Running head: Teacher Mentoring

Teacher Mentoring
Vanessa Vitiello
William Paterson University
November 4, 2015

Running head: Teacher Mentoring

It has been demonstrated throughout history that next to a students determination to

learn, the quality of a teacher is the most powerful determinant of student success. Since quality
teachers are so important, many areas of education have begun to invest in new-teacher
mentoring. New Jersey has developed requirements established in New Jersey code that require
districts to implement a rigorous one-year mentoring program for all novice teachers.
(http://www.state.nj.us/njded/code/title6a/chap9/index.html#8)
After reviewing the district mentoring program for my school district I learned that there
are three primary goals. The first is to enhance teacher knowledge of and strategies related to the
New Jersey Core curriculum Content Standards (NJCCCS)/Common Core State Standards
(CCSS) in order to facilitate student achievement. The next is to identify exemplary teaching
skills and educational practices necessary to acquire and maintain excellence in teaching. Finally
the district strives to assist novice teachers in the performance of their duties and adjustment to
the challenges of teaching. These three goals do align to the New Jersey Professional Standards
for Teachers (NJPST).
The district seeks out effective mentors that have a track record of fostering significant
student learning. The path to finding the right mentor is complex. Many districts dont have the
structures in place to assess who their most skilled educators are or which of their teachers are
having a strong positive impact on student outcomes. To address this issue in the Paterson school
district both mentors and mentees are required to complete a detailed self-assessment regarding
the qualities that are addressed in the program. Along with this self-assessment there is an option
to include questions and concerns.

Running head: Teacher Mentoring

After interviewing both a teacher who has been mentored and a teacher who has been a
mentored it is evident that the process is flawed. For all intents and purposes there is a desire to
align instructional support efforts but there is no follow up. The mentor who I interviewed
expressed her concern regarding the fact that her mentee did not ask any questions. It appeared to
her that her mentee teacher was independent and did not appreciate asking for help. Her
observations of this teacher were positive; however, there was room for improvement. She
explained that her reports indicated as much and, as far as she was aware, nothing was addressed.
The mentee who I interviewed was concerned about her ability to manage classroom
order and behavior. She claims her mentor did not support or address this area with her.
According to her, the mentor gave her some articles that explained that classroom management
was a part of teaching that was subjective and there are many strategies that should be utilized
until the correct strategy for that particular environment is found. It is possible that the mentor
wanted her to find the strategy that works best for the school rather than simply tell the mentee
what works best with students. I found this to be counterproductive because if this was the case,
the students are missing out on valuable teaching time while the new teacher utilizes trial and
error to control her classroom.
Based on the information I have gathered it is obvious that there is no mal intent and the
program can be successful. The district must find a way to follow up with both mentors and
mentees to ensure that both have met their obligations. It is also important for mentors to be
trained. If a mentor thinks that it is best for a teacher to learn the ropes through trial and error,
training could help ensure that they do more to assist.

Running head: Teacher Mentoring