Task 2b 'Journal writing experiance'

Bould assumption to reflective practice is "writing is ameans of puzzling through what is happening in our work and personal lives." D.Boud (2001)

I was asked to be involved in Assertive mentoring, which I felt would help my teaching, giving me a better understanding of pupil’s behaviour and how to assist that particular behaviour. I have posted this as i feel this may help other teachers. Reflection as helped me to continue to puzzle through to come to research deeper to give me a deeper understanding

I was given the opportunity to shadow another member of staff who has worked in this role for the past 3 years. For the purpose of this reflective journal I will identify the pupil as Amy who is 16yrs old and is currently in year 11.

Her year 11 group will be the first year 11 group in this school to take part in the system of mentoring called Assertive Mentoring (AM).

Assertive Mentoring was created by Eamonn Farrar and Dean Judson for Hurworth Comprehensive School in Darlington as a series of systems including ‘student target setting, tracking, mentoring, intervention and checking.’  (Farrar, 2008, pg20)

My first meeting with Amy highlighted that she did not yet recognise ‘the special value of the mentor-mentee relationship’ (Farrar, 2008)

Her opening comment: ‘I will turn up to the meetings, nod at the right times, you can fill in your forms and away I’ll go. No one gets in to trouble then.’

My interest was aroused by Amy’s comments, as she appeared to have developed a sense of the education system that she felt was obsessed with ticking boxes.  Stating, she was doubtful of the intention of any initiative provided by the school to be truly in her interests and not the interest of the school.

I began asking myself the question, does assertive mentoring work?

This question would support the schools decision to adopt the Assertive Mentoring scheme. The success of the scheme, in its original context, transformed Hurworth’s GCSE results from 38% A* to C passes in 1998 to 96% A*to C passes in 2007.

There was a similar study taken place in the form of action research which made me question what new knowledge could I bring to this subject matter. Secondly the study had taken place over three years and my time limit was fixed to one school term and time to evaluate the data. Thirdly but most importantly this large focus didn’t spark my interest as I thought it would. I began to feel perhaps my interest had become ‘co-opted by these very movements, which are led by special interests more concerned with ‘national competitiveness’ than with the welfare of children.’ (Anderson, Herr & Nihlen, 2007)

The idea that action research ‘attempts to explain the ‘big consequences of little things’’ appealed to me. I wanted to be effective within the limitations of time and a desire to make research of some true purpose and quality. So reviewing the literature gave me cause to support Elliot’s (1991) view that reconnaissance should involve more than just ‘find facts’ but also act as analysis and to be a recursive activity in which the general idea can adapt.

I began to look at the question ‘What makes a good assertive mentor?’ Again the literature of Farrar (2008) outlined this. I asked myself if my knowledge of AM was something that had been insinuated to me by obscure sources without critically examining the evidence. The ‘Assertive Mentoring: seminar handbook’ which was given to me by my colleague provides a list of good mentoring qualities including supportive, friendly, and mutually respectful. Also includes in the list of good qualities is the term ‘hard mentoring’. This is an evidence based system in which; current attainment is the priority, deals are struck and mentors lead the sessions. A series of short case studies presented by Farrar are given in ‘Using Assertive Mentoring to counter ladishness’ (2008) in which these techniques work with two troubled male pupils. These situations reflected pupils who were struggling with peer pressure and teacher conflict and their Assertive Mentoring systems and ‘Save the day’. Initially I had marvelled at these examples and was looking forward to my own mentees.

Amy year 11 pupils with poor behavioural record and a reputation of wearing inch thick make up, was unimpressed with Assertive Mentoring scheme. The premise that the assertive mentoring scheme was mentor led was a concern as Amy was not the kind of pupil to be led by her peers or any other adult. She made it clear to me at an introductory meeting that she thought the programme was a joke and she would be willing to go through the motions but not to be truly involved or committed to it. Through further discussion with her it was apparent through her use of critical language she was intelligent and articulate as she criticised the fact the school was involved in lots of schemes that were not effective and that as teachers we all expect her to be stupid because she wore make-up. I wanted to use her critical potential and so the question was born. I wanted to see how the system would work for those pupils who did not fit around the whole expectations.  This critical nature was ‘something one would like to change or improve on’ (Eliott, 1991) and I wanted to give authority to her voice. My interest was inspired, so how can we motivate the reluctant Assertive mentee to become involved in the mentoring programme?

I then collected reports and viewed comments across the board such as;

‘Amy is a bright girl. However her current behaviour and lack of focus will not support her meeting her full potential’ (Amy’s School Report 2009, Head of Year Commentary)

Target grades are A and B but she is currently working at C and D accept Art which is aimed for A. Amy’s daily reports previously described her as ‘Scruffy’, ‘too much make-up’, ‘Loud’ and ‘Constantly questioning’.

I am going to talk to Amy’s parents and to Amy and engage her interest. I felt her academic potential made her more than capable of student researcher. Also her ability to articulate her feelings to me frankly and question teachers did show me her possible aptitude as researcher in this endeavour.

 I feel now my practice is made up of a collection of others ideas that I assumed worked because I am told they work by other sources.  The young people in my care have experienced is not based on my reflection of suitable practice for them but what has worked by others. ‘The research process itself can generate greater professional understanding for those practitioners involved.’ (Barnett & Burton, 2006, pg 398) I now understand my assumptions, my weaknesses as a researcher and as a teacher, but most importantly I understand what to do when I don’t understand. I need to generate my own understanding for my own contexts so my learners can develop in ways that have been carefully considered rather than merely accepted.

This way I can respect myself and have confidents that the work in my classroom fits my pupil’s needs.