The Effects and Implication of Mentoring for Beginning Teachers in the Philippines

Research ProblemThe Effects and Implications of Mentoring for Beginning In-service teachers in Western Mindanao res publica University Philippines Statement of the problem Teachers face many challenges during the first years of instruction, such(prenominal) as planning and implementing curriculum and instruction, conducting assessments, motivating students, managing student contrarietys and behaviour, and generally expression overwhelmed (Roehrig et. al. 2006).They are being asked to teach technological and analytical skills to students from a openhanded range of backgrounds, prepare them to read and write scholarly, to think critically, and to apply their cognition to solving real-world problems. In other(a) words, the skills teachers sine qua non to develop are twain complex and demanding (Borko & Livingston, 1989). To reduce the challenges that new teachers face and to improve the graphic symbol of their training a popular start was introduced purposely to furnish s upport via mentoring which is dominant in the US (Roehrig et. l. 2006). In fact, beginning teachers are being call for to participate in mentoring programmes, a great deal as part of the work on for permanent wave certification in almost states in America. Unlike in some developing countries, like the Philippines wherein its department of education has been under-performing for years, and has no guide golf shot policy on mentoring program, professional advancement and in-service training to improve the teachers competency once hired (Luz, 2008).Hobson (2008) defines mentoring as the virtuoso-to-one support of a critic or less scramd practitioner (mentee) by a much experienced practitioner (mentor), designed primarily to assist the development of the mentees expertise and to facilitate their induction into the culture of the profession. Mentoring can sacrifice a classification of purpose or goals, can involve a variety of coiffes and strategies to achieve these purpose a nd goals, and can take place at contrastive stages of a mentees professional development and over different durations.Based on this assumptions and preconception of mentoring, the primary purpose of this research is to de limitine the possible effectuate and implications of mentoring to novice teachers in my design. Research Questions This research project aims to develop insights into the mentoring process and seeks to explore how mentoring can assist beginning in-service teachers in my home institution in developing their confidence, teaching competencies , skills in motivating students as head as classroom management. Moreover, it seeks to examine my protest lived experiences as a mentee.Furthermore, it aims to repartee the following research questions below. ?As a mentee, what were my experiences that make me recognized the worth(predicate) of mentoring scheme provided by senior teachers. ?How did these experiences assist me in becoming a more reflective and dynamic teach er? ?How can these experiences assist me in mentoring new teachers? Methodology This research is an auto-ethnography that heightenes on my own lived experiences as a teacher and as a mentee and the connection of my livelihood story with the experiences of other teachers from my home institution.According to Ellis and Bochner (2000), an auto-ethnography is a form of study that makes the investigators own experience a topic of investigation in its own right. It utilizes selective information or so ego-importance and its circumstance to gain an understanding of the connectivity between self-importance and others within the same mise en scene (Ngunjiri, et. al. 2010). The intended purpose of this study is to provide a detailed, in-depth description of my mentoring experiences, its effect and implication on my drill as a teacher. This methodology is suitable for this research because, according to Chang (2007), auto-ethnography is a soft research.As a research methodology, it ta kes a systematic approach in information collection, analysis, and interpretation about self and social phenomena involving self. This systematic and intentional approach to the socio-cultural understanding of self sets auto-ethnography apart from other self-narrative roots such as memoir and autobiography. Moreover, Ngunjiri (2010) explicitly emphasized that auto-ethnography is distinctive from other research because it is self-focused and context-conscious. The esearcher is at the centre of the investigation as a subject (the researcher who performs the investigation) and an intent (a participant who is investigated). Auto-ethnographic information provide the researcher a window by means of which the external world is understood. Although the blurred distinction between the researcher-participant congenership has move the source of criticism challenging the scientific credibility of the methodology (Anderson, 2006), portal to sensitive issues and inner-most thoughts make s this research method a powerful and unique putz for psyche and social understanding (Ellis, 2009).Lastly, auto-ethnography is context-conscious, which means it intends to connect self with others, self with the social, and self with the context (Wolcott, 2004). The focus on self does non unavoidably mean self in a vacuum. A variety of others, others of parity (those with similar determine and experiences to self), others of difference (those with different values and experiences from self), and others of opposition (those with values and experiences seemingly irreconcilable to self), are often insert in stories about self (Chang, 2007).This multiplicity of others exist in the context where a self inhabits on that pointfore, collecting data about self ultimately converges with the exploration of how the context surrounding self has influenced and shaped the make-up of self and how the self has responded to, reacted to, or resisted forces innate to the context. Research met hods To answer my first two research questions, I provide use personal reflection and narrative inquiry as my research methods. Personal ReflectionPersonal Reflection as define by tail (2004), is being mindful of self, either within or after experience, as though looking through a window which will enable the practitioner to view and focus self within the context of a particular experience, in order to confront, understand and move toward resolving power contradiction between ones vision and actual practice. It is a process of examining and evaluating the impact of personal values, culture and beliefs in relation to real issue.My own retrospection allows me to recount the support, assistance and emotional as well as in pick outectual guidance that were provided to me from my senior colleagues and how these support made me traverse the obstacles that were on my path during the first few years of my teaching. In addition, my personal reflection will enable me to envision the poss ible mentoring that I will provide when my opportunity to become a mentor comes. Advantages/ chroma As it is about you it requires you to be honest and open about your keep and feelings about a specific thing ?It is often used by the person researching and writing to explain how they sacrifice felt during the process and their answer to the topic ?Allows people to learn from experience Limitations ?Should be used in conjunction with others ?Very difficult or Impossible to quantify ? any(prenominal) topics could cause friction within the family Narrative Inquiry Narrative inquiry is my main methods to represent my voice and engage readers in my text.This method focuses on studying a single person, gathering data through the collections of stories, report individual experiences, and discussing the meaning of those experiences for the individual (Creswell, 2008). The use of stories, discourse and my personal tarradiddle will be my bureau of describing my mentoring experiences as a teacher and as a mentee and critically reflect on its effect and implications in my teaching practices. Although my personal narratives will be the major component of my data, other individuals life experiences and stories will be also considered (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990).Strengths ?No need of comprehensive social function to follow for it is just my own experiences. This means no standard formality involved. It is a matter of my availability of time and retrospective mood. ?Ability to present data accurately as I have a in force(p) long term recollection. Limitations ?Risk of missing information due to memory fatigue. ?Some experiences may not be presented as it may have harm to third party. Although the stories are my experiences, by telling them may have an impact on the life of a third party. Thus to be ethical I may not be able to tell every story (Cohen et al, 2000). Limited ability to present emotional stories. I am not a confident writer, therefore my limited writin g skills will be a limitation. Quality standards Any educational paper regardless of which paradigm the researcher position himself should have some fiber standards associated with it. In the context of auto-ethnographic research, the standard use in judging the quality of any research needs to be considered carefully. Member checking Is basically what the term implies an opportunity for divisions (participants) to check (approve) particular aspects of the interpretation of the data they provided (Doyle, 2007).It is a expressive style of finding out whether the data analysis is congruent with the participants experiences (Curtin & Fossey, 2007). The usual practice is that participants are given transcripts or particles from the narratives or written stories they contributed and are asked to swan their accuracy. Participants may be asked to edit, clarify, elaborate, and at times, delete their own words from the narratives although Creswell (2008) worried that member checking is best done with polished interpreted pieces such as themes and patterns emerging from the data rather than the actual transcripts.Member checking can be an individual process or can take place with more than one person at a time, such as in focus group settings, as a discussion with the researcher (Doyle, 2007). Member checking is often a single upshot that takes place only with the verification of transcripts or early interpretations. Sometimes though, it is done at a few list points throughout the research process with some scholars recommending it be done constantly (Doyle, 2007). As the researcher I will regularly provide my other participants with their nterpretations of the narratives for the purpose of verifying plausibility (Curtin & Fossey, 2007) and asking Am I on the right track? Did I understand this in the same way you meant it? Authenticity Refers to the reliability and verifiability with which the account of the event corresponds to the real details of the event (da te, time, place, people, and words spoken). Truth claims can be made only if certain procedure has been followed to guarantee to the greatest extent possible that the researchers account matches or corresponds to the event.A study is authentic when the strategies used are charm for the true reporting of the participants ideas, when the study is fair, and when it helps participants and similar groups to understand their world and improve it. It means that there is new insight into the phenomenon under study (Holloway & Wheeler, 2002). I can only achieve this in my research through member checking. The data should be continually revisited and scrutinized for accuracy of interpretation and for meaningful, coherent tape transport of the participants narrative contributions (Creswell, 2008).Moreover, fairness is one of the standards under legitimacy to make confident(predicate) different constructions are presented, clarified, checked, and taken into account in a balance manner (Cohe n et al, 2000). To ensure fairness, I will sure as shooting involve all stakeholders in constructions and interpretations of data. I will make sure that the data collected are accurate in terms of a vis-a-vis agreement with participants. transparence Is the benchmark for the presentation and dissemination of findings, the need to be explicit, clear and open about the assumptions made and the methods and procedures used.Seale, et. al (2004) recognizes the researchers need to be transparent and reflexive about conduct, suppositious perspective and values. The credibility of any qualitative study lies in the enhancer of its specific paradigm assumptions. In planning, designing, and carrying out qualitative research there must be a conscious examination of research strategies, excerption of participants, and decisions made in collecting and interpreting the data (Duarte, 2007). Methods of inquiry, which includes he procedures of data collection and data analysis and interpretation m ust be clear enough for others to replicate, and therefore must be transparent. This is possibly the important difference between qualitative and quantitative inquiry, the emphasis is on the procedures being replicable, and not the findings (Sparkes, 2001). Qualitative inquiry requires a thorough critical self-exploration of the researchers assumptions, presuppositions, decisions, and self-interests. It is important to stress that reflexivity must be applied to the full(a) research process, and is not merely a consideration of potential sources of bias.The researcher has a crucial participatory role in any inquiry. Transparency and reflexivity therefore go hand in hand, since without transparency, reflexivity is impotent, and in return, reflexivity effectively promotes transparency (Bruce , 2007).