Posts

Michael Soulé

Mentoring in Waldorf Early Childhood Education, WECAN

/in /by

About mentoring . . . to begin with . . .

Mentoring is a collegial relationship which contributes to the personal and professional development of both the mentor and the student, teacher, or caregiver being mentored (called the “mentee” in this handbook). Mentoring is a process of mutual adult learning.

The mentor, an experienced teacher, supports the growth of the mentee through observation and the mentoring conversation, sharing the fruits of her experience in a way that helps the mentee to see her own work more clearly and to feel encouraged in her striving. It is important to keep in mind that mentoring is distinct from evaluating.

The mentee, who may be a student in a training program, a new teacher or caregiver, or an experienced professional seeking renewal, offers the mentor an opportunity for new insights on her own path.

In mentoring, the experienced educator serves the Waldorf movement by helping to insure that programs are rooted in a strong Waldorf early childhood offering; a mentored teacher or caregiver is able to enhance the health of the setting where she works. In a fundamental sense, the mentor serves children and their parents through her work with their teacher or caregiver.

The work of the mentor grows out of an understanding of, and gratitude for, the insights of Rudolf Steiner. Keeping these insights at the forefront in the mentoring work—in a way that is thoughtful, not dogmatic—fosters the development of a Waldorf movement with integrity, true to its essential qualities.

The quality of the mentoring visit will be heightened by communication in advance to ensure clarity of purpose, expectations, and process. The follow-up record of the visit and conversation will contribute to the usefulness of the experience for the mentee.

In Mentoring in Waldorf Early Childhood Education, we have enlarged on these key aspects of mentoring, with chapters on the essentials of Waldorf early childhood work, the paths of self- education and adult learning, the “nuts and bolts” of mentoring, and the nature of a fruitful mentoring conversation. Our hope is to follow this publication with a companion handbook on teacher evaluation.

Each chapter retains the voice of its author, but was written after thorough work among the Task Force members and other experienced mentors. We hope you, the reader—whether a mentor, mentee, or member of a school committee—will feel free to read chapters in whatever order seems most useful.

We gratefully acknowledge the Waldorf Educational Foundation for providing support for the work of the WECAN Mentoring Task Force over the past two years.

vii

Table of Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

I. Self-Education as the Basis for the Art of Mentoring
Andrea Gambardella . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

II. The Role of Mentoring Early Childhood Teachers and Caregivers: Context and Purpose
Connie White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

III. Laying the Basis for the Mentoring Visit
Nancy Foster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

IV. The Essentials of Waldorf Early Childhood Education
Susan Howard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

V. The Mentoring Observation: What Do We Look For?
Nancy Foster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

VI. The Art of Fruitful Conversation
Carol Nasr Griset & Kim Raymond . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

VII. Pearls of Wisdom: The Role of Advice in Mentoring
Nancy Foster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39

VIII. Accountability: Written Records
Nancy Foster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43

IX. Meeting at the Eye of the Needle: Mentoring on the Path of Adult Learning
Susan Silverio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45

References (listed by chapter) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

About the authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55

Introduction

Along with a growing interest in Waldorf education, and the proliferation of new initiatives, comes the need for more early childhood teachers and caregivers. And along with the preparation of these professionals—through early childhood education programs and individual inner work—comes the need for collegial support. Such support is of value not only to new teachers and caregivers as they launch into this vital work, but also to those with experience who are seeking further professional development.

One of the great gifts of Waldorf education is the stimulation of the human capacity for life-long learning. This capacity is nurtured in both the students and their teachers. Rudolf Steiner admonishes us never to become stale, and certainly the children who come to us are asking—indeed, demanding—that we continue to grow and learn. We are grateful to Rudolf Steiner’s insights which provide the substance for our work and enkindle our enthusiasm.

Through the mentoring partnership, professional growth of both mentor and mentee are encouraged and supported. Early childhood education is a challenging profession, and having a supportive colleague can be a crucial factor in a teacher’s developing competency, pedagogical artistry, and self-confidence. There is a wonderful passage from Ecclesiastes (4: 9-10) which expresses the essence of mentoring:

Two are better than one because they have a good reward for their toil. For if they fall one will lift up his fellow. Woe to him who is alone. When he falls he has not another to lift him up.

The Mentoring Task Force of WECAN was formed in 2004 in recognition of the essential role of mentoring in the healthy development of Waldorf early childhood education and Waldorf early childhood teachers and caregivers. Our mandate was to find ways to offer support and guidance to those who are mentoring others. In consultation with other experienced Waldorf early childhood
mentors from all over North America, we have created a document which we hope will be informative and helpful to mentors, to those who are being mentored, and to schools and other settings which may be establishing in-house mentoring practices.

We offer practical guidelines for clarity in the mentoring process, thoughts on the role of
self-education, and a look at the underlying essentials of Waldorf early childhood education, We also include chapters on the nature of advice and on the art of fruitful conversation, which is the heart
of the mentoring relationship. The final chapter, an examination of the path of adult learning and self-development, could be a valuable resource for faculty study. A list of references concludes the handbook.

Our intention is to provide a working handbook for the mentoring partnership. Such a handbook is necessarily incomplete, a work-in-progress. Mentoring, like teaching, involves continual growth, questioning, and learning. We hope this book may play a part in that process.

—Nancy Foster, for the WECAN Mentoring Task Force

Mentoring Task Force: Nancy Foster, Andrea Gambardella, Susan Howard, Carol Nasr Griset, Kim
Raymond, Celia Riahi, Susan Silverio, Connie White

Click here for the entire booklet:  MentoringWaldorfECE

 

Michael Soulé

Evaluations and Mentoring, ASWNA Effective Practices

/in /by

Evaluations and Mentoring
From AWSNA Effective Practices at http://www.whywaldorfworks.org/11_EffPractices/efmenmenu.asp

Mentoring and Renewal – Section 4

1. Is the school’s evaluation process separate from the mentoring program, or do mentors also serve as evaluators?

2. In what ways is the distinction between mentorship and evaluation made clear to all personnel?

3. Are mentors required to report on their observations to anyone other than the person being mentored?

4. What course of action does your school expect a mentor to take if serious concerns arise about the quality of work done by the person being mentored?

5. Are personnel evaluations shared with both the mentor and the person being evaluated?

6. In what ways does the mentor support a colleague in receiving additional outside support such as participating in classes, conferences and other off-site activities?

7. What is working particularly well at your school with regard to the relationship between mentoring and evaluation activities?

8. If there were something you could change with regard to the overlap between mentoring and evaluation, what would it be and why?
1. Is the school’s evaluation process separate from the mentoring program, or do mentors also serve as evaluators?
Mentors never serve as evaluators for the teachers they advise, and it is crucial that the mentoring and evaluation processes be kept separate. One school noted, “The mentor visits the advisee’s classroom twice a year and does write-ups of her observations. A copy of these write-ups is given to the Teacher Development Committee, but they are not evaluative in nature, simply a narrative description of what was observed. The mentoring relationships at our school are considered confidential and are expected to be supportive. To this end the mentoring work cannot cross over into evaluation.”

Another school elaborated further:
“At our school the evaluation process is very separate from that of mentoring. An employee is evaluated in the first year of employment and every three years after that. The governance council has created two committees to coordinate evaluations, one for teachers and one for staff.

“For teacher evaluations someone is picked to do an in-class observation of the teacher. In about half of the cases this observation is done by someone outside of the school. The person being evaluated can block the person selected to do the evaluation if there is a difficulty, but he may not choose the evaluator; this is done by the committee. In preparation for the evaluation the teacher is asked to write a self-evaluation, noting particular areas of strength and areas where the individual wishes to further develop his skills. The evaluator meets with the teacher before the first class and discusses the teacher’s self-evaluation. The pair meets again after the first day of observation for feedback and discussion and then again after the second day of observation. The evaluator prepares a written report detailing her observations. While this process of observation is underway the committee also sends forms to about 15 people (teachers, staff members and parents) asking for feedback in particular areas of the teacher’s performance. These questionnaires, which are not anonymous, are returned to the review committee.

“Once everything is complete the review committee compiles the feedback from the observer and the questionnaires into a single document. The person being evaluated meets with the committee for about an hour once the documentation is completed. The teacher is allowed to see the original documents submitted by the evaluator and those completing the questionnaires if desired, although this request is rarely made. The teacher has an opportunity to add a response to the review if he desires, and then all of the documentation is added to the employee’s personnel file.

“A similar process is used to evaluate staff. Staff reviews are done by the administrative director along with a Board member. No observation of the staff member’s work is done, but a self-evaluation is submitted and forms are mailed to a variety of colleagues and parents for feedback. Again the results are compiled by the staff evaluation committee and discussed with the employee before the documentation is placed into the employee’s file.

“In cases where an employee has been placed under evaluative review and a school-assigned mentor is in place, this is done with the clear understanding that the mentor will be asked for feedback on performance. In no other cases are the mentors involved with the review process.”

Editor’s Note: For additional information on Evaluations, See: Human Resources, Section 5, Evaluations. For a sample teacher evaluation form, See: Evaluation Guidelines.

2. In what ways is the distinction between mentorship and evaluation made clear to all personnel?
The mentor relationship is one that is built on trust and relies on the ability of a mentee to share his difficulties and questions fully with his advisor. This freedom to share the deepest questions that may be living in someone cannot exist if someone fears that a revelation might be used against him later in an evaluation.

Typically the Teacher Development Committee speaks about the separation between mentoring and evaluation on a regular basis at faculty presentations. The mentors are all aware of this separation and discuss it with their advisees. In schools with established mentoring programs this separation is generally well understood, but nonetheless it is repeated regularly.

3. Are mentors required to report on their observations to anyone other than the person being mentored?
Many schools ask their mentors to keep a log or submit a form recording their mentoring visits. The form or log notes the date of the visit and the subjects discussed in very general terms. Frequently the mentor is asked to submit notes documenting her observations during the semi-annual classroom visit.

In one school the pedagogical chair follows up with mentors and asks how things are proceeding with her advisee. The mentor is expected to answer in a general way such as, “Things are going well. We’ve been working on his upcoming parent meeting, the main lesson book expectations for an upcoming block, and methods for working with the temperaments.” No more detailed report is requested or expected.

4. What course of action does your school expect a mentor to take if serious concerns arise about the quality of work done by the person being mentored?
If a mentor has concerns about a colleague’s progress he should first give a reasonable amount of time for transformation to take place. If the concerns continue, the mentor must advise the mentee that the Teacher Development Committee will be brought into the loop as it is clear that the mentor is not able to provide the teacher with the necessary guidance to transform the areas of concern. Both the mentor and the mentee will speak with the Teacher Development Committee and a conversation will take place to determine what is really being called for. Sometimes the result is that a new mentor is assigned. In other cases a special assessment is done so that a second opinion is obtained about the concerns expressed by the mentor. If the evaluator shares the same concerns then appropriate action can be taken.

In schools with a pedagogical chair the evaluator is expected to notify the chair that there are serious concerns, and the chair schedules a visit to the class. Based on this visit and a number of other indicators such as student behavioral issues, families leaving the class, collegial concerns and so on the pedagogical chair and the teacher development committee will make a decision as to whether a full evaluation will be scheduled.

5. Are personnel evaluations shared with both the mentor and the person being evaluated?
Schools handle this issue in various ways. In some schools the mentor always sits in on the evaluation conversation when her advisee receives the written evaluation report. The schools who take this approach feel that this allows future mentoring work to be fully supportive of the goals outlined in the review.

In other schools the detailed evaluation is considered a personal document, and is not shared in detail with the mentor. The mentor is provided separately a list of those areas in which particular support and attention is needed so that the mentoring work can be focused and productive.

6. In what ways does the mentor support a colleague in receiving additional outside support such as participating in classes, conferences and other off-site activities?
Mentors often suggest things such as observing another teacher (inside or outside of the school) or particular classes or workshops that might be of help to the teacher being mentored. A mentor for a class teacher in the early grades might suggest attendance at a singing or speech workshop, or a class that focuses on movement for grades 1-3. Most schools expect teachers to do several days of outside training or professional development a year, and many make funds available to help ensure that this happens.

7. What is working particularly well at your school with regard to the relationship between mentoring and evaluation activities? (Editor’s Note: The following comments were shared by the schools that contributed to this study.)
Everyone knows clearly that evaluation and mentoring are separate activities, and that the mentoring relationship is a confidential one that is intended to support and protect the new employee.

The two processes of mentoring and evaluation are very separate. Mentoring can trigger an evaluation and an evaluation can inform the mentoring, but they are viewed discreetly and kept separate.

There is very clear and open communication about evaluation results and recommendations so that the mentor is aware of the areas that need to be transformed and true support can be given.

The evaluation of classroom teaching is really done well. We have an established group of people who work with the school and who have recognized strengths in particular areas.

Everyone has a clear understanding of the difference between mentoring and evaluation, so those being evaluated never worry that their confidences will be shared inappropriately by their mentors.

We are able to see when things are working for a new teacher in the classroom and when they are not. We don’t get surprised. This doesn’t mean that we can remediate every difficulty that comes up, but we are aware of any difficulties in fairly short order.

We have an ongoing dialog about the quality of our teaching. That dialog is spread throughout the faculty through the programmatic learning groups. It is not just the personnel committee that is concerned.

We have a great number of experienced faculty members at our school. The mentoring program allows us to actively engage our most gifted teachers in the sharing of wisdom with colleagues who are newer to teaching.

The presence of a pedagogical chair in the school allows the separation of mentoring and evaluation to be kept intact. It allows the school to take action while maintaining the integrity of the mentoring relationship.

8. If there were something you could change with regard to the overlap between mentoring and evaluation, what would it be and why?
Integrating new special subject teachers such as those for Spanish, German, and instrumental music calls for more support and attention. We do not have a large number of these teachers in our school, so finding experienced and appropriate mentors can be a challenge.

Our ability to evaluate a teacher’s work with parents and with her colleagues can still be improved and we continue to work to improve our process here.

This chapter is part of Effective Practices : Mentoring

From AWSNA Effective Practices at http://www.whywaldorfworks.org/11_EffPractices/efmenmenu.asp

The full module includes:

MENTORING MENU

  1. The Mentoring Program
    2. Mentor Qualifications and Scheduling
    3. Oversight and Review of the Mentoring Program
    4. Evaluations and Mentoring
    5. Personal Development and Enrichment
Michael Soulé

The Mentoring Program, AWSNA Effective Practices

/in /by

The Mentoring Program
From AWSNA Effective Practices at http://www.whywaldorfworks.org/11_EffPractices/efmenmenu.asp

Mentoring and Renewal – Section 1
1. Which person or group in the school holds the responsibility for the mentoring and renewal program for faculty and staff?

2. How does the mentoring program work as part of the school’s complete development plan for its employees? Describe how the mentoring process is coordinated with other aspects of personal development such as evaluation and outside training through conferences, workshops and courses.

3. How does the school ensure that all teachers and staff members receive mentoring in a manner that is appropriate for their situation and level of expertise?

4. How is the mentoring program supported in the school’s financial plan?

5. How does the school determine when an individual’s mentoring needs exceed what is available among other faculty or staff members? How and when are outside mentors used?

6. Are mentors used to support teachers and staff in all areas of the work, or is mentoring support limited to the classroom or technical areas of the staff member’s work?

7. Is the mentoring program recognized and supported by the school calendar, policies and practices? Is there written documentation regarding the mentoring program, and the roles and responsibilities of each participant?

8. With regard to the above issues, what is working particularly well at your school?

9. Is there something that you would like to see changed at your school with regard to the above issues?

1. Which person or group in the school holds the responsibility for the mentoring and renewal program for faculty and staff?
In most schools the responsibility for mentoring and renewal of faculty members is held by the Personnel, Human Resources, or Teacher Development Committee. It is typical for the committee to include teachers from each section of the school (Early Childhood, Lower School, and High School). Schools which have a pedagogical dean include this individual on the committee, and it is often the dean who serves as the committee chairman. Individuals selected for this committee must be good leaders who are effective in implementing decisions and who are well respected by their fellow teachers. Oftentimes the committee has a staff member designated as the coordinator for the faculty mentoring program. Less frequently the responsibility for mentoring and renewal is held by the school’s governance council or leadership team.

The responsibility for mentoring and renewal for staff members is the responsibility of the school’s administrator. This is due to the fact that each staff position is unique and so there is little opportunity for in-house peer mentoring to take place. Most of the professional development opportunities for staff members come in the form of attendance at outside conferences and workshops.

2. How does the mentoring program work as part of the school’s complete development plan for its employees? Describe how the mentoring process is coordinated with other aspects of personal development such as evaluation and outside training through conferences, workshops and courses.
Every school in our study assigns a mentor to each teacher who is new to the school, regardless of the amount of experience a teacher may have had in prior schools. The Teacher Development Committee has a preliminary conversation with the new employee to find out what kinds of support the teacher hopes to receive from the mentor, and then assigns someone who is best matched with the person’s needs and desires. Listening carefully to the new employee’s needs helps to ensure that the mentor and her advisee are well matched. In those rare instances in which a mentor and her advisee can not work well together, it is the responsibility of the Teacher Development Committee to assign a new mentor.
It is usual for a new employee to have a mentor assigned for the first three to five years of employment, although some schools require a mentor for the full eight years of a class teacher’s cycle.

It is often easier for schools to provide mentors for class teachers than for subject and early childhood teachers, just because there are more class teachers in a school. For this reason it is sometimes necessary for schools to find outside mentors for these teachers.

Schools work hard at maintaining the integrity of the mentoring process, and work to keep the mentoring and evaluation processes separate. In situations where a mentor is concerned about the quality of an advisee’s work, it is the mentor’s responsibility to notify the chair of the teacher development committee of the concern and to request that an evaluation be performed by someone else. The mentor is never asked to do an evaluation of her advisee.

At the end of this period of school assigned mentoring, teachers move into a new relationship with a peer speaking partner. The timing of this change is typically a result of the evaluation and professional development planning process. Most schools require those teachers who do not have a school assigned mentor to select a peer speaking partner, although a few leave this decision up to the individual teacher.

It is typical for the same committee at the school to be responsible for overseeing the evaluation process, the creation and implementation of the teachers’ professional development plans, and the mentoring program, so the overlap in these processes is well managed with little difficulty.

Learning Circles
One school in our study reported the implementation of a new program called Learning Circles. Although this program is still in its infancy it appears to be working well, and we include a detailed description of how the program works so that other schools may consider adopting some or all of the program’s features.

Every teacher, new and old, is also assigned to a learning group. The learning groups have four or five people in each circle. Today the following learning groups exist at the school:
Grades 1-5
Grades 6-8
Music Teachers
Early Childhood Teachers
High School Humanities
High School Math and Science
World Languages
Subject Teachers

These learning circles meet once a week and all members are expected to attend on a weekly basis. To ensure that these meetings are regularly attended they take place during the school day and the schedule is arranged in such a way that all members of a circle are available at a designated time.

One of the responsibilities of the learning groups is to hear each member’s own self assessment and then to work together to create a professional development plan for the teacher. The self assessment is simple in format, asking the individual to describe what he or she does, to list one’s strengths and weaknesses, to describe what is most satisfying about the work, what is the least satisfying, and what the school and the teacher can each do to improve the teacher’s performance and make him or her better at teaching.

The self assessments and the professional development plans created for each colleague are done in writing, and are turned in to the Personnel Committee.

Newer colleagues that are involved in the one-on-one mentoring program receive formal evaluations rather than participating in the self assessment/peer development process described above. The school uses both inside and outside evaluators for this work. The evaluators make observations, listing commendations and opportunities for improvement and listing recommendations for professional development. These newer colleagues will still participate with their peers in the learning circle for purposes of hearing others’ self assessments and the creation of the peer professional development plan, but are exempt from doing a self assessment as this evaluation is taking place in a different way.

In addition to reviewing each member’s self assessment, the learning circles are a place where various questions can be addressed. Sometimes these questions are sent from the school; in other cases they are issues that the group is interested in exploring.

In order to make this aspect of the group’s work real we require that the groups present the results of their work to the whole faculty. For example, at a recent in-service day we had a focus on parent education. We asked each learning group to look at the list of topics that we address with parents as a part of our parent education program, and asked them what else should be brought to the parents and what changes should be made in the way in which the material is presented. In this way all of the learning groups were able to participate effectively in a whole school pedagogical topic.

3. How does the school ensure that all teachers and staff members receive mentoring in a manner that is appropriate for their situation and level of expertise?
A frequent approach to following up on the effectiveness of mentoring relationships is the mentoring log. The log shows the date of each mentoring conversation and describes in a general way the topics that were discussed at the meetings. No personal details are included; it just may note that the topics discussed include the temperaments, the class play and an upcoming parent evening. Both the mentor and her advisee initial the log. The logs are turned in to the Teacher Development Committee coordinator so that the committee members are aware that the meetings are taking place and that appropriate topics are being discussed.

The Teacher Development Committee gives a monthly update to the College or Leadership Team on its work, and the College/Leadership Team ensures that the committee is serving effectively.

Most schools include the times of the weekly mentoring meetings on the official school schedules so that this work happens on a regular basis. These times are considered sacred, and are not used for other meetings.

It is usually the Teacher Development Committee that coordinates all of the peer visits and evaluations for teachers. This allows the Committee members to be quite aware of each teacher’s particular development needs and can take this into consideration when assigning mentors.

In the annual self evaluation a portion of that evaluation is focused on the quality of the mentoring relationship, giving the Teacher Development committee good feedback on who is serving as an effective mentor and whether a particular teacher’s needs are being met.

4. How is the mentoring program supported in the school’s financial plan?
The first line of financial support for mentoring is to ensure that the time for mentoring meetings is scheduled during the school day for all teachers. In addition to this, whenever outside mentors are used they are compensated by the school for their time and travel expenses. Most schools report that serving as a mentor is considered when calculating a teacher’s workload, and that serving as a mentor may be considered as part of a teacher’s additional non-teaching duties.

Most schools provide additional funding for outside professional development as well. The amount of these budgets varies from school to school. Several schools mentioned having a budget of approximately $500 per person per year. One school mentioned that an adult education program uses its facilities rent free. In exchange that school’s teachers are allowed to attend all programs and classes offered through that program for free. One very large school with classes in early childhood through high school has a budget for mentoring and professional development of $20,000 to $30,000 a year.

5. How does the school determine when an individual’s mentoring needs exceed what is available among other faculty or staff members? How and when are outside mentors used?
Most schools report using in-house mentors whenever possible. This is most common in schools with experienced faculty members and when resources exist to send the teachers to attend the pedagogical advisor’s colloquium.

An outside mentor can be brought in for a variety of reasons.
• In some cases a teacher has had a series of mentors and none of them have worked out.
• In other cases the evaluations show a serious concern that needs intense remediation if the teacher is to be retained on staff. In these cases an outside mentor is brought in to take a fresh look at the teacher’s work and to try a fresh approach to the work with the teacher. This outside mentoring must be built into the school’s budget. In extreme cases it is possible for the school to arrange a year-long intensive relationship.
• In yet other situations the school does not have someone on the staff that is a good match with the young teacher’s needs.

6. Are mentors used to support teachers and staff in all areas of the work, or is mentoring support limited to the classroom or technical areas of the staff member’s work?
Teacher mentoring takes place in all areas of the work including work with parents and other non-classroom activities. Typically mentors are required to attend all parent evenings and can be requested to sit in on parent conferences.

Mentoring conversations may address the meditative aspects of teaching work, or topics such as student temperaments. The mentor is required to review all communications the teacher sends out for accuracy, tone and completeness. The mentor also makes recommendations as to which courses and summer work might be helpful to the teacher. The mentor will also sit in when there are serious issues with colleagues or with parents.

The school that is using Learning Circles as part of its professional development program reports that the work of the Learning Circles is intended to be primarily focused on work in the classroom. At times the conversations in the Circles stray from the pedagogical into the operational as the school struggles with how to implement some of the new ideas being discussed. It is the intent though that these Learning Circles be used to address the burning pedagogical issues – how does one teach this, how do you assess that, what is taught in one block or another.

7. Is the mentoring program recognized and supported by the school calendar, policies and practices? Is there written documentation regarding the mentoring program, and the roles and responsibilities of each participant?
Schools with effective mentoring programs report that those programs are recognized as being of key importance, and that the programs are well documented. Mentoring sessions are included in the school schedules both for one-on-one sessions and for Learning circle meetings. These meetings take place during the school day, and are never scheduled to occur in the afternoon after school has been dismissed for the day.

One school described its program this way:
The school has a significant amount of documentation on the subject of mentoring, evaluation and professional development. Some of it is already in the employee handbook, and other documents are intended for future inclusion there.

The Teacher Development Committee makes presentations to the full faculty several times a year and ensures that the faculty is fully informed bout the mentoring program and the school’s perspective on professional development opportunities.

In addition the Teacher Development Committee meets weekly for 1 ½ hours. A portion of this meeting time (15 to 20 minutes) is used touching base with every teacher in the school during the course of the year. The Teacher Development Committee is interested in hearing directly from the teachers about how things are going in all aspects of their work so that each colleague can be properly supported.

8. With regard to the above issues, what is working particularly well at your school?
The school has a large supply of Waldorf trained teachers with good experience, and the young teachers appreciate the support and guidance they receive. The mentoring program is working very well and the teachers feel well supported by it.

Mentoring is helpful as its focus is on professional development, rather than being seen as a punitive approach to performance improvement. There is good will about the program from both the mentors and the colleagues they support.

The Teacher Development Committee has a strong presence in the school. People come to the committee for guidance and advice.

The reporting to the College on a monthly basis by the Teacher Development Committee has been really helpful. It ensures that College members are in the loop on difficulties and the needs of various individuals. It is the responsibility of the College chair to share some of the highlights of this work with the Board of Trustees, again helping to ensure that everyone is fully and appropriately informed.

The fact that every new teacher is assigned a mentor is a real plus. In the case of a class teacher this mentoring support will continue for eight years until the teacher has completed an entire cycle of classes.

The mentoring policy, created by faculty in the context of the Pedagogical Carrying Group (pedagogical management) gives very clear guidelines and expectations which are implemented by the mentoring program coordinator, giving more form and consciousness for the program.

A lot of our mentors have been through the Sound Circle Mentoring Seminar, so we have trained mentors who are sensitive to the issues that mentoring presents.

We are fortunate to receive a grant from the city for funding through the No Child Left Behind Act (legislation in the United States). This funding is substantial and can be used for professional development. These funds, plus those the school designates out of its own operating budget, are used for a variety of professional development options. In some cases the teacher’s mentor may suggest an appropriate course or opportunity; in other cases the idea for professional development comes from the review process.

The school tries to schedule main lesson for two of our grades later in the morning so that it is possible for teachers to do observations of another teacher’s classroom.

The scheduling of the Learning Circle meetings is working well and is a key element in the program’s success.

It is very easy for the full faculty meetings to be filled up with business issues and leave teachers feeling that there is not enough time to discuss pedagogical matters. The Learning Circle meetings solve this problem by providing a space that is dedicated to this pedagogical focus. Teachers feel they are able to talk about the questions they have about their work.

The Learning Circles also present teachers with the opportunity to do some visioning work around the curriculum. They can discuss some aspect of the pedagogy and agree together about where they would like to take a particular subject or topic in the future.

The Learning Circles provide a place where a pedagogical conversation can be sustained over time so that teachers are able to really get to the heart of an issue.

The Learning Circles provide a place where we can talk about the school’s scope and sequence documents for learning. Discussions take place about how something is really approached in first grade and then second grade. We can talk about whether we are really following the scope and sequence documents, whether these documents need changing, or whether there is room for improvement in our teaching work.

Research has shown that a peer sharing process is more effective in creating change in teacher performance than is a traditional peer evaluation process. People are more likely to hear one another and act on recommendations when they come from peers than when they are top down in direction. In the past we were doing fifteen evaluations a year which was an administrative nightmare and caused a lot of collegial distrust.

9. Is there something that you would like to see changed at your school with regard to the above issues?
We have to be careful to keep the conversations in our Learning Circles focused on the pedagogy. We are often tempted to allow too much operational conversation to seep in, which detracts from the intent of our time together.

We have a group that coordinates the formal evaluation portion of the program for our teachers, but we are still working on developing this part of the program.

We are still struggling with how to get parent input into the evaluation process.

There is no Learning Circle for the administrative staff. People would like to have one, and sometimes express resentment at the “old style” of management used in this area of the school evaluation and professional development work.

We are worried about the members of our administrative staff from a developmental perspective. We have had an interim administrative structure in place for some time and it is not clear that our administrative staff members are receiving the development opportunities they deserve and that will allow them to really understand and speak clearly about the work we are doing with the young people in our school. One of the questions for the future is whether the Teacher Development Committee should become a Professional Development Committee and extend its responsibilities to all employees of the school.

The schedule of classes needs to be more refined to support the mentoring work. We should actually write the scheduled mentoring meetings onto each teacher’s schedule so that when changes are made to the teaching schedules we do not compromise the mentoring relationship in the process.

It would be helpful for the mentors to meet together more frequently to discuss their work and discuss overall problems. This kind of sharing is invaluable, but doesn’t happen as often as might be preferred.

Our school would be well served by an increase in funding for professional development. The current budget of $500 per person barely covers an airfare, let alone the cost of a program and lodging while in attendance.

This chapter is part of Effective Practices : Mentoring

From AWSNA Effective Practices at http://www.whywaldorfworks.org/11_EffPractices/efmenmenu.asp

The full module includes:

MENTORING MENU

  1. The Mentoring Program
    2. Mentor Qualifications and Scheduling
    3. Oversight and Review of the Mentoring Program
    4. Evaluations and Mentoring
    5. Personal Development and Enrichment