Mentor Identification,Selection,Preparation,and Development: A Literature Review

Mentor Identification and Selection

Mentor identification should begin with a personalized recruitment effort to engage with teachers who possess effective mentor characteristics (Moir et al., 2009; Odell, 1990). Potential mentors should have at least 5 years teaching experience; understand the challenges of teaching and classroom dynamics; be skilled, effective, and reflective teachers with evidence of effective instructional practice and classroom management strategies; be respected as competent educators by peers; and, committed to their own professional development (Conway & Hodgman, 2006; Moir et al., 2009; New Teacher Center, 2016; Zaffini, 2015). They must be able to provide effective modeling, observe mentees’ teaching, provide nonjudgmental feedback within specific contexts using questioning strategies to guide, and help novices become reflective practitioners (Conway & Hodgman, 2006; Zaffini, 2015).

Potential mentors must also be knowledgeable about subject matter, curriculum, instruction, resources, and assessment (Moir et al., 2009; Odell, 1990). They must possess knowledge of students, policies and procedures, and school and community climate and culture (Conway & Hodgman, 2006; Zaffini, 2015). Mentors also provide emotional support, encouragement, and foster a relationship of trust (Conway & Hodgman, 2006; Smith, 2005). Therefore, they should possess strong interpersonal skills (Moir et al., 2009); be organized, confident, collaborative, positive, honest, open-minded, flexible, patient, energetic, enthusiastic, and able to listen, communicate, and interact with a variety of people with different perspectives and viewpoints (Conway & Hodgman, 2006; Smith, 2005; Zaffini, 2015).

Effective mentoring programs regard mentors as “teachers of teachers” (Moir, 2003, p. 5). Novice teachers are adult learners, so potential mentors must be able to work with adults of various backgrounds (New Teacher Center, 2016; Schwille et al., 2000). Teachers who previously were successful cooperating teachers, have peer coaching experience, or involvement in faculty committees have the necessary prerequisite experience working with adult learners and should be considered as mentors (Bartell, 2004).

Mullinix (2002) found the topic of recruiting mentors less prominent in the literature than those studies that listed desired characteristics for mentor participation and selection criteria. Recruitment strategies “appear to range from opportunistic appointment to promoting self-nomination to tying membership status to a developmental career ladder” (Mullinix, 2002, p. 2). As for recruiting mentors, Moir et al. (2009) wrote to “woo these individuals through any means necessary” (p. 32). This process should involve high-level stakeholders in a visible campaign emphasizing the rigor and value of mentoring to show the prestige of the mentor position and help secure a highly qualified pool of applicants (Moir et al., 2009). However, potential mentors must be interested and willing to take on the role (Corbett & Wright, 1994), and either possess the necessary skills or have the potential to learn them (Bartell, 2004).

Assessing the qualities of potential mentors can be done through informal or formal conversations with students, staff, and administrators; interviews; records of professional activity; portfolios; or observations of classroom teaching (Moir et al., 2009). Ganser (1995) recommended having the prospective pool of mentors provide the following: letters of nomination; written statements about teaching beliefs, induction, and mentoring; a curriculum vita; portfolios; and videos of teaching. Although these materials can be time consuming to prepare, they demonstrate the commitment necessary for being a mentor.

Establishing and following a formal mentor selection process is integral for a successful mentoring program (Berg & Conway, 2016). The process must be well-defined, rigorous, transparent, and fair, ensuring that highly qualified individuals are selected (Bartell, 2004; Moir et al., 2009). Many mentors are chosen solely by administrators without peer recommendation or enough attention to who best fits the role (Bartell, 2004; Odell, 1990). Being an outstanding classroom teacher does not necessarily transfer to being an outstanding mentor, and those selected by administrators may not be endorsed by peers as competent educators and qualified mentors (Achinstein & Athanases, 2006; Moir, 2003; New Teacher Center, 2016). Ideally, mentors would be selected collaboratively by a competent group of individuals including veteran teachers, experienced mentors, school and district administrators and coordinators, university teacher educators, and union or teacher organization leaders (Moir et al., 2009; Odell, 1990; Schwille et al., 2000).

The mentor selection process must also include specific and clear selection criteria such that expectations and accountability for high standards are evident (Ganser, 1995; Portner, 2001). Although mentor selection criteria can vary greatly (Conway, 2003), it should be aligned with the vision, purpose, and goals of the mentoring program (Moir et al., 2009), which may include the following: to retain teachers; reduce isolation; introduce curriculum, policies, procedures, culture, and collegiality; and promote reflective practice or teacher education (Mullinix, 2002). Mentors selected without known criteria may not fully comprehend the nature and magnitude of their role (Schwille et al., 2000). Mentors selected solely because they are highly regarded teachers has been proven ineffective (Bartell, 2004). Furthermore, selecting mentors for the sake of convenience, availability, seniority, on a rotational basis, or because of a stipend is inefficient (Achinstein & Athanases, 2006). Such selection practices may seem easy, but have the potential to spread poor or mediocre teaching practices. A careful selection process demonstrates that the attributes of a high-quality mentor take priority over scheduling ease or perks for certain teachers (Moir et al., 2009).

Preparation and Development

Preparing mentors to effectively guide and support novice teachers is essential (Achinstein & Athanases, 2006; Greene et. al, 2020; New Teacher Center, 2016). Evertson and Smithey (2000) wrote that “a mentor is not enough. The mentor’s knowledge and skills of how to mentor are also crucial” (p. 303). Being an effective mentor is not an inherent trait; it requires skills that need deliberate and ongoing development and reflection (Moir et al., 2009). Mentors must be able to demonstrate, observe, articulate, collaborate, and support novice teacher development while being responsive to the novice’s needs, which differs from working with students (Moir, 2003; Moir et al., 2009). Teaching adults may not come as easily to those who are used to teaching children, and many exemplary teachers experience their teaching practice as second nature and may not be able to articulate how they teach (Moir et al., 2009; Odell, 1990). Without proper preparation and development, mentors rely on telling novices what they know, which is not effective in helping novice teachers develop (Moir et al., 2009).

Meeting the needs of mentors through structured preparation and ongoing development increases their satisfaction and confidence (Zaffini, 2015). Conway (2003) examined mentor practices in 13 school districts in mid-Michigan and found that while not all mentors were prepared to take on their role, all noted the value of preparation. Riggs (2000) analyzed the impact of a 1-year mentor training program on mentors within a state-funded teacher induction program using the Mentor Efficacy Scale to measure mentors’ self-efficacy on four skill areas: personal, instructional, professional, and assessment. Results indicated mentors who participated in the training self-reported higher self-efficacy for mentoring that those who were not trained.

Mentor preparation will also increase a mentor’s effectiveness in guiding novice teachers (Achinstein & Athanases, 2006). Evertson and Smithey (2000) compared classroom practices of novice teachers mentored by mentors who participated in a formal preparation program, and novice teachers mentored by mentors who had not participated in a formal preparation program. They found novice teachers with prepared mentors had sustained and workable classroom routines, managed instruction smoothly, gained students cooperation in academic tasks effectively, and had more engaged and less disruptive students than novices with unprepared mentors. Mentors who were not prepared were supportive but did not always have strategies necessary to assist beyond encouragement.

Mentor preparation should be an adoptable, flexible, and adaptable process that considers mentors as learners, and provides them opportunities to build their own pedagogical knowledge and capacity for effectively guiding novice teachers (Achinstein & Athanases, 2006; Hobson et al., 2009). Evertson and Smithey (2000) wrote that mentor preparation should focus on what kinds of knowledge, skills, and understandings will help mentors support novice teachers. They developed a mentor preparation manual based on a program that included an inquiry-based workshop, weekly mentoring activities, and monthly meetings with mentors and novices to discuss teaching successes, challenges, and documented goal setting.

It is important that the preparation process also include research-based knowledge that facilitates understanding of stages of teacher development and the needs of novice teachers (Bartell, 2004; Berg & Conway, 2016). Furthermore, preparation in content-specific instructional strategies, classroom observation, collecting classroom data, analyzing teaching, questioning and leading reflective conversations about teaching and learning, assessing practice, building trust, and identifying and meeting novices’ needs are helpful (Bartell, 2004; Berg & Conway, 2016; Corbett & Wright, 1994; Odell 1990). Moir et al. (2009) described structures for mentor development in the New Teacher Center, including mentor academies and forums that provided opportunities listed previously for mentors to learn, integrate, and apply new knowledge and skills. The academies were learning communities where mentors shared information on developing relationships with teachers, collecting and analyzing classroom data, and assessing and supporting teacher growth and effectiveness. Mentor forums were weekly gatherings allowing mentors opportunities to encapsulate knowledge and skills learned in the academies, share ideas and tools, and problem solve. Forum discussions were always inquiry-based and grounded in data, allowing mentors to reflect on their experiences.

Honoring the mentors’ experiences by including time and space for mentors to reflect on their personal experiences as novices and their current practice, and engaging their questions, should be part of mentor preparation (English, 1999). Koballa et al. (2010) described the cultural tools science teachers used in a mentor preparation program to mediate their thinking about mentoring. They defined tools as “means through which individuals internalize the highest mental processes central to social transactions in particular cultures” (p. 1073) which included discourse, data, and experiences that supported participants’ process of learning to mentor. They found that while teachers used a variety of tools, reflecting on their past teaching experiences, being mentored themselves as novices was one of the most valuable experiences.

Mentor preparation should not be just an orientation, or a program based on a technical or manual approach that reduces mentoring to strategies or tips; those are limiting and lacking. Generic models and templates are a starting point, but preparation should be personalized to be most effective (Achinstein & Athanases, 2006). It is important to know what responsibilities and duties the mentors will be assigned and what skills and knowledge they need to successfully carry out their responsibilities, then design preparation in ways that will increase the mentor’s ability to develop the appropriate knowledge and skills (Hughes, 2006). Koballa et al. (2010) found tailored mentor training helped mentors develop critical reflective practice, shifting in perspective from telling novices how to teach to more inquiry-based guidance.

Mentor education does not end with the initial preparation (English, 1999). Achinstein and Athanases (2006) wrote that “mentors are in a continuous process of becoming” (p. 10). Casey and Claunch (2005) described five stages of mentor growth. The first is predisposition, where teachers are flexible and open-minded, but idealistic and not fully understanding the importance of their role. Once the realities of being a mentor set in, mentors enter the second stage, disequilibrium. Preparation helps mentors strengthen procedural knowledge and shift thinking to an adult learner perspective. Once mentors realize they may be an excellent classroom teacher, but they are a novice mentor, they enter the third stage, transition. Continued professional development helps mentors increase understanding of their role, broaden their knowledge base, develop individualized strategies and better questioning skills, focus on the novice rather than themselves, reflect, and build trusting relationships. The fourth stage is confidence, where mentors understand expectations, apply new knowledge, continue developing, and experience success. Confidence leads to the last stage, efficacy, where mentors have developed a personal mentoring style and move from intuitive to intentional practice.

Once in their role, mentors need continued support through ongoing development that includes opportunities for them to examine their own practice in new and thoughtful ways; interact and learn from each other through role-play and discussing teaching and learning; and share ideas, resources, and positive and negative experiences (Berg & Conway, 2016; Hobson et al., 2009; Moir et al., 2009). Ongoing development should enhance mentors’ understanding of their own limitations and help them discover and adapt to what works best in their own practice. This development must be contextual and meaningful for engaging mentors with ideas, colleagues, and materials (Berg & Conway, 2016; Portner, 2001).

Stanulis and Ames (2009) examined how an experienced teacher learned to mentor two novice teachers through preparation and ongoing development—6 full days throughout the school year and 6 hours a month in a study group—as part of a university/district pilot induction partnership program. The mentoring program developers emphasized responding to the novice teacher’s needs while challenging their thinking and perspectives on effective teaching. Preparation topics and discussion included how to help novices enhance student achievement by developing worthwhile content, using effective instructional practices, scaffolding student learning, developing strong classroom management skills, and motivating learners. The mentor learned the value of observation of mentees’ teaching to guide their continued learning and developed a flexible repertoire of mentoring ideas and strategies which, combined with their prior beliefs, knowledge, and experiences, allowed them to effectively navigate different roles with each mentee. Collaborative conversations helped facilitate the mentor’s learning; opportunities for mentors to engage with each other and reflect on their learning should be part of the development process.

Berg and Rickels (2018) created the Music Mentor Plus program, incorporating live workshops and ongoing electronic communication between inservice music teachers and university faculty, providing opportunities for connection and formalized mentor development to meet the needs of local teachers. The program included resources, materials, presentations, and role-playing exercises. Participants commented on the benefits of discussion with other mentors and hands-on learning opportunities, along with developing effective mentoring strategies such as better questioning and listening skills.

Berg and Conway (2016) found similar results. They examined the development and implementation of the American String Teachers Association (ASTA) Mentor Program, which included a process for selecting and preparing mentors. Every mentor believed that as a result of program participation they had a better understanding of the needs of novice teachers, developed new skills in effective observation and conferencing, and developed new skills to effectively assist novice teachers with prioritizing string-specific instruction that would lead to student achievement. Mentors stated the most useful aspects of the program were interactions and learning from one another; considering mentor characteristics from the mentees’ point of view; learning about effective conferencing strategies, such as asking essential questions and paraphrasing; and learning string-specific, group teaching ideas. They recommended developing and implementing processes and supports for mentors and mentees, including ongoing professional development for mentors, perhaps through online discussions.

In summary, teaching and mentoring are different, and mentors must be adequately prepared to take on their role. Sufficient preparation can increase mentor satisfaction, confidence, effectiveness, self-efficacy, and help enhance novice teacher effectiveness. The preparation and development process should be personalized and flexible, providing mentors a variety of materials and resources along with plentiful opportunities to reflect and interact with each other to share ideas, strategies, successes, and challenges. If not provided preparation and development, mentors should request it, including opportunities to meet with other mentors for reflection, assistance, and support (Zaffini, 2015).

Implications for Music Education

The research findings discussed in this literature review have several implications for MEAs, schools, and administrators. Identifying mentors is an important part of the selection process but is often overlooked. Therefore, advertise mentoring opportunities online and in schools, and include information about necessary mentor qualifications and expectations. Hold an informational meeting or post information online where those interested or who are recognized as potential mentors can learn more about the mentoring program on expectations, time commitment, and other pertinent information. Most important, include veteran teachers, mentors, and administrators in the mentor recruitment process. Collectively approach teachers with mentoring potential to discuss the attributes and characteristics they possess that would make them excellent mentors. Potential mentors may overlook participating for many reasons. Some teachers do not see themselves as others do, so perhaps they need a nudge in the mentor direction. This is an excellent opportunity to recognize another teacher’s outstanding qualities and potential. Some teachers may feel unqualified or unsure they can successfully fulfill the role. If they do not currently possess all the necessary qualities but are willing to learn, communicating vital information may make potential mentors more willing to participate, especially if they know they will be adequately prepared to take on their role and provided ongoing support. If they are not an appropriate fit for a mentor role, a thorough mentor selection process can eliminate them.

Establishing and following a clearly defined, fair, and rigorous mentor selection process is crucial; however, mentors are often selected by individual administrators rather than collectively, and the selection process is often based on limited criteria. The mentor selection process can extend from the recruitment process, providing another opportunity for teachers and administrators to collaborate. This may help teachers actively participate in the mentoring process and help build a sense of community and investment within the school or district.

The criteria for selecting effective mentors as described in the literature is extensive, which may make the selection process overwhelming and deter potential mentors (Turk, 1999) or lead to poor selection justifications. Effective mentoring requires a great amount of time, experience, and expertise, which one person may not have. Mentoring is more effective when mentees have a variety of mentors inside and outside their own contexts (Sawiuk et al., 2017). Conway (2003) noted a participant suggestion of a building mentor and a subject mentor. Multiple mentors should be considered to reduce the load of mentors and provide mentees opportunities to develop multiple professional relationships and different perspectives (de Janasz & Sullivan, 2004; Sawiuk et al., 2017). Multiple mentors would alleviate the challenge of matching by subject and grade level, making it is possible to match music teachers specifically by grade (elementary, middle, and high school) and content area (general, instrumental, and vocal).

Conway and Holcomb (2008) wrote that the profession needed a larger research base to inform mentor program designers and policy makers on preparing music teacher mentors. Conway (2015) stated that although there is an abundance of literature on novice teacher mentoring, and its importance has been well-documented, “it is still unclear in the literature . . . how best to prepare mentors” (p. 100). Indeed, there is still much to learn. Mentor preparation cannot be a one-time meeting or workshop (Bullough, 2012) or involve just strategies and tips. Mentor preparation must be a flexible process centered on mentor-as-learner to help build pedagogical knowledge, incorporate reflection, engage their questions, and honor their expertise. A single set of goals or objectives for mentor preparation—no matter how specific, clear, and measurable—will not fit every situation. However, my literature review revealed numerous resources, including models, which have been and can be adapted at the district level.

Those charged with designing and implementing music teacher mentoring programs should carefully consider the mentor preparation and development components of the program. Baumgartner (2019) described the process of establishing a state-wide MEA-sponsored music mentorship program for beginning teachers, recognizing the importance of providing support and resources to selected mentors. All mentors were given the Handbook for the Music Mentor (Conway et al., 2010), links to resources and activities, and offered guidance about facilitating mentor/mentee communications. They were also invited to participate in multiple professional development activities throughout the year, including clinics and events with opportunities for socialization and small group work. This design may be useful to other facilitators developing or refining mentoring programs or activities. The Music Mentor Plus Program (Berg & Rickels, 2018), the ASTA Mentor Program (Berg & Conway, 2016), and other state and local district models may be used as guides for specific mentor preparation and development programs. Still there may be a lack of awareness or experience adapting programs to meet the needs of local music teachers. Teachers and administrators among and between districts could work together—with local university faculty as applicable—to modify or adapt existing programs to fit specific contexts. Furthermore, university faculty creating workshops, hosting seminars or online discussions, and developing and preparing materials and resources for mentors may provide opportunities to develop collaborative relationships with K–12 music teachers. Like the Music Mentor Plus program, these can be designed to meet the needs of local music teachers.

The Supporting Beginning Music Teachers group, part of the Society for Music Teacher Educators (SMTE) Areas for Strategic Planning and Action (ASPA), aims to “develop a set of ‘best practices’ on various topics to serve as models for state MEAs when designing and implementing music mentoring programs” (http://smte.us/aspas/supporting-beginning-music-teachers/). SMTE has teamed with The National Association for Music Education to create the Music Mentorship Program Facilitator and Mentor Support Project. This project includes 10 virtual, interactive sessions on various music teacher mentoring topics including mentoring styles, observation and technique practices for mentors, virtual mentoring, guided reflection, and meaningful feedback, and practicing mentoring skills (https://smte.us/aspas/supporting-beginning-music-teachers/).

Even when given opportunities to meet with one another, mentors still needed continued guidance, and wanted more resources and opportunities to interact, support each other, and share strategies (Baumgartner, 2019; Conway & Holcomb, 2008). Baumgartner (2019) suggested hosting social engagements, and posting prompts, resources, and activities on social media to provide support. Berg and Conway (2016) indicated that mentors must take some responsibility for their development, but having them be completely responsible can contribute to their dissatisfaction of the process and risk their effectiveness. Effective mentoring actively involves all stakeholders; therefore, school administrators must also take responsibility for mentor development, and be committed to training and supporting them in their role (Corbett & Wright, 1994; Moir et al., 2009). Perhaps a structured preparation and development program that includes opportunities for mentors to socially interact and learn from one another coupled with additional resources and materials mentors can explore to improve their skills and knowledge would guide and empower them to continue learning. Weimer (2019) provided strategies mentors can use to develop and strengthen mentoring relationships; this is one resource mentors could examine on their own and use as applicable to their mentoring context.

Teachers in different contexts have different teaching responsibilities, needs, and access to resources and materials, and mentoring should reflect that. Future researchers should continue exploring how to effectively identify, select, prepare, and develop mentors in various contexts—at the state and district level, including urban, suburban, and rural districts—to better understand effective strategies and processes that may lead to a relevant mentoring experience for all participants. Much of the literature on mentor identification and selection focused largely on specific criteria rather than outcomes of using that criteria. Additional examinations about the effectiveness of mentor selection criteria and procedures would be beneficial. Additionally, music education researchers should examine how those who design and implement music teacher mentoring programs incorporate the Beginning Music Teacher ASPA’s virtual and interactive materials in their training and the effect of those materials on mentor preparation.

The ASTA Mentor Program and Music Mentor Plus are two existing music mentor preparation programs, but more research is needed at the state and local levels, especially on specific, flexible, and mentor-centered components of programs that can be easily adapted to different mentoring contexts. This could include examinations of how districts adapt or modify existing programs to fit their specific mentoring context, and how university faculty, preK–12 teachers, and administrators collaborate to modify and adapt programs.

Future researchers should examine multiple mentors, mentoring networks, and other forms of group mentoring in music education in various contexts—in person, online, and a combination of both. Having multiple mentors has been examined in educational settings including language arts (Morgan, 2013), special education (Marshall et al., 2013), sports coaching (Sawiuk et al., 2017), and higher education (de Janasz & Sullivan, 2004). Benefits included flexibility, collaboration and collaborative reflection, participants feeling agency and greater sense of contribution, improved skills, and a better understanding of mentoring and mentees.

Preparing and developing mentors is essential. Meeting mentors’ needs will increase their effectiveness in meeting novice teachers’ needs. However, the effects of different kinds of mentor preparation and support is “rather sparse and underdeveloped” (Hobson et al., 2009, p. 212). Further examination of programs like the Music Mentor Plus and the ASTA Mentor Program may reveal useful strategies and materials to enhance mentor preparation and development, and lead to the creation of new programs. Finally, future researchers should continue examining the impact of preparation and development on mentors, and how mentors learn from each other in preparation or development programs, specifically in music education.

The literature examined in this review revealed the importance of carefully selecting and preparing mentors to take on their crucial role. It is vital that music education researchers continue examining and implementing research-based processes of mentor identification, selection, preparation, and development. Seeking a deeper understanding of these processes can enhance mentor effectiveness, leading to a more meaningful experience for all involved.