An interview with Dr. William A. Gray President of Mentoring Solutions
Two No-Cost  Revolutions in Teacher Preparation that Work

Email: wgray@mentoring-solutions.com

Tel:  (877) 955-0314

For 30 years, Dr. Gray and Marilynne Miles Gray have helped over 200 organizations define, design and deliver successful mentoring programs. For eight years, they implemented Mentor-Assisted Enrichment Projects with gifted/talented, ESL, and at-risk students in grades 4-12, initially, as an optional course assignment that any education professor can offer future teachers and later, as a radically different student teaching practicum.  Both approaches were revolutionary in enabling future teachers to identify and respond to individual differences in learners, as this had not occurred before. Here is what Dr. and Mrs. Gray had to say regarding the issues now under consideration from the USDOE. …. Delia Stafford

1. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan recently called for a radical revolution in teacher preparation (http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/2009/10/10222009.html).  You did this twice.

That’s correct.  Let me first describe what I did as an education professor at the University of British Columbia. I wanted my students to understand individual differences in learners and how to respond to these, using different types of motivation, communication, discipline and teaching methods.  So, I created optional course assignments that enabled my students to apply what they were learning as they worked with students in grades 4-12.  One of the most popular options was to plan and carry out a Mentor-Assisted Enrichment Project (MAEP) over a 12-week semester, as a mentor of 2-5 student-proteges. Each MAEP had a schedule of activities that were based on that mentor’s expertise (this could be work-related, a hobby, an academic major) and also on the interests of the proteges.

My research revealed that different types of structure were needed for success. For example, instead of simply matching a mentor with proteges, I needed to provide training so everyone knew what to do. I required mentors to write up weekly reports on individual differences in their learners/proteges and how they responded to these. The participating teachers had to ensure that their students met the mentors and were prepared so that each MAEP could be completed, or I was faced with creating another assignment that my students could complete.

2. What was the specific revolution in teacher preparation that occurred from carrying out a Mentor-Assisted Enrichment Project as an optional course assignment?

Because I read and commented on each mentor’s weekly report, I realized that by the third meeting with proteges the mentors could identify and describe specific individual differences in learners, and respond appropriately to them.  This led me to start a more systematic investigation based on the “Concerns of Teachers” that Frances Fuller and her graduate students replicated over several years.  These researchers had repeatedly found that teachers progress through three stages of concern.   First, they are concerned with “Self” – do I know my subject well enough to teach it and can I control my class so I can teach.  Second, they are concerned with “Them” – the group they are teaching, no matter what size it is.  Third, they are concerned with “Individual Differences in Learners” – and how to respond appropriately.  These researchers found that no student teachers, on any practicum, reached Stage 3.  And many first-year teachers did not.

My own investigation revealed that all of my future teachers, who served as mentors, reached Stage 3 by the third meeting with their proteges because of the weekly report I required.  They were able to bypass Stage 1 because each Mentor-Assisted Enrichment Project was based on that mentor’s existing expertise and on each protege’s motivation to participate.  It took only two meetings to move from Stage 2 (seeing “Them”) to Stage 3 (identifying and responding to individual differences in learners).

Because these mentors were typically in the last year of their B. Ed. Program, they could compare what they learned as mentors with everything else they had learned.  They said planning and carrying out a 12-week Mentor-Assisted Enrichment Project taught them more about working with different kinds of students than any course or student teaching practicum.

I received high course evaluations for making my course relevant to becoming an excellent teacher. This plus the many benefits that Mentor-Assisted Enrichment Projects produced for future teachers and their student-proteges should be an incentive to any education professor to do what I did.

3. How did you revolutionize the initial student teaching practicum?

UBC had a 5-year B. Ed. Program for future secondary teachers.  In year 2, these students took a weekly 1-hour seminar over a semester to prepare them for their first practicum.  They typically observed the sponsoring classroom teacher for 2-4 hours and then taught the entire class (or sometimes a smaller group).  These student teachers were just beginning their academic major, knew virtually nothing about classroom management or specific discipline techniques, and few had ever talked in front of any audience. When the dropout rate reached 40%, the Director of Student Teaching asked me and my wife to replace the conventional practicum with Mentor-Assisted Enrichment Projects.

Our ongoing investigation into the “Concerns of Teachers” revealed that these student teachers reached Stage 3 after two meetings with their student-proteges because we continued to require weekly mentor reports on how they responded to individual differences in learners.

After these mentors they did a conventional three-week student teaching practicum, we found that nearly all of them reached Stage 3 because they looked for individual differences, they knew what to look for, and they responded accordingly. None got stuck at Stage 1 – being concerned for “Self.”

Any student teaching program could do what we did, instead of putting beginning student teachers in front of entire classes (or even small groups) where their lack of confidence and competence will likely mire them in concern for “Self” until they sink or swim.  If they sink, the profession might lose a potentially excellent teacher (but we’ll never know).  If they swim, it will likely be with “Them” because they really don’t have an opportunity to identify and respond to individual differences in learners as they struggle to teach the class or group.

4. How did the student-proteges benefit?

They benefited by learning how to take turns leading and following, how to plan and carry out a project, how to incorporate higher-level thinking skills into each project (based on Bloom’s Cognitive Taxonomy), how to interview other experts and prepare for this, how to give a public presentation to an audience, and how to complete something they started.  The parents especially appreciated this last benefit, because youth typically have difficulty completing what they start.

5. What are next steps for you?

Before I retire, I’d like to work with teacher preparation programs to help them do what we did.  I’d like to share what we learned over an 8-year period about how to match a mentor with 2-5 youth for group mentoring, how to train them, how planning needs to occur so proteges are committed, how to ensure projects are completed.  At a micro-level, individual professors could learn how to provide and oversee Mentor-Assisted Enrichment Projects as an optional course assignment, which will benefit their students and improve course evaluations.  At a macro-level, beginning student teachers could learn how to plan and carry out Mentor-Assisted Enrichment Projects instead of doing a conventional practicum. Either way, future teachers -- as mentors -- will reach the Stage 3 concern for seeing and responding to individual differences in learners.  This is foundational for revolutionizing teacher preparation so that ultimately individual learners do well in school and graduate.

Dr. William A. Gray
President of Mentoring Solutions
Email: wgray@mentoring-solutions.com
Tel:  (877) 955-0314

Delia Stafford
President
Haberman Foundation
http://www.habermanfoundation.org