teacher
Educator diaries are fixed in September. Our January start meant that the three Project
Leaders had already scheduled most of their time.
However, two of the Project Leaders had already collaborated on Mentor and Mentee
Handbooks and were prepared to share their latest versions of these by emailing them to each
other and posting them on the WMCETT website. As both colleges had continued to develop
their approaches, the Handbooks were by now substantially different and it was a useful
learning experience to consider their different approaches. The third college also found the
materials useful. This linked with my first and second objectives.
I next emailed the External Mentor questionnaires to the External Mentors. Project Leaders
either took on this task or emailed me a list of current names and contact details. Project
Leaders requested permission from External Mentors and emailed or telephoned with an
explanation of what the project entailed and the reasons for us carrying it out. Returns were
relatively poor with 2 out of 8 from College A, 5 out of 9 from College B and responses from
6 Internal Mentors from College C but nothing from the one External Mentor. It had already
been an unexpected outcome to find that College C had only one External Mentor on its
DTLLS course. We checked if we could define any of the Internal Mentors as “hard to reach”
but they were in fact college based Advanced Teaching and Learning Practitioners. They
were a useful comparison group, however, showing a model of a well- structured internal
mentoring system. In the hope of increasing our questionnaire returns we offered a nominal
payment for completion. This did not increase the numbers of returns.
I followed up the returned questionnaires by further email and telephone contact which I used
to clarify answers and to probe further. This was done in a semi- structured way in order to
clarify answers they had given. (see Outcomes for details of findings.) I also tried to follow
up the non returns to see why these External Mentors had not responded. This was only
partially successful and I was never able to make contact with some Mentors. (see Appendix
4 for further details. )
We organised a focus group and “Thank you lunch” for External Mentors from all three
colleges. We held this at a venue with beautiful gardens. This proved a good way of
increasing contact with External Mentors. 3 External Mentors from College A and 1 from
college B expressed an interest in attending. Sadly, the mentor from College B was
eventually unable to attend but was very helpful in offering suggestions for improving the
situation for External Mentors.
5
Despite the relatively low numbers, the “Thank you Lunch” and focus group proved very
useful. The Project Leader from College B attended and helped facilitate the focus group. A
profoundly deaf Mentor attended with an interpreter which gave an insight into the particular
issues for External Mentors with this disability. An External Mentor attended with her
Mentee which enabled the group to hear how a very successful relationship had worked. Two
learners from the DTLLS course also attended at the request of the Project Leader from
College B. These learners spoke about their group‟s experiences of both Internal and External
Mentoring. They conveyed that both External and Internal Mentoring was extremely variable
and that unlike the impression gained from College C that all the Internal Mentoring was
effective and tightly organised, suggested that Internal Mentoring worked well when Mentors
were approachable, skilled and had enough time, but worked very badly when the reverse
applied. They spoke about both their own and their peers‟ experiences citing occasions when
Mentees avoided their designated Mentor and sought informal support where they could. (See
case studies in Appendix 1) The “Thank you lunch” linked to objectives 4 and 8
All findings have been disseminated to the Project Leaders in the format of the Interim
Report and the Final Report. This has helped in the creation of a Community of Practice.
(objectives 1,2 and 3)
Evaluation of Strategies
I felt I needed to use questionnaires as I needed to collect information on what the issues and
needs were for both the Project Leaders and External Mentors. (See my third objective.)
Questionnaires could be emailed easily, were relatively non- intrusive and offered a way in to
further more in –depth telephone conversations. One of the disadvantages was the low returns
experienced. The follow up telephone conversations offered more information, however,
some External Mentors were still impossible to contact. This indicates just how hard to reach
some of them are. My questionnaires included a broad range of questions. This was because I
didn‟t have any real idea of what the issues might be and therefore had to cast a wide net.
Once I had a broad picture, I wanted to ask more specific questions. The follow up telephone
calls were useful for this.
A meeting between the 3 Project Leaders was impossible to organise as all had very high
workloads often on multiple sites at great distance from each other. One Project Leader also
had to cover for a colleague on long term sick leave and Teacher Educator diaries are usually
set for the year in September. In this respect our project was poorly timed with its January
start and limited time for completion.
The focus group worked well although disappointingly only with participants from one
college. It enabled us to gather further information, share good practice and to elicit case
study material. (See appendix 3). It certainly helped to bill it as a “Thank you Lunch.” This
strategy produced further contact from the 7 External Mentors who had filled out the
6
Questionnaires and from 1 who had not. Two Mentors stated that the “Thank you Lunch” had
made them feel more valued as External Mentors.
Outcomes (see Questionnaires in appendices 2 and 3)
Numbers of External and Internal Mentors (questions 4, 5 and 6, appendix 2)
My first interesting finding was that whereas College A had 8 External Mentors on its
selected DTLLS course and College B had 9, that College C had only 1 on its four DTLLS
programmes although it did have 12 on its CTLLS course. This indicates either a different
group of Learners, or a different recruitment strategy. The tightly knit and well organised
Internal Mentoring system was evident in College C. (For full details of findings see
appendices 2 and 3)
Recruitment of External Mentors (questions 11, 12 and 13, appendix 2)
In terms of recruiting External Mentors, Colleges A and B pass the responsibility to the
Mentee. I am unclear about the processes for College C. A question raised by my research is,
“How difficult is it for Mentees to find suitable Mentors and what happens if they don‟t?” I
am also interested to know how much pressure there is just to come up with a name. This
would be another fruitful area for future study
Databases and record keeping (objective 3)
I was very interested to find that in both College A and College B, records for External
Mentors were not always accurate and up to date. Both colleges had highly motivated
Teacher Education teams but even so things slipped through the net. In College A, I finally
managed to contact one “External Mentor” by telephone only to hear that, “I never actually
took on the job.” This left me wondering if the Trainee Teacher had managed all year without
a Mentor. In College A, the member of admin staff who keeps the records has been off with a
long term illness and so the usual checking on and updating of records has not taken place.
The Project Leader at this college intends to ensure that this checking and updating of the
database definitely happens next academic year. In College B, we learned at the “Thank you
Lunch” that one External Mentor, I had never had a reply from had been away with a long
term illness. Again, we gleaned this information in a random way. As before, I was left
wondering how the Learner had managed and who had signed his or her paperwork. Some
External Mentors, I never managed to make contact with at all. Those in the prison service
were particularly hard to reach, particularly as emails often are bounced back for “security
reasons.” It is not clear how these “issues of access” can be resolved. It was also hard to reach
those based in school.
Of those who responded to the External Mentor questionnaire, 3 External Mentors identified
themselves as willing to be on a local area database and 1 said possibly if they had more
information. 2 were willing to be part of a local area mentoring network and 2 gave qualified
approval (objective 4) ( see question 3, appendix 3)
7
Mentor Handbooks (objectives 1 and 2) (Question 16, appendix 2)
All three colleges had paper based Mentor Handbooks. As a result of the project, two of these
may now be accessed on the WMCETT Mentoring Website. They have developed
differently but both are examples of good practice.
It became evident from the External Mentors that whilst College A had a clear and very
useful Mentoring Handbook and laid on a series of briefing meetings throughout the year, the
two External Mentors who responded had actually not received the Handbooks as the college
relied on Mentees to pass them on to Mentors. Therefore they also did not attend the briefing
meetings and did not have contact details for the Teacher Educators. The college intends to
tighten up this procedure by emailing and posting the information out to all External Mentors
in future.
During a follow up phone call, one External Mentor requested that Handbooks should be
divided into three sections – Background to Mentoring, Procedures and Essential Paperwork
to make it less daunting.
Links with Internal Mentors and Teacher Educators (objective 3) ( questions 9 and 10,
appendix 2)
In all three colleges, External Mentors did not have the opportunity to meet with Internal
Mentors but in Colleges A and B they had contact details for key Teacher Educators and in
College A a programme of meetings to attend. College C had not developed the relationships
between External Mentors, Teacher Educator teams and/or Internal Mentors. As stated
previously, their internal mentoring system is tightly organised but the role of External
Mentors on their CTLLS course is not clear and perhaps requires further input from City and
Guilds. College C hope to learn from the findings of this study in order to improve this
situation.
Teacher Educator roles (objective 1) (question 8, appendix 2)
Teacher Educator roles were seen slightly differently in each of the three colleges. College A
cited more use of e-learning opportunities such as blogging. This could be a fruitful area in
which the participating colleges could exchange information and expertise.
The value of Mentoring (question 25, appendix 2)
. All three colleges felt that mentoring was of value. College B felt it should be “proactive
and positive with a protocol built around the relationship to protect both parties.” College A
saw it as “a developmental and supportive role which is non- threatening to encourage the
mentee to become independent and confident as a teacher.”
Commitment to the Mentoring role (objectives 6 and 7) (questions 13, 15, 16, 17,
appendix 3)
8
My experience was that some External Mentors are extremely helpful and committed to the
role but that others do not see it as a key priority. This was echoed by the Learners at the
“Thank you Lunch” who felt that this extended to Internal Mentors as well. Respondents to
my External Mentor Questionnaires fitted both categories. For example, one respondent saw
herself as a Line Manager only taking on the Mentoring role “as a special request for a
member of my staff.” This person did not want any training or contact with Teacher
Educators or any access to e-resources. In contrast, another respondent had done some
training but “would appreciate some updating and some scenarios”
Difficulties facing External Mentors (objective 3) (question 7, appendix 2, question 19,
appendix 3)
I asked a question about the difficulties facing External Mentors. College C saw this as
“recruitment and understanding their role specifically in terms of lesson observations for
DTLLS.” This raises a question of expectations in relation to lesson observations.
Expectations of the Mentor‟s role appear to vary throughout the region. We know from other
studies that some Mentors are not expected to observe Mentee learning sessions at all, some
are expected to offer developmental feedback to Mentees and some are expected to offer
graded observations (and in some cases to carry out all the required graded observations!) I
did not find out which of these was expected by the three designated colleges. This would be
useful in a follow up study.
Colleges A and B particularly commented on the difficulties involved when a line manager is
allocated as a Mentor. This can lead to serious conflicts of interest and can inhibit Mentees
from “opening up”. However, it is difficult to draw definitive lines as some Mentees may
positively choose a line manager whom they trust, to be their Mentor.
College B saw their main difficulty as making contact with the External Mentors. They found
that face to face and telephone contact was very difficult and that e-mail contact “worked
occasionally.”
College A found that making time to meet with External Mentors was the most difficult thing
for them. They found that most External Mentors do not attend meetings at the college
(although these are provided and timed at twilight for ease of access) but welcome college
tutors meeting with them at their own workplace either for joint observations or for general
support.
During a follow up phone call, one External Mentor requested support with the subject
specialism where the subject was not directly her own. This sometimes occurs owing to the
broad sector and subject categories 1-15 (used by Ofsted) and often used by colleges in
assigning mentors.
Mentoring Training (Objectives 3, 4, 6, 7, 8) (question 21, 22, appendix 2, question 5, 14,
15, appendix 3)
As a result of a Mentoring Training course offered to College A concurrently with this
project, they now intend to offer Mentoring training to future groups of External Mentors.
9
College B work with Worcester University who engage all Mentors in a Training Needs
Analysis. College C did not know what training their External Mentors had undergone.
Another interesting finding was that even when a College (College B) had commendably put
on a Mentoring training course at the External Mentor‟s own workplace, the External Mentor
still did not attend. In this case it could be that timing was an issue but I do not know for
certain.
Although College B offered Mentoring training, one External Mentor explained that “I would
have quite liked just to have someone to talk to about the paperwork issued to me at the
beginning rather than a course explaining how to be a mentor”
Supervision (objectives 1, 3, 6, 7, 8) (question 16, appendix 3)
Three External Mentors identified that they would have appreciated support such as from a
Mentor Supervisor. This would be in the form of clinical supervision perhaps from someone
in a co-ordination role or perhaps as group supervision within a team of mentors. Two
External Mentors indicated that they “received no support after a difficult mentoring
session.” One Mentor stated that, “Some areas may need clarification and that the right thing
is being done.” And another would like “backup as an External Mentor.” There was a final
request for, “an informal discussion on the telephone or to be able to ask questions via email.” This is an area worthy of further study.
Impact
As a result of this Project, the collated results from the two sets of questionnaires have been
circulated to the 3 Project Leaders. This has enabled them to consider how each college
manages its Teacher Education provision particularly with regard to External Mentoring.
College C intends to transfer any learning to their CTLLS Programme. (Objectives 1, 2, 3)
Recruitment and Giving Information (objectives1, 2, 3, 4, 8)
College C intends to ensure that the identification of a mentor is made when a potential
trainee applies to go on an ITT course. The mentor could then be contacted in writing to
ensure that they understand the role and possibly to sign an agreement at this stage. This may
help with “issues of access” as identified, for example, in the case of mentors from the prison
service.
College A and College B have planned to give more information on the DTLLS course to
External Mentors in response to their request for this. Some External Mentors had completed
their Teacher Training many years ago and were not up to date with the new qualifications.
They also felt that if they knew what aspects of the training were happening when, they could
better anticipate issues and support their mentees. College C tend to use more recently
qualified staff as their subject specialist mentors. College C intend to invite Mentors to the
2nd/3rd taught ITT session in order to encourage a community of practice between mentors,
10
their trainees and the ITT team. Exemplar copies of marked assignments would be provided
so that both trainee and mentor could see the standards required.
Databases (objectives 3, 6, 8)
Colleges A and B intend to tighten up their databases and to check with External Mentors
periodically that contact details are current and up to date and that appropriate mentoring is
taking place. College C intends to set up a mentor database and to provide mentor training.
Protocols
Colleges A and B are considering a 3 or 4 way agreement between External Mentors,
Mentees, Teacher Education Teams and Employers instead of the 2 way Mentor/ Mentee
agreement currently in use.
Co – ordination (objectives 1, 2, 3)
College B has recruited a 0.5 mentoring Co-ordinator to oversee its mentoring provision. The
Project Leader from College A intends to oversee the mentoring provision in that college
making sure that all External Mentors receive the Mentor Handbooks and notification of the
Mentoring meetings and that the database is kept up to date. Three External Mentors had
stated that they felt there could be improvements in co-ordination.
Mentoring Handbooks (objectives 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8)
As a result of the project, the Mentoring Handbooks from Colleges A and C have been
uploaded onto the WMCETT website where they may be freely accessed. They have
developed differently but both are examples of good practice.
All three colleges have updated their Mentoring Handbooks during the life of the project.
College C intends to give clearer guidance in the Mentor Handbook on the expectations for
the mentoring process by the ITT team
Links with Teacher Educators (objectives 1, 3, 6, 7, 8)
Some External Mentors requested information on how trainees are performing on their
course. Project Leaders felt that this would be inappropriate (especially when Mentees are
also Line Managers!) although they would encourage trainees to share information with their
mentors.
This project has afforded the Project Leader of College A sufficient funds to visit 5 out of the
8 External Mentors in their own workplace between January and July 2009. This is in
addition to the joint observations. This was one of the things requested by External Mentors.
College C intends to include one review between ITT tutor and their Mentor per trainee. This
will either take place in person or via webcam using a Skype account.
Mentor Training (objectives 6, 7, 8)
11
As a result of mentoring training concurrent with this project, College A will offer mentoring
training from September 2009. It is also important to remember that External Mentors from
College B requested “someone to talk to about the paperwork rather than a course explaining
how to be a mentor”
A profoundly deaf External Mentor has requested “Deaf Awareness” as part of the Equality
and Diversity inputs on mentor training courses. This is an area worthy of future study.
E –resources (objectives 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8)
Some External Mentors requested access to the Moodle site. This is not always practical as it
is a restricted access site and requires registration on college courses. The WMCETT website
could offer an accessible alternative for some things.
College C wanted some means by which External Mentors could access information
electronically and College B some means by which they could access e-training. As part of
the project, the Project Leader from College A has sought out some interactive video clips of
mentoring to be accessed via the Mentoring Toolkit on the WMCETT website
College A is investing time in producing some interactive e- resources for mentoring. These
will be added to the WMCETT Mentoring Toolkit on the WMCETT website.
College A and College B intend to send all paperwork electronically as well as in hard copy
to External Mentors. This was requested by an External Mentor from each college.
College C intends to prepare an online site for mentors to access materials and FAQs
A profoundly deaf External Mentor has requested more consideration for deaf mentors on
website and resource provision. This is an area worthy of future study.
An additional outcome is the increased reflective practice amongst the Project Leaders and
their Teacher Education teams at the three colleges.
It will be difficult to judge further impact of the project before next year. This may be seen in
various ways such as:Up to date databases
The number of Mentors in receipt of the relevant paperwork
Whether External Mentors are “on board”, know what is happening, have undergone
training and are supported
Improved retention and achievement of trainee teachers
Hits on the WMCETT website
Learning Points
12
In a climate of continuing inspection, targets and grades, it is often difficult to carry
out investigations as college personnel may be reluctant to expose any practice that is
less than exemplary.
There was a difficulty in organising a 4-way meeting between the Project manager
and Project Leaders due to time constraints and the starting time of the project.
The difference in numbers of mentors on the DTLLS course for one college was
unexpected. Owing to the short lead in time for the project, the criteria had been
established with two colleges before the third came on board. It would have been
preferable to determine the criteria with all stakeholders.
There was a difficulty in contacting External Mentors especially when records were
incomplete. This became a finding and action point for colleges to improve on.
There was a low return rate of the questionnaires for External Mentors. This may have
been due to the length of the questionnaires. It would have been useful to carry out a
pilot or scoping study in order to narrow the range of questions.
There was an advantage in supporting questionnaires by follow up telephone calls as
extra information was gleaned and unclear answers could be probed.
Motivation to participate in a project comes more from a sense of being valued rather
than payment for the completion of a questionnaire. This became clear from the
increase in contributions when External mentors were invited to a “Thank you” lunch
against the low increase in receiving questionnaires when payment was offered.
There were clear advantages to a meeting of all stakeholders of a college – Project
Manager, Project Leader, External and Internal Mentors, Mentors with special needs
and Mentees.
There appear to be issues around mentees finding their own External Mentors and it
would be useful to have more rigorous checks on the quality assurance of the
mentoring.
There is variance of expectations of the role of the mentor in different colleges
especially in regard to observations, use of line managers, time allocations for
meetings and reviews and knowledge of subject specialist areas.
Requests were made by mentors for support from a Mentor Supervisor especially after
a difficult mentoring session.
Next Steps
In terms of sustainability, various measures are being put in place at the participating
colleges. These are as follows:Databases and record keeping will be improved and monitored. The Project Leader from
College A intends to take a co-ordinating role in this. At College B, the appointment of a 0.5
mentoring Co-ordinator should greatly improve the record keeping. College C has a robust
system for Internal Mentors and intends to extend some of this rigour to the External
Mentoring.
13
A review of paperwork has taken place at all three colleges. College C will include a clear
outline of the role of the Mentor for their CTLLS course and College A will e-mail and post
hard copies of their Mentoring Handbooks to External Mentors as well as giving copies to
Mentees. This should ensure that all External mentors receive the paperwork and the dates
and times of meetings as well as the contact details for the ITT staff.
College A is researching interactive video clips on mentoring as well as highlighting useful
website links. Some mentoring materials are already available on the WMCETT website and
these are in the process of being extended. College C is preparing a list of FAQs and is
preparing a college online site for off-site access by External Mentors. College B is putting
all paperwork together in an online format, to be e-mailed or issued on memory sticks.
College C is arranging one review meeting between ITT tutor and mentor per trainee. This
may be real or virtual by means of webcam or Skype to overcome issues of distance. College
A is also continuing its policy of one meeting per Mentor where possible in the
Mentee‟s/Mentor‟s own workplace.
Mentor training is already offered by College B on several sites. Colleges A and C intend to
offer Mentoring training from September. Trained Mentors will then be entered on a database
by College C.
Greater emphasis on the role of the Mentor in promoting Reflective Practice is being flagged
by College C and informal links between ITT staff, trainees and other mentors are being
promoted.
At College C, from September, mentors are being invited to the 2nd or 3rd ITT taught session
to encourage a “Community of Practice” between mentors, their trainees and the ITT team.
This will take the form of an informal social session for the first half of the evening. It will be
led by the ITT team and will allow mentors and their trainees to learn about the role of the
mentor, support available and to be able to discuss informally what is required.
The ITT team will also provide exemplar copies of marked assignments for the DTLLS
Action Research assignments so that trainee and mentor can see the standards required and so
that the Mentor has a better understanding of how they can support their trainee. Copies of
marking criteria will also be issued.
By each college sharing what it is doing, a cycle of continuing improvement should ensue.
Contact Details
jayne.hedges@yahoo.com
14
Appendix 1
Case Study One
An External Mentor and her Mentee attended the Focus Group and “Thank you” Lunch. The
Mentee explained how she had chosen her Mentor for her experience of working with young
people with challenging behaviour. The Mentor had had almost 20 years of working in this
field in a variety of settings. The Mentee had known her by acquaintance and felt that she was
approachable as well as skilled. This formed the basis of a successful and developing
mentoring relationship. The Mentee had experienced severe pressures from her home life and
stated that without the support and encouragement from her Mentor, she would have certainly
left the DTLLS course. This was corroborated by the Course Leader. Both the Course Leader
and the Mentor expressed their admiration for the quality of the teaching provided by the
Mentee.
The Mentor said that as she had completed her teacher training almost 20 years ago, that she
would have welcomed an outline of the new DTLLS programme and requirements. She had
to rely on her Mentee for information on this.
The mentoring arrangement is now continuing informally with a reciprocal sharing of roles
in a co-mentoring arrangement. The Mentee‟s knowledge and expertise in a foreign language
is of benefit to the Mentor who is teaching a different foreign language to her students.
Case Study Two
A profoundly deaf External Mentor attended the Focus group and “Thank you” Lunch. We
organised a signer to attend with him. He particularly wished to flag up the issues facing the
profoundly deaf Mentor and Mentee. He suggested that it would be helpful in Mentoring
Training courses to raise these issues in terms of Equality and Diversity.
It was a learning experience for me to recognise the difficulties facing this Mentor. Email or
text based interaction was invaluable. It was clearly impractical to phone him and a signer
would need to be employed in situations where non- signers were present or leading a
learning experience. This was largely outside the brief of this Action Research Project but a
great deal more work could usefully be done in this area.
15
Case Study Three
Three learners from the designated DTLLS course at College B attended the Focus Group
and “Thank You” Lunch. They described a varied picture of the effectiveness of mentoring
relationships they had either personally experienced or witnessed. They described how it
could work really well as in Case Study One (see above). They also described how it
sometimes failed to work. This was usually if the Mentor showed little interest in the role,
appeared too busy or unapproachable.
In such cases, they explained that Mentees would often avoid the designated Mentor and
look for informal support elsewhere. They saw this as by no means confined to External
Mentoring but to Internal Mentoring as well. Where mentoring works well, it works really
well but sadly it is sometimes a patchy experience.
Appendix 2
Collation of Questionnaires for Action research Project Leaders
1. How many CTLLS programmes does your college offer?
College C 2
College B 0
College A 1
2. How many DTLLS programmes does your college offer?
C
4
B
1
A
2
3. Which organisations validate or franchise these qualifications?
C CTLLS – City and Guilds
DTLLS – Warwick University
B Worcester University (new courses will be with Wolverhampton)
A Warwick University
4. How many learners are currently on each year of the programme?
C CTLLS 32
DTLLS yr one 23
DTLLS yr two 28
16
5.
6.
7.
8.
B DTLLS yr two 31
A CTLLS 5
DTLLS yr one 26
DTLLS yr two 19
How many of your ITT learners are internal candidates (i.e. are
candidates based in your organisation)?
C CTLLS
20
DTLLS yr one 23
DTLLS yr two 27
B DTLLS yr two 21
A All courses 30
How many of your ITT learners are external candidates (i.e. are
candidates based in other organisations)?
C CTLLS 12
DTLLS 1
B DTLLS 9
A All
20
DTLLS (Yr two) 8
What, if any, would you say are the difficulties facing external subject
mentors in particular?
C Recruitment and understanding their role specifically in terms of
lesson observations for DTLLS
B Contacting them face to face and by phone (e-mail works
occasionally)
A Time to meet with mentees on a regular basis to provide sufficient
support
Attending meetings with tutors. Most do not attend meetings at
college but welcome meeting with tutors at own college or workplace
One mentor requested more information on ITT programme
How would you describe the roles of the following:Teacher Education staff
C We have 2 permanent members of staff and a number of servicing
lecturers. Many of our servicing lecturers are ATPs. The teacher
Education staff and ATPs report to the same Quality Manager who
ensures the smooth allocation of subject mentors.
17
B To recruit, interview students for the programme. To manage the
teaching, learning and ensure learners’ individual needs are met. To
ensure internal moderation events take place and quality assurance
processes are followed for both the college and the university. To attend
the monthly partnership meetings at the university, alongside the
External Moderation meetings held quarterly.
A Teach groups and lead seminars; support trainees through individual
tutorials, e-mails, blogging. Provide ideas for them to develop their
teaching practice in a general way following observation. Comment on
draft assignments and mark assignments. Meet with mentees where
possible and conduct joint observations. Discuss practice as ITT tutors
with colleagues. Moderate colleagues’ marking and teaching
observations.
Subject Mentors based within the college?
C All ATPs are subject mentors within the college. Where there isn’t the
expertise in the current ATP team, we select staff who have recently
completed our ITT programmes and invite them to be subject mentors.
Often these staff are in curriculum leader roles within the college.
B To comply with the university paperwork for their role. To ensure they
are available at suitable times to meet on a regular basis with their
mentee/s. To offer support and guidance with a range of issues
presented by the mentee., to signpost their mentee to others if
necessary. To carry out subject specific observations of their mentee.
A Support trainees on a regular basis through individual or small group
tutorials to provide ideas about teaching their subject specialism. This
includes observation of trainee teaching practice and providing verbal
and written feedback to them
External Subject Mentors?
C This person is recruited after a discussion between the ITT tutor and
the trainee as to who would be most appropriate within their
organisation
B as for internal subject mentors
A as for internal subject mentors
Subject Learning Coaches?
18
C We have a team of ATPs who are in a “Subject Learning Coach” role.
Some of them are part of the SLC programme from LSIS.
B The college has not identified any SLCs
A This is the same or similar role depending on whether it includes
observation of the trainee’s teaching practice.
9. How would you describe the relationships between those groups?
C Good. The ITT tutors come and present at the ATP meetings on
updates for subject mentoring. The relationship between the internal
groups is good because they all report to the same quality manager.
B n/a
A Generally very good and supportive. However many trainees have
commented to me over the last 10+ years that they do not appreciate
their line manager being requested to mentor them as there can be a
conflict of interest. This is a complex area of interaction which is worthy,
I think, of serious thought and discussion.
10.What do you think could improve those relationships?
C I’m not sure the internal relationships need improving. The external
relationships are more difficult although there are less of them. The
external mentors are very time conscious and getting them to come into
college would be very difficult.
B n/a
A More contact and communication between tutors and mentors which
could include contact when the tutors arrange to observe the trainees
though not necessarily conducting a joint observation together.
Maximum and regular contact between mentor and trainees.
11.What if any are the difficulties in recruiting Subject Specialist Mentors?
C Currently there are no difficulties although in the future it may be
tricky if we have many more trainees for Equine courses or Animal
Welfare.
B The ITT trainees are responsible for obtaining their subject specific
mentors. We recommend they do not use their line managers to ensure
the mentee’s voice is heard, give a freedom to the mentee and to aid
confidentiality
19
A There doesn’t seem to be a difficulty recruiting. Sometimes there is a
difficulty with regular contact between mentor and trainee following
recruitment.
12.Are there any particular subjects where you find difficulty in recruiting
subject specialist mentors?
C At Warwickshire College we call the subject specialist the broad sector
and subject categories 1-15(used by Ofsted) as our guide. We would be
unable to provide mentors for some of our very specialised land based
provision such as farriery if we did not have this approach.
B As the trainee is responsible for finding their own mentor, currently
we have no difficulties
A None that I am aware of
13.How do you get around any difficulties in recruiting subject specialist
mentors?
C As above, we use the broad subject categories
B n/a
A Trainees are required to find a mentor as part of their application to
the CTLLS or DTLLS programme so the responsibility is with them
14. How do you attract or select your external mentors?
C We invite the trainees to propose an appropriate mentor at
recruitment stage on to the ITT course
B n/a
A As above so it is up to the organisation where the trainee works
15.Do you keep a mentor database? (If so would you be prepared to share
this with others? Please explain.)
C No, the majority of our mentors are staff from within our college so
our priority is for them to be available to work with our trainees. We
have heard about the work at the University of Huddersfield on ementoring and that is interesting
B The University (Worcester) keeps a database. I am happy to share the
details of my mentors with you, however I would want to ask their
permission first.
A Yes we do
16.Do you offer induction and follow up sessions to your external
mentors? If so please describe.
20
C No, as we have so few, this tends to be personalised at the moment
and via e-mail
B We offer training through the University at the beginning of the year,
and all mentors complete a TNA of further needs, this is then sent to the
university for further planning.
A Yes we have an induction once a year with a follow up programme of
joint meetings with all tutors available. The meetings are held at 5pm.
Last year we had 4 meetings and this year we have held 2 so far with a
third meeting scheduled for May
17. Do you offer guidance to your external mentors? Do you have any
examples of paperwork they receive?
C Yes we just have paper guidance
B All mentors receive a mentor’s pack, and the ITT staff go through this
with the mentees as well, so they can guide their mentors
A Yes we have our Mentor Booklet
18. Do you have written policies and procedures for your external
mentors to follow?
C Only our paper guidance
B We have procedures, roles and responsibilities as outlined in the
mentors handbook
A We advised them to follow the Warwick University guidelines as set
out in the Booklet
19. How do you organise or co-ordinate your external mentors?
C We haven’t had many to date, so this has been quite personalised and
liaising with the trainee
B Any information I need to get to the external mentors I either email or
pass on through the trainee
A We have a programme of meetings as described above and all
mentors are contacted by post and/ or email and/or via their mentees.
They are also sent a Mentor Booklet with the recommended Subject
Specific Observation Form to use
20. Do your external mentors have opportunities to meet with internal
mentors? Teacher Education Teams? SLCs? If so, please describe
C No
21
B Only on the initial training session, however they have the ITT staff
members details so they can contact if necessary
A As above
21. What mentoring training do your external mentors already have?
C Not sure although many of them have general mentoring roles in their
organisation rather than a training/teaching role
B All this information is on their TNA which is held at the University
(Worcs)
A No specified training is available beyond the programme of meetings
as specified above. Training is being offered from September 2009
22. Do you offer any additional mentoring training? If so please describe
C At the college we offer a mentor (buddy) to all new members of staff
to support them in their first 3 weeks at the college. We also allocate an
ATP to all new teaching staff to support them in their first year of
teaching
B Not currently
A Not as yet
23. Do your ITT mentors (and in particular your external mentors) fit into
an overall policy for mentoring within your organisation?
C Not at the moment although we have two other mentoring
programmes taking place within the college
B Not for external, however internal mentors do get 10 hours release
time from their timetable
A Not that I am aware
24. Are there any ways in which you feel your dealings with external
mentors could be improved?
C Improved written guidelines and perhaps somewhere they could
access information electronically. Contacts in the college for more
information
B By a co-ordinated push to ensure I contact them regularly, work
towards doing joint observation of trainees with them. Some way of
offering e-training
A As stated above by tutors arranging to meet them at their place of
work
25. How would you describe your values and beliefs around mentoring?
22
Would these be widely held within your department?
C Warwickshire College has placed great value on the mentoring
process in the past and has invested in staff time to support staff who
are new to their roles
B Mentoring is a two way process which I personally feel benefits the
mentor and the mentee. The mentoring relationship needs to be
proactive and positive with a protocol built around the relationship to
protect both parties. All discussions need to be within the bounds of
confidentiality
A This should be a developmental and supportive role which is nonthreatening to encourage the mentee to become independent and
confident as a teacher. It should not include grading though can include
agreed action points following observation and tutorials.
Line managers and senior teachers though often undertake this role
including at our college, and they are not always the best suited as there
may be conflict between their dual role
26. How is the quality of Subject Specialist Mentors assured within your
organisation?
C All college appointed mentors receive training from the ITT staff and
they liaise with their mentees’ tutors on progress to date. All college
mentors are teacher qualified and selected either by the ITT team or
Quality Manager
B Our Internal Moderator will take a sample of mentors and observe
them observing and giving feedback as part of the ITT quality assurance
process
A ITT tutors arrange joint observations with mentors annually as part of
the ITT quality process
27. How is the impact of Subject Specialist Mentoring measured at your
organisation?
C Very early to have robust information back. Informal feedback has
indicated that there have been some very positive outcomes from the
support provided by mentors specifically regarding the development of
teaching practice
B The organisation has just recruited a .5 mentoring co-ordinator who
will be working with the quality team to look at this area
23
A A measure of this would be through the teaching observation grades
awarded annually to all teachers as part of their appraisal
28. How do you address issues of equality and diversity with subject
specialist mentors and/ or mentees?
C All ATP mentors have received training on Equality and Diversity by the
college E and D Manager
B Not as far as I know but I would need to explore this with Worcester
University who do our training
A Issues of E and D are addressed in taught sessions and through
discussion with individual trainees
29. Do you have mentoring e-resources available to your subject specialist
mentors? If so please describe.
C No
B Not currently
A This is yet to be developed
30.Would you welcome an opportunity to further develop these?
C Yes
B Yes
A Yes this may help towards supporting mentors as only a small
minority attend meetings with tutors
Appendix 3
Collation of Questionnaires for External Subject Specific Mentors
5 out of 9 external mentors responded from College B
2 out of 8 external mentors responded from College A
24
0 out of 1 external mentor responded from College C
1. On a scale of 1 – 5 how would you rate your experience as a
subject specialist mentor?
1
excellent
1
2
Very good
2
3
good
2+1
4
satisfactory
1
5
poor
2 rated the experience as very good, 2 as good and 1 as satisfactory
1 rated the experience as excellent and 1 as good
2. Are your details kept on a mentor database within your
organisation?
3 people said no
2 non responses
2 people said no
3. Would you be willing to have your details held on a local area
subject mentor database so that you could be contacted by other
local organisations requiring Subject Specialist Mentors?
3 people said yes, 2 qualified this by “if allowed by my current
job”
1 said no and 1 said “possibly but would like more information”
25
4. Would you welcome being part of a local area network of Subject
Specialist Mentors?
2 said Yes,
1 said yes if paid,
2 were unsure
1 said no and 1 said “Perhaps but I would like more
information”
5. Were you offered an induction into the Subject Mentor role? If so,
please describe.
1 “no induction offered at that time”
3 said yes
1 “yes if you mean mentoring in general as opposed to subject
specific mentoring. However I felt it was geared towards
attending a mentoring course and I do not have any available
time to do this”
1 said no and 1 said “through the mentee but not formally”
6. Are you clear about your role and responsibilities as a Subject
Mentor?
4 said Yes
“To assist the mentee as necessary, mainly to give support, advice
as required and be a sounding board”
“To assess and guide the mentee’s progress by being
approachable and easily accessible and offering immediate
feedback, constructive criticism and support whenever possible”
1 “ I am clear about my role/responsibilities, but would like more
training”
26
1 said yes and 1 said “Act as supporter and adviser to the mentee
’critical friend’, Assess 2 teaching sessions, Provide information to
the mentee to help them improve their teaching”
7. Do you have written policies and procedures to follow with regard
to your Subject Mentor role? If so, please describe.
3 yes the mentor handbook (one person described it as ‘fairly
straightforward’
2 no (0ne said ‘none given’. One said ’as I am the only mentor
within the company there is no need for formalised procedures
at this point’
2 said no
8. Is the paperwork issued adequate for you and your Mentee’s
needs? If not, please explain why.
1 didn’t answer this question
1 “Having done this for the first time, I feel I could have done
better”
1 “I have only been a mentor twice, so feel that I am unable to
answer this question”
2 felt that the paperwork was adequate ( one said “The
paperwork is adequate for need but is perhaps not formatted
in the most user friendly way. It would also be of benefit if the
paperwork was available online rather than having to
handwrite the information”, One said ”The paperwork is
adequate if a bit repetitive on occasion”
27
1 said yes and 1 said “I would have appreciated a simple pack
with pertinent information such as contact details, course
layout, expectations of the mentor and assessment criteria”
9. Do you feel that you receive satisfactory co-ordination in your role
as a Subject Mentor? How is this organised?
3 felt there could be improvements (1 said time was an issue in
this, 1 “ I only have contact when a course is available To do a
better job I feel I need more input” 1 said“I have been invited to 2
meetings regarding the mentor role, again as before it leaned
towards a mentoring course. I would have quite liked just to have
had someone to talk to about the paperwork issued to me at the
beginning, rather than a course explaining how to be a mentor”)
1 felt unable to answer this question as they had only mentored
twice
1misunderstood the question“As a small company there is
regular contact with all mentees”
1 said “No, but it is not necessary” and 1 said, “Fortunately my
mentee is experienced and mature and totally self sufficient and
reliable so she ensured I had the relevant information but I had no
contact with the college or course lecturer”
10. Do you have adequate opportunity to communicate with
Teacher Educators at your Mentee’s place of study? If not, how
could this be improved?
28
1 was completely satisfied “yes”
2 thought improvements could be made “As I teach full time I
find the time factor is a drawback where communication is
concerned”
“Teacher educators are always accessible by phone and e-mail but
perhaps further opportunities to meet would be of benefit”
1 had not met the Teacher Educators“I have yet to meet with any
of the above”
1 had not sought to meet them “I have never asked for assistance
so cannot comment”
1 said “No, not necessary” and 1 said “This is not an issue
however no-one else is taking a similar course to my mentee”
11. Do you have adequate opportunity to communicate with other
Subject Mentors? If not, how could this be improved?
2 felt they had not got the time ( “I am sure the opportunity is
there but I do not have the time” “Due to the fact that I have a
busy schedule, it is difficult to fit in any more however if there was
a scheduled arrangement this may be a solution”
1 had a disability which impeded communication with other
subject mentors“I do not feel there is adequate opportunity to
communicate with the above. I am profoundly deaf, teaching
BSL and would need a CSW to be present i.e. making phone
calls, translation of written work
There were no answers to this question
12. How would you describe your values and beliefs about
mentoring? Would you say that these are shared by your
managers?
29
The 3 who answered were positive about mentoring
“Enjoyable experience but I feel I am obliged to carry this out
without any time remission as I am the mentee’s line manager”
“I feel I have a wealth of experience which will only benefit the
mentee”
“ I do believe in mentoring. I do feel it is a good progression route
for the mentee. I have yet to share my experience with my
manager”
1 said “I believe it is important to support staff” and 1 said
“Giving honest feedback in a sensitive manner; treating my
mentees in an equitable manner; drawing on my own
experiences to give balanced opinions/ideas but respecting their
diversity; being mindful that it is the mentee’s agenda and not
my own; appreciate that the mentee has multiple commitments
and ensuring that my expectations are realistic”
13. How would you describe your way of working with mentees?
This question generally produced answers indicating a
supportive and enabling approach to mentoring, however, I
wondered if there was a confusion of role for one mentor and I
wondered about the balance of power in another relationship.
“Collaborative, supportive and allowing mentee independence to
learn from experience”
“I only have the one mentee and this is done on a very informal
basis. I know my mentee well. I presume I would work in a similar
way if I did not know the mentee”
“I would describe this as being worthy. I do have the knowledge in
this subject area and the feedback given to the mentee I feel was
very useful”
“Friendly, informal and with a ‘can do’ attitude to all requests”
30
“ Informal and supportive. We have regular one to one meetings. I
allow my mentee to use me as a sounding block and I offer any
advice I can, e.g. reading through assignments and giving
feedback”
1said “Good” and 1 said, “Act as a supporter and adviser to the
mentee, ’critical friend’; assess and evaluate teaching sessions as
required; provide information to the mentee to help them
improve their teaching skills; treat them like adult learners by
keeping an ‘open door’; setting up regular informal meetings
based on the needs of the mentee”
14. What training as a Mentor have you received?
This question produced a variable picture ranging from none,
inability to take up training, possibly due to timing, induction
and training
“Induction”
“The course offered. In fact I have done it twice as I thought it
was going to be a different course!”
“Training was offered at my place of work. Unfortunately, I was
unable to attend this due to being a teacher”
“Training days offered by Sutton College and Josiah mason
College”
“None”
1 said “None” and 1 said the following:-“ I undertook the
postgraduate Learning and Teaching in Higher Education course at
Plymouth University. I did a half day’s mentoring training at
Birmingham City University and I undertook the ENB 998 course
(nursing)
31
15. Would you welcome any further training in mentoring? If so,
what kind of training?
4 said yes “Models of good mentoring practice”
“It is a good opportunity anyway to meet fellow mentors so any
course which involves practical situations”
“I would welcome some training. This would need to meet the
needs of British Sign language”
“ I intend to take a mentoring qualification some time in the near
future”
1 said no “ Unfortunately, we are constantly having to keep up
with Continuous Professional Development as therapists and
teachers, so there is very little spare time”
1 said “no” and 1 “would appreciate some updating and
scenarios”
16. What do you feel would significantly aid you in your work as an
External Mentor?
One person said “Time!”
One person said “Regular updates on the mentee’s progress on the
DTLLS course so that I could assist in rectifying any problems as
they arise.”
Three people appeared to need support such as from a mentor
supervisor. Two people indicated that they received “no support
after a difficult mentoring session”
“Some areas may need clarification and also confirmation that the
right thing is being done”
“Backup as an external mentor”
32
“An informal discussion on the telephone or to be able to ask
questions via email”
1 said “I am only doing it as a special request for a member of my
staff” and 1 said “communication with the college/university”
17. Would you welcome an opportunity to access e-resources
related to your role as a subject specific mentor?
2 did not respond
2 were keen but with specific requests
1 said “I would welcome this, maybe in the form of a person
signing on a particular website” (This person is a profoundly deaf
teacher and user of BSL)
“This would be of great benefit; access to the Moodles site,
regular updates on the mentee’s progress and feedback from
tutor observations and tutorials”
1 was undecided
“This is difficult to say as the 2 year course is almost complete. I
might have found the extra information useful at the beginning of
the course.”
1 said “no” and 1 said, “anything as long as it is evidence based”
18. How would you say that issues of Equality and Diversity are
addressed in your role as Subject Specific Mentor?
Only 2 people responded to this question
“I feel that more Deaf Awareness is required within this subject
area”
33
“Reasonably well”
1 said, “No comment” and 1 stated that, “If my mentee had
specific learning or cultural requirements we would address these
by seeking specialist advice/support and put in place the
recommendations. All staff members are treated fairly, equitably
and with respect.”
19. What are the main issues or obstacles you encounter?
“That the provision we offer is a specialist LDD and this does not
translate easily to the mainstream approach required for the
DTLLS course.”
“Lack of time”
Other information gleaned is that sometimes mentors are also
line managers (of 2 who gave information, 1 was a colleague
who was asked to be a mentor by the mentee, the other gained
the role ”Because of my position as Curriculum Manager within
the company”
1 out of the two was a line manager
Appendix 4 – Contact with External Mentors
College A
2 responded to initial e-mails and questionnaires. 1 offered additional
recommendations.
1 not available to be contacted “on compassionate grounds.”This External Mentor
worked in the prison service and early e-mails were bounced back for “security reasons”
1 never replied to e-mails. I eventually contacted him by phone to discover that he
“never actually took on the job.”
34
1 out of the country and only contactable via his mentee. The mentee did not respond
to e-mails. No phone number available.
1 based in a school. He never replied to any e-mails and although I got through to the
staffroom by phone, I was never able to talk to him and he never phoned back.
2 never replied to e-mails and no phone numbers were available.
College B
2 responded to e-mails and attended the “Thank you Lunch”
3 responded to e-mails but were unable to attend the lunch owing to time constraints
1 off long term sick. I found this out from her colleague at the “Thank you Lunch”
1 based at a school. I phoned 3 times and left messages.I was unable to make contact
and she did not return my call.
1 did not respond to e-mails and had no available phone number
1 - Repeated phone calls were unanswered
College C
The 1 External Mentor did not respond to e-mails or the questionnaire from the Lead
Teacher Educator.
35