7 / 11
17
Modeling
As shown in Table 5, the modeling factor received greater than a 90% agreement
response on all quantifiable items. Student teachers indicated that a majority of mentors modeled
teaching practices. Modeling effective teaching and rapport with students were perceived to be
the most representative practices of the mentors at 96% and 95% respectively, while the
mentors’ demonstration of hands-on learning was at 94%. Mentors’ modeling of classroom
management and well-designed lesson plans were lower on the student teachers’ responses, as
was the student teachers’ perceptions of their mentor’s display of enthusiasm (all at 93%). The
lowest score within the modeling factor pertains to the mentors’ use of curricular language
(standards). Student teachers perceived that this occurred 90% of the time. Mentors’ reference to
standards was also the lowest reported score in the system requirements factor.
Table 5
Modeling
Mentoring practice
%
Mean
SD
Modeled effective teaching
96.8
4.72
0.55
Modeled teaching
96.3
4.70
0.63
Modeled rapport with students
95.9
4.66
0.63
Demonstrated hands-on lesson
94.1
4.56
0.70
Displayed enthusiasm
93.6
4.63
0.71
Modeled classroom management
93.6
4.62
0.69
Modeled a well-designed lesson
93.2
4.50
0.69
Used curriculum language (standards)
90.9
4.38
0.76
Note.
%*, Percentage of mentees who either
agreed
or
strongly agreed
their mentor provided
that specific mentoring practice.
Feedback
The fifth factor, feedback, showed the lowest scores of implementation on the MPST
instrument, as compared to the other four factors. The student teachers perceived that only 71%
of the mentors reviewed the student teachers’ lesson plans (mean score=3.84;
SD
=1.03). Also
significant, is that although 92% of the student teachers reported their mentors observed their
teaching, only 79% of the student teachers indicated they received written feedback on their
teaching (mean score 4.14;
SD
=1.04). In stark contrast, 92% of the student teachers agreed or
strongly agreed that they received oral feedback of their teaching (mean score 4.47;
SD
=0.83).
As Table 6 shows, 86% of the student teachers felt that their mentor teacher articulated
expectations during this experience, and 91% noted their teaching was evaluated. Mean scores
for these items were 4.30 and 4.46, respectively and standard deviations 0.97 and 0.86
respectively.