David Ruehs

ED 635

Mentoring and Induction Reflection

As I started my journey to become an administrator in Minnesota, was I expecting things

to be different than what I am accustomed to in Iowa. So far, the two systems have been the

same. This mentoring unit is where the two systems start to diverge. In Iowa, it is required by

law to have a two-year mentoring program in place. The mentoring is not prescribed across the

state, but there is the mandate non-the less. In Minnesota, mentoring is optional and districts

range from none at all up to three yearlong programs. In those mentoring programs, there is an

assortment of ways they are structured from observations, workshops, and new teacher training.

They can be powerful for our young teachers which includes the development of teachers’

professional learning communities through collaboration, individual research, trial and error, and

feedback.

In the report produced by the Minnesota Department of Education, roughly three

quarters of the districts have mentoring programs. In a profession that sees so many young,

talented teachers that get burned out or change careers within five years, again roughly one

quarter of the teachers, I would think that mentoring would become more of a priority for school

districts. In the same report, however, those schools that do have a mentoring program range

from one to three full years of teacher mentorship. In general, the state report lists many

activities and the frequency of use in the mentoring programs across the state. Those activities

include seminars, collaboration with other teachers, new teacher orientation, mentor

observations, and workshops, just to name a few. In those workshops, where I think there could
be a strong amount of influence on new teachers, mentoring programs focused on classroom

management, instructional strategies, curriculum and assessments, lesson planning, and

differentiated instruction. I find it interesting that according John Hattie and his effect sizes, the

mentoring programs that address lesson planning and curriculum the most are the three-year

programs. Shorter mentoring programs focus on these factors less often. In Hattie’s work, you

cannot just choose one factor and teach focus on it in isolation, but rather as a consortium of

factors. That is done through deliberate assessment, unit, and lesson planning. In my personal

experience, I have seen classroom management dramatically increase as teachers’ instruction has

improved based on that Understanding by Design work.

In the article by Tim Post, he summarized that new teachers are frustrated with being able

to find a mentor to provide feedback on their work. In the two districts that I have worked in,

that is a key role of the mentoring program. Each program has a mentoring coordinator that lines

up content and level specific mentors with new teachers. Like I had mentioned earlier, the

programs were two years long and addressed a wide array of topics. If I were the king of my

forest, so to speak, I would focus on Understanding by Design and have weekly collaboration

time with new teachers, and build those conversations on current needs as we continue to focus

on strong instructional planning. I would also encourage teachers to develop a digital

professional learning community and report back what they discovered every week with their

peers. Ultimately through strong mentoring programs, having a strong “main” mentor combined

with a strong support system of other staff in the building that creates and maintains strong

relationships is key to keep and grow our young and moldable talent.

In Madeline Will’s article, “Looking for More Support, New Teachers Turn to Online

Communities,” she says that most of new teachers’ are so basic. They are asking for advice on
how to build relationships and how to write strong lessons. In my experience with education and

professional development, I am concerned with offering professional learning that is shallow and

has breadth. This model is commonly referred to as flavor of the month by the teachers that

work in my district. I think that a strong mentoring model would focus on something that is

more specific and deeper, that could naturally address those other needs in tangents as they

present themselves.

It goes without saying that mentoring programs are important to keeping and growing the

young talent in our classrooms. In Minnesota, mentoring programs are optional and districts

range from none at all up to three yearlong programs. In those mentoring programs, there is an

assortment of ways they are structured from observations, workshops, and new teacher training.

They can be powerful for our young teachers which includes the development of teachers’

professional learning communities through collaboration, individual research, trial and error, and

feedback.