Posted: Fri. 10 Jan., 2025 Author: Carol Thompson

When Carl Rogers (1961: 8) describes his experience as a student, he does so with some frustration: ‘A group of us felt that ideas were being fed to us, whereas we wished primarily to explore our own questions and doubts, and find out where they led.’ This quote is from 1961 and yet it seems very familiar territory, particularly when it comes to how we support teachers as a result of recently introduced training framework, and, subsequently, how they enact their roles once in post.

Currently initial teacher training (ITT) is based on model underpinned by professional standards, as well as the Core Content Framework [PDF] which sets out a minimum entitlement for what trainee and Early Career teachers should learn and experience). In addition, the ITT market review [PDF] report (2021) recommended the implementation of an intensive training and practice element (ITAP) which would give trainees the opportunity to practise specific techniques for effective teaching. In theory, this approach aimed to consolidate trainees’ understanding and application of theory to practice.

As part of their training, student-teachers are allocated a mentor who will support their progress and, when it comes to mentoring, there is a clear agenda that the focus will be on ‘intensive training and practice’. To provide a framework for this, there has been renewed interest in models of mentoring which take a more instrumental form, often based on ‘instructional coaching’ and ‘deliberate practice’. Bambrick-Santoyo’s (2012) model is one example of this and includes 6 steps:

• Precise praise
• Probe
• Identity problem and concrete action step
• Practice
• Plan ahead
• Review

The steps themselves are not complex and outline a fairly typical model of observation- feedback-target setting. ITT has used this model for years, so on the surface it seems like nothing new. However, the mentoring approach has arguably become more rigid and top-down since the introduction of ITAP.

Instructional coaching is based on mastery learning, ie, specific ‘problems’ and ‘actions’ will be identified and linked to activities which will provide the opportunity for consistent focussed practice. The model also relies on a ‘Master-Apprentice’ approach, whereby the mentor is seen as ‘all-knowing’. They are not unlike the model you might come across in sports coaching…indeed, the author uses this analogy: ‘Teachers are like tennis players: they develop most quickly when they receive frequent feedback and opportunities to practice’ (Bamrick-Santoyo: 2012:65).

It is easy to see why such a model is popular in education circles, especially with the renewed interest in ‘deliberate practice’ (an idea that draws on Ericsson et al., 1993). The term describes highly-structured activities with the explicit goal of improving performance, whereby, ‘specific tasks are invented to overcome weaknesses, and performance is carefully monitored to provide cues for ways to improve it further’ (ibid.: 368) The goal is to develop expertise which allows teachers to respond to the demands of the classroom. A laudable aim… but, in order to meet the complex demands of professional practice, a teacher also needs to be able to adapt to meet the needs of their learners. And… such adaptation requires the ability to think through a situation within a very short time frame. It requires teachers to enact agency in relation to their roles and for student-teachers it probably means that they ‘need to explore their own questions and doubts and find out where they’ lead (Rogers 1961: 8).

My own experience of working with trainee and ECT’s is that their fear of ‘getting it wrong’ creates a tendency to follow rules rigidly rather than explore available options. This means that when something doesn’t go exactly as they expect, they can become overwhelmed. When a skill or strategy has been learnt in isolation, there is a struggle to adapt to another context and yet… the complexities of teaching mean that any number of events could disrupt the flow of the class, making it necessary to be able to cope with whatever presents itself. With this in mind, rather than mastering specific techniques, might time be better spent developing a good understanding of teaching and learning theory alongside the ability to critically evaluate practice. After all, teaching is not a scripted exercise and expertise does not come from practising something over and over. By taking the opportunity to make mistakes, reflect on them and make our own connections we enhance our ability to improvise, and more importantly, we develop confidence in adapting our practice in order to meet the needs of the context.

Is it time to rethink the drive towards inflexible models of coaching and consider how we might develop a more democratic culture where mentors and their proteges learn together? To do this we would need to consider the mentor’s role, not as an instructional coach but more as an enabler. From wise, all-knowing ‘Master’ to ‘Co-learner’, albeit one with a little more experience to share. This approach is underpinned by reflection, it is a process not a product and as such requires continuous exploration of questions and where they might lead. Perhaps, to quote Rilke, by ‘learning to love the questions themselves, like locked rooms and like books that are now written in a very foreign tongue.’ we may find the answers we seek.

References

Bambrick-Santoyo, P. (2012) Leverage Leadership: A practical Guide to Building Exceptional Schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993) The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406.

Rogers, C. (1961) On Becoming a Person: A therapeutic view of Psychotherapy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.