Assessing the trainees: the mentor’s role

Using the Standards

Mentors need to be familiar with the Standards for QTS. Two problems need addressing here. First, there are 42 Standards in total which can appear daunting to the new mentor. Second, the Standards themselves are not the definitive guide to good teaching. They are not subject-specific and can be satisfied in a variety of ways. Moreover, mentors, however much they recognise that good teachers come in different shapes and sizes, will tend to lay greater emphasis on some aspects over others. This is inevitable, which is precisely why the Standards can be useful in establishing some common parameters. They can lend a degree of objectivity to assessment. It is only a degree, however. The Standards themselves are open to interpretation!

The Standards can also be useful in a more formative way. They can provide a helpful vocabulary for mentors in discussion with their trainees. Imagine, for example, that a trainee’s lessons lack focus and only about half the teaching time is used effectively. A mentor might refer to Standard 3.3.1 - ‘a purposeful learning environment’ - or 3.3.7 – ‘organise and manage teaching and learning time effectively’. The use of the Standards in this case makes the mentor’s judgement less personal. A useful discussion could then focus on what would constitute evidence of meeting these Standards, and a trainee’s next steps in the light of this. Other Standards might then provide further help in identifying root causes (might Standard 3.1.1 – ‘set challenging teaching and learning objectives’ – be part of the problem?).

Observation and feedback

One of the mentor’s most important roles is to observe their trainee teach and to provide feedback. Problems commonly arise here if the mentor:

• focuses on what the trainee did wrong and does not pay enough attention to positive elements
• focuses on too many different things, ignoring the agreed focus
• focuses on symptoms and not causes (often leading to over-emphasis on classroom management)
• provides neither space nor prompts to enable trainees to explore issues for themselves; feedback becomes a monologue by the mentor, not a two-way discussion
• does not end the feedback with practical, tangible next steps

How often should trainees be observed? This is something you will need to establish with mentors. You may wish to distinguish between formal observations which require written as well as verbal feedback (and a minimum of once a week would be a starting point for this) and observation which is more ‘informal’. Informal observation may not last the whole lesson, or might involve the mentor teaching part of the lesson and observing the other half. Even when a decision has been made not to write up the feedback formally, it is good practice always to provide some verbal feedback to the trainee, however brief. You may wish to recommend that trainees record such ‘informal’ feedback themselves in a notebook.

See the resource entitled ‘Effective observation and feedback’ [link to resource 4.3.2] for more detailed guidance.

Target-setting

Hundreds of targets will be generated for any single trainee during a typical year. These will range from ongoing, weekly targets to longer-term objectives arising from key assessment or transition points. As with any good targets, these should be specific and attainable, drawing on the principles of support and challenge already discussed.

One of the danger points for trainees is transition to a different school. Insufficiently detailed, specific and accurate assessment at this point can hinder the next mentor’s ability to carry out a proper needs analysis and to plan ahead. It is worth spending time with mentors ensuring that you have an agreed definition of what constitutes helpful assessment and target-setting at such key points.

Helping trainees to self-assess

Mentors are not the only people who should be engaged in assessment. Trainees themselves must learn to evaluate their own practice effectively if they are to continue to learn and make progress beyond their training year.

Trainees’ evaluations are often too descriptive and they may be inclined to make superficial judgements – it was ‘fine’ or it was ‘terrible’ - or attribute problems to factors other than themselves (see Pendry, A. & Husbands, C. with Arthur, J. & Davison, J. (1998) History Teachers in the Making, Buckingham: Open University Press and Lacey, C. (1977) The Socialisation of Teachers, London: Methuen).

Mentors need to support trainees in their ability to evaluate. They can do this by:

• Prompting the trainee to ask certain questions (‘Do you think the third lesson objective was met? Do you think the higher attaining pupils were sufficiently challenged?)
• Challenging trainees to substantiate their conclusions (‘Why do they think the pupils understood that concept. What is their evidence?’)
• Pointing out the data they might otherwise overlook (‘Did you realise that 75% of the questions were answered by boys?’ ‘Does the homework suggest they understood the task properly?’)
• Encouraging trainees to recognise the implications of their answers (‘So how could you explain that idea differently?’ ‘How will you structure a debate differently next time?’) (based on Hagger, H., Burn, K. & McIntyre, D. (1993) The School Mentor Handbook, London: Kogan Page)