GETTING RESULTS: The English, Reading, and Communication Department Mentoring Program for Professional Development by Annet O’Mara

OVERVIEW OF MENTORING PROGRAM: 1. Began in late 2011/early 2012. 2. Mentoring Committee. (13 mentors met at least 3X prior to kick-off) 3. Scholarly Articles on Mentoring. 4. Orientation in Fall/Spring Faculty On-Hand Day. 5. Mentoring Pairing 6. Professional Development 7. Classroom Observation Pool (COP) 8. Certification of Completion

Develop more effective teachers THE FRAMEWORK: GOAL Develop more effective teachers

THE FRAMEWORK: OUTCOMES 1. Regular/Informal Classroom Visits. 2. Regular/Informal Discourse/Discussion. 3. Self-Reflexivity about Teaching.

THE FRAMEWORK: STRUCTURE 1. Point of Contact. 2. Voluntary Participation. 3. Benefits.

THE FRAMEWORK: 1ST SEMESTER 1. Orientation/Break-Out Groups. 2. Mentor/Mentee Meetings and Classroom Observations. 3. Assessment to Follow.

THE FRAMEWORK: 2nd SEMESTER 1. Mentor/mentee will determine commitment for the 2nd semester. 2. Classroom Observation Pool remains in tact/observation encouraged. 3. Mentees will participate in assessment activities.

METHODOLOGY OF ASSESSMENT 1. OBJECTIVE ASSESSMENT 15 QUESTIONS 1) In-service/Mentor/Mentee Pairing. 2) Materials, Text, and Delivery of Content. 3) Classroom Management. 4) Teaching and Learning. 5) Professional Development.

METHODOLOGY OF ASSESSMENT 1. SUBJECTIVE ASSESSMENT 5 Questions 1) Teaching Experience. 2) Strengths of the Mentoring Program. 3) Weaknesses of the Mentoring Program. 4) Suggestions to the Mentoring Program. 5) Suggestions to New Faculty.

THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE RESULTS 100% respondents say that the mentoring program was effective in: 1. Creating a culture that encourages an exchange of teaching and learning ideas.   2. Conveying to mentees that their service is valued.

THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE RESULTS 92% -- respondents say that the mentoring program was effective in: 1. Pairing mentors with mentees who guided the latter’s teaching and learning at OCC. 2. Encouraging mentees to participate in internal and external professional development.

THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE RESULTS 85% -- respondents say that the mentoring program was effective in: 1. Engaging mentees in the orientation/break-out sessions. 2. Making mentees aware of various resources in the department. 3. Challenging mentees to consider new pedagogical approaches.

THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE RESULTS 85% -- respondents say that the mentoring program was effective in: 4. Encouraging greater student achievement of LOs. 5. Showing mentees different pathways to the mentoring experience. 6. Sharing information for important campus services.

THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE RESULTS 77% -- respondents say that the mentoring program was effective in: 1. Imparting to mentees some knowledge/tips on classroom management. 2. Addressing student issues or behavioral ones with mentees. 3. Showing mentees how to put together their syllabi and course structure. 4. Giving mentees a textbook to teach from.

THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE RESULTS 69% -- The mentoring program was effective in: 1. Preparing mentees for delivery of course content.

ASSESSOR’S RECOMMENDATIONS: It is suggested that the mentoring program includes the following content areas/areas of competencies into its framework: 1. Mentoring Relationship 2. Delivery of Content 3. Classroom Management 4. Teaching and Learning 5. Professional Development 6. Communication

MENTORING COMMITTEE’S INPUT: 1. Include more generic workshops that encompass all the disciplines. 2. Include RDG/COM. discipline specific workshops. 3. Ask mentees a pointed question about the value of the textbook assigned. 4. Consider having a different program for new full- time faculty.

CONCLUSIONS 1. Rephrase the question of the textbook to communicate its value. 2. New full-time faculty should not necessarily be observed by their mentors. 3. All disciplines might consider offering professional development workshops and at different times. 4. Refine the framework to include some core competencies.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1. Jamie Sindell, Chair of the ENG/RDG/COM dept. 2. Mentoring Committee Members. 3. Mentors and mentees who participated in the survey. 4. Wendy Tarby, Nancy Gabriel, Karen Bull, Jennifer Naples, and Nicole Schlater.