Abstract
M.Ed. (Psychology of Learning)
Although mentorship implies expertise, such expertise in teaching is not sufficient for being an effective teacher educator and thus does not guarantee effective mentoring (Timperley, 2001:121). A number of researchers (Hoover, 2010; Kiggundu, 2007; Quick & Sieborger, cited in Kiggundu, 2007; Timperley, 2001; Weiss & Weiss, 2001, cited in Keogh, 2005) found that mentors need to enter mentoring encounters well prepared and they should be guided by more than intuition and expertise in their domain. They indicated that research based selection strategies and training programmes need to be developed since practicum arrangements for the selection of supervising teachers and mentors seem to be done on an ad hoc or voluntary basis and that, in general, training in mentoring skills and principles are non-existent or insufficient.
With Vygotskyan and Bakhtinian theories as basis, this study attempts to offer research based guidance for significant and meaningful mentoring conversations, since conversation is the vessel through which learning is mediated. This study investigates the structural dimensions of mentoring conversations and how they relate to learning outcomes of student teachers. The outcome of this study equips mentors with research based knowledge on how they can deliberately structure their conversations with mentees to optimize the learning outcomes of the conversation.
This study analyzes samples of mentoring conversations and engages in three levels of analysis. On the primary level, the structure of the conversation is determined, in terms of the structural model of Tillema (2011). A secondary level of analysis follows which identifies conceptual artefacts, a notion of Bereiter (2002), (cited by Tillema & van der Westhuizen, 2006), as outcomes of the learning conversation.