A Study of Mentoring in the Teach First Programme
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Canterbury Christ Church University’s repository of research outputs http://create.canterbury.ac.uk Copyright © and Moral Rights for this thesis are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder/s. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given e.g. Cameron, D. (2014) A study of mentoring in the Teach First programme. Ph.D. thesis, Canterbury Christ Church University. Contact: [email protected] A Study of Mentoring in the Teach First Programme by David Cameron Canterbury Christ Church University Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2014 Abstract Policy trends in initial teacher training (ITT) in England have increasingly located training in schools, where trainee teachers are supported by practicing teachers designated as ‘mentors’. The nature of the mentoring that trainee teachers experience has been shown to be of critical importance, both to outcomes in the initial training period and also in terms of teachers’ professional identity construction and retention within the profession. School-based mentoring has been typically characterised, however, as of variable or inconsistent quality. Teach First is a teacher training programme with a number of features which set it apart from other routes into teaching. Teach First grows from and sits within the contemporary policy landscape of teacher training; the programme has a distinctive identity and is the focus of significant interest in the education sector in England and beyond. Teach First is an employment-based training programme and Teach First trainees are mentored by teachers as they work and train in schools; trainees also receive periodic support from tutors based in higher education training providers. This study takes Teach First as a case study and adopts a mixed-methods approach, including both quantitative and qualitative analysis where appropriate. Empirical data is drawn from a multi-layered programme of surveys, focus group discussions and interviews. The study explores how those involved in Teach First mentoring conceptualize the process and how they perceive their role in supporting it. In addition, the study considers the extent to which Teach First mentoring can be considered distinctive. The thesis presents a framework for understanding the mentoring process which is based on an extension of relevant theories of learning and models of mentoring. Empirical findings from the data lead to two propositions: firstly, that the mentoring process in initial teacher training is based on a triadic relationship, in which the relationship between supporters of mentoring is particularly important to its efficacy; secondly, that there is no programme-wide model for Teach First mentoring and, as a consequence, the distinctiveness of the Teach First programme is attenuated by the school-based mentoring process. This latter point has implications for both the nascent identity construction of Teach First teachers and also for how Teach First is perceived in relation to more mainstream teacher training programmes. i Acknowledgements I would like to first thank my supervisors, Dr Viv Wilson and Professor Vivienne Griffiths, for their unfailing support over the years. Through their gentle teaching, sponsorship, encouragement, counselling and friendship I have been able to persevere through all manner of challenges: ideological dissonance and resolution; professional re-alignments; and genuinely life-changing events. Many thanks Viv & Viv; everybody needs a mentor, and you have been mine. You have my lifelong gratitude and respect. I would also like to thank my chair of supervisors, Dr John Moss, the Dean of Education at Canterbury Christ Church University. Dr Moss has provided supportive and thorough supervision of this thesis. He also offered me my first role working with Teach First during a difficult time of transition for me; he may not know how important that opportunity was for setting me on a new and positive path. I would also like to thank my colleagues at Canterbury Christ Church University who all, in different ways, helped to support or facilitate the completion of this research. Particular thanks go to Laura Kay, Ali Jarman, Reuben Moore, William Stow, Amanda Lavocat, Susan Leighs and Danny Ball. Many thanks go to all those tutors, mentors and Teach First trainees who participated in this research, at every stage. I am particularly grateful to the eleven mentors who took part in the final interview series. I would also like to acknowledge the support afforded by two institutions in the completion of this research: first, the Graduate School at Canterbury Christ Church University, which not only provided excellent research training but also waived all fees whilst I was employed at the university; second, the Institute of Physics, which provided substantial financial support and invaluable time and flexibility to complete the thesis. Particular thanks must go to Charles Tracy and Professor Peter Main for their support of a child which was not their own. Finally, the greatest thanks go to my family and friends for their love and support throughout this long journey. To my parents and my sisters, the pride and faith you have shown me throughout my life make this as much yours as it is mine; to my wife’s family, many thanks for your unfailing support and interest. Thank you also to my friends for your encouragement, most particularly to Alex for showing me it could be done, and to Laura (again) for never doubting it would be finished. All that I am goes in thanks and love to my family: to my wife Clare and especially to my son Peter, who joined us part-way through the process. Thank you both for your kindness, love and support, and most of all for your patience with me as I sought to finish what I’d started. This is for you. All done now, let’s go. ii For my wife and for my son, with love. iii Table of Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... i Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................... ii Table of Figures........................................................................................................................................... ix Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................................... x Chapter 1 – Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 Objectives of the study ............................................................................................................................. 1 The significance of the study .................................................................................................................... 2 Overview of the research process ............................................................................................................. 3 Chapter organization ................................................................................................................................ 4 Definitions ................................................................................................................................................ 5 Chapter 2 – Policy Review and Analysis, 1984-2012 .................................................................................. 7 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 7 1984-1992 ................................................................................................................................................. 8 Policy Narrative, Rationale and Response ............................................................................................ 8 1992-2010 ............................................................................................................................................... 14 Policy Narrative, Rationale and Response .......................................................................................... 14 Analysis: the challenge of achieving consistency in school-based ITT .............................................. 18 2010-2012 ............................................................................................................................................... 19 Policy Narrative, Rationale and Response .......................................................................................... 19 Analysis: the use of international comparison in ITT policy .............................................................. 20 Conclusion: 1984-2012, a continuum of change .................................................................................... 24 Chapter 3 – The Teach First Programme: a distinctly different training route ..........................................