Learning to Lean on Each Other:
Peer Mentoring for Teacher Development
By Alexis Ramsey and Kristen Seas,
Purdue University
|
|
Learning to Lean on Each Other:
|
Introduction: Pedagogical Crises We begin with a confession: two years ago we both suffered what we called “pedagogical crises.” We found ourselves feeling isolated in our teaching and dissatisfied with what we were doing in our composition courses. Although seasoned veterans of the trenches of freshman composition, we just didn’t feel like we were effectively reaching our students or making sense of that nebulous beast: “writing.” Such insecurities were particularly pressing given the curricular demands of Purdue’s composition program since Fall 2003, when a technology component and student conferencing became mandatory for the introductory course. This meant even the most experienced TAs suddenly found themselves in unfamiliar teaching territory. Thus, as helpful as our year-long mentoring program had been, we each realized that there was still much to learn about teaching writing. After admitting our insecurities to each other we felt relieved. How nice to know that we were not alone in our struggles to learn the art of teaching. Yet were we the only two struggling? Many of our colleagues did not appear to have such difficulties; in fact, they came back with stories of creative and successful lessons that got students talking in class and understanding composition. The question then became: what can we learn from these innovative colleagues about becoming better teachers, and how can we make that peer education possible beyond the existing mentoring program? Research: Instructors’ Needs As a response, we decided to pursue a forum for pedagogical peer-mentoring among instructors. However, we were dismayed to find little relevant research concerning alternatives to conventional teacher preparation beyond traditional forms of hierarchical mentoring (Boyle 1998, Shannon 1998, Swenson 2003). Moreover, studies addressing non-traditional forms of mentoring, such as co-mentoring, have focused on academic rather than pedagogical arenas (Wyant 1996, Brown-Wright 1997, Fugate 2001, McGuire 2003). Thus we decided to conduct our own research into the needs of our specific peer community of instructors to gain a better sense of the kind of support they required and how best to meet their needs. During the 2005-2006 school year, we first surveyed all (190 total) of the instructors in the Purdue composition program with a 29% response rate, and then conducted focus groups with 14 compensated volunteers of both graduate instructors (TAs) and adjunct lecturers divided into three sessions. However, the numbers discussed below are only those of the TAs, the primary population of interest in our study.  Among the 44 graduate instructors surveyed (roughly 27% of the entire TA population in the program), 50% claimed they felt very prepared when they walked into the classroom, with another 39% claiming to feel somewhat prepared. Yet when asked to rank their sense of preparation in creating specific components of the introductory composition course, their answers were less confident (see Figure 1). The survey responses also indicated that the department’s graduate instructors are already turning to one another to prepare for teaching, with 84% of those surveyed seeking help from fellow instructors and 90% relying on conversations with friends and peers (see Figure 2). Most importantly for the prospect of a community resource, an almost unanimous 93% (excluding only those who did not answer the question) claimed that they would be willing to share their own ideas and materials with other instructors. Indeed, when asked about the creation of an informal, voluntary forum for instructional support, 81% indicated they were receptive to the idea.  So what do all of these numbers mean? As we discovered in the focus groups, they mean that graduate instructors are thinking about their teaching practices, are willing to work with others on pedagogical issues, and perceive a need for more resources to help them. Aside from resources sought beyond the program, as in textbooks or websites, nearly all participants noted that they turned to colleagues, office mates, and other peers for suggestions and to answer questions about issues in their own classes. Moreover, all participants affirmed the need for additional teaching resources beyond first-year mentoring. Response: Collaborative Online Instructors’ Network What has emerged from our research is the development of the Collaborative Online Instructors’ Network (COIN). Since 51% of our survey respondents concluded that an online venue would be the best medium for sharing pedagogical resources, we created COIN to facilitate the sharing of teaching ideas through a decentralized, voluntary, collaborative online forum. Established in November 2006 and still growing, COIN is available as a ready resource to anyone, regardless of experience, who is seeking new pedagogical techniques. COIN is also entirely peer-driven, sustained and directed by the instructors’ themselves; however, to encourage participation in the network, the composition program at Purdue offers both an endorsed service line for a participant’s vita as well as a certificate of recognition. Ideally, participation in COIN facilitates professional development by providing an opportunity for instructors to share insightful strategies for teaching writing, as well as reflect on their own teaching practices as they are asked to contextualize their submissions to the network. As instructors, we are constantly learning from our experiences – our mistakes and successes – and COIN allows us to learn from one another’s experiences and knowledge to help us grow as teachers. For instance, in our survey, 31% admitted that they felt least prepared to create daily lesson plans, while the same number indicated that they felt most prepared to create them. This interesting coincidence suggested both a disparity in the respondents’ preparation as teachers and a promising opportunity for co-mentoring between instructors of different strengths and weaknesses. Finally, by providing a medium of contact that foregrounds the ideas rather than the social relationships within the department, COIN also fosters a sense of community around the shared imperative to improve as instructors, regardless of position in the department. Indeed, because COIN is voluntary and draws out those who already passionately pursue the art of teaching, we hope this sense of community will translate beyond the website itself. Discussion Questions:
|
Copyright © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved. Any use is subject to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
McGraw-Hill Higher Education is one of the many fine businesses of The McGraw-Hill Companies. If you have a question or a problem about a specific book or product, please fill out our Product Feedback Form. |