1

Postgraduate Certificate in Higher Education Practice

Assignment Cover Sheet

Participant Name: Ariel Vázquez Carranza Department: Language and Linguistics

Module 1 Module 2 Assignment 1 Assignment 2

Assignment Title:

Mentoring Practice: a reflexion on my role as a GTA Prefect and Senior PhD

colleague

Programme Learning Outcomes This assignment demonstrates coverage of the following learning outcomes:

Knowledge and

Understanding

Intellectual/Cognitive Skills

Practical Skills Key Skills

1. 3. 3. 1.

6 5. 4. 5.

6. 6.

UK Professional Standards Framework Areas of Professional Activity and Core Knowledge

This assignment demonstrates coverage of the following:

Professional Activity 3. 6.

Core Knowledge 3. 6.

I certify that the attached is all my own work. I have read and understood the University Regulations and Procedures on dealing with cheating and plagiarism

Signature of Participant: Ariel Vázquez Carranza Date: June 2014

x x

2

Mentoring Practice: a reflexion on my role as a GTA Prefect and Senior PhD colleague

Abstract

The present paper is a reflection on my experiences as GTA Prefect and Senior PhD colleague. I

suggest that in these two experiences I have played the role of a mentor. First, I present the

definition of ‘Mentoring’ which I consider is the most appropriate to describe my experiences. I

present three mentoring cycles that I have found in the literature (Hay, 1995; CSP, 2005; and

Munro Turner, 2004) and I also show the mentor’s roles and characteristics. The second section of

the paper is the reflection about my two experiences. I incorporate in my reflection the theoretical

concepts mentioned. I focus on the things that went right and wrong in both experiences and how

I can improve. In the final part I mention the benefits of the mentoring process that my mentees

and myself had.

1. Introduction

The present paper is about my experience as Graduate Teaching Assistant (GTA) Prefect and

as Senior PhD student. Although I was not officially a mentor, I consider that what I have

done in both positions is very similar to what a mentor does. This is why I consider this

experience as my first experience as a mentor in Higher Education. The experience that I

report was not planned; it was the result of external circumstances or decisions made that lead

to me becoming a mentor. My mentoring experience is two folded; it has to do with teaching

and research. For five years I have been a Graduate Teacher Assistant (GTA) in the

Department of Language and Linguistics at the University of Essex. At the beginning of this

academic year (2013-2014) most of the GTAs in the Department were new in the job so the

Undergraduate Linguistic Co-ordinator, who is in charge of the GTAs in the Department,

foresaw the need of having someone with experience as a GTA to assist new comers to the

job. This is how I was appointed Prefect of the GTAs in the Department. The Prefect role

involves giving guidance to fellow GTAs in matters such as class preparation, marking and

administrative matters. Ever since I started my PhD I also became a member of a research

group on Language and Social Interaction which is organised by my supervisor, Dr. Rebecca

Clift. At the beginning of this academic year I submitted my PhD thesis and in this year new

PhD students became members of the research group. This made me the senior PhD student

in the research group. Because this research group is strictly about analysing data, I suggested

to my supervisor the idea of having a reading group with my fellow PhD students. My

supervisor agreed and suggested that I should lead it. In these reading group meetings we

were supposed to only discuss relevant articles and chapters of books however my fellow

PhD students started bringing to the session questions about their research so half of the time

we would be discussing the readings and the other half we would be talking about their

research. I would be giving advice and shearing my experience as supervisee. After talking

3

with my supervisor about all the activities we do in the reading group she made me realised

that I was training myself to be a research supervisor.

As I have suggested with the title of this paper I consider that the experience I had in these

two areas has to do with mentorship. This report first will look at some theory and concepts

about mentoring. I will then describe my experience as a mentor and I will evaluate my

practice in accordance with the theory, I will described what went right and what went wrong

in the reported experiences. I will also mention how my mentoring performance can be

improved. In the final section I will present in what ways mentoring has benefited my

mentees and me.

2. Mentoring

2.1. Definition

Most of the documents I consulted on mentoring mention the origin of the word ‘mentor’

(e.g. Eby, et al., 2007; Shea, 2002; McKimm, et al., 2007). The word mentor comes from

Homer’s Odyssey in which Odysseus assigns the care of his son, Telemachus, to Mentor who

acts as teacher and overseer. Then, Athena, in the form of Mentor, helps and accompanies

Talamachus in search for his father, Odysseus. Traditional definitions of mentoring would

refer to someone in a higher position helping and guiding someone in a lower position, for

example, Blackwell (1989) defines mentoring as “...a process by which persons of superior

rank, special achievements, and prestige instruct, counsel, guide, and facilitate the intellectual

and/or career development of persons identified as proteges" (p. 9). One of the problems of

this definition is that the relationship that is described can lead to favouritism, career

climbing and internal politics. Hay (1995) suggests, however, that mentoring is “a

developmental alliance between equals in which one or more of those involved is enabled to:

increase awareness, identify alternatives, initiate actions and develop themselves” (p. 5).

Rawlings (2002) argues that this definition addresses the type of mentoring practice that fits

within the Higher Education sector. one of the most adequate for Higher Education settings.

One of the issues in mentoring research is the fact that there is not a general consensus on a

concrete definition of mentoring or mentor (Merriam, 1983; Jacobi, 1991; Eby, et al., 2007).

For instance Blackwell (1987) and Jacobi (1991) identify about fifteen different definitions of

mentoring or mentor (Jacobi only focuses on the areas of education, management and

psychology!). It is argued that mentoring is something not easy to define because it varies

from situation to situation (McKimm, et al., 2003; Cranwell-Ward, et al., 2004; Eby, et al.,

4

2007). Rawlings (2002) argues that the reason why there is not a universal definition of

mentoring is because there are two mentoring operation models: the European Model and the

US model. The former is oriented to ‘development’ and the later oriented to ‘sponsorship’

(Clutterbuck 2001; Hamilton, 1993). I consider, however, that there is a basic characteristic

that all definitions of mentor and mentoring have in common. This characteristic is identified

by Shea (2002) who says that “mentors are helpers” (p. 5), they are helpers in the process of

mentoring. I consider that Shea’s definition of mentoring encapsulates the fundamental and

generic characteristics of mentoring. He mentions that

“mentoring is a fundamental form of human development where one person invest

time, energy, and personal know-how assisting the grow and ability of another person.”

(p. 5). [It is]... a process whereby mentor and mentee work together to discover and

develop the mentee’s talent abilities and to encourage the mentee to acquire knowledge

and skills as opportunities and needs arise. The mentor serves as an effective tutor,

counselor, friend, and foil who enables the mentee to sharpen skills and hone his or her

thinking” (p. 8).

In section 3 of this document I will show how these definitions of mentor and mentoring

correspond to the experience I report in this paper. I will show how I have been shearing with

my colleagues my personal know-how with regard to teaching and research. I will describe in

what ways I have worked with my fellow GTA’s and PhD colleagues with the aim of

developing their teaching and research skills, how I have shared my knowledge with them,

how I have tried to be a guide, and how I have encourage them to develop their abilities.

However, before doing so I consider it is important to report on what the literature says about

the mentoring process and the characteristics of the mentor.

2.2. Mentoring Process

Hay (1995) identifies four stages of the mentoring life cycle:

Stage 1 – Initiation and Orientation (first Contact): The mentor and mentee initiate an

alliance and establish the goals to achieve. They establish the rules and the dynamics of the

mentoring meetings and in general of the mentoring process. This stage consists of ‘breaking

the ice’ and establishing rapport and trust, i.e. forming a bound. It is argue that having a

strong and trustful relationship will allow open honest discussions about the mentee’s

abilities, strengths, weaknesses, hopes, worries and goals.

Stage 2 – Getting established (mentee’s audit): In this stage the mentee requires friendly

support from their mentor to review their own situation. The mentee reflects on their

strengths and weaknesses, their knowledge and skills and their personal and professional

5

circumstances. Reflection on the mentee’s circumstances could lead to the establishment of

long-term and short-term goals. The mentor listens, enquiries, encourages, discussed and

reflects. An important tool that can be used at this stage is a SWOT analysis which will help

the mentee to evaluate their strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for the

achievement of a particular goal.

Stage 3 – Maturing: In this stage the mentor helps the mentee to have deeper learning, the

mentor has to encourage the mentee to reflect on his or her work and take into account

different perspectives in order to identified new possible goals and new possible alternative

options that are available for the mentee. The mentor becomes the devil’s advocate, this

means that the mentor confronts, stimulates and challenges the mentee to see things from

different perspectives. The mentor advices the mentee on the best options that the mentee

could take. There is a detailed plan of action. It is recommended to have a structured

approach to decision making and problem solving.

Stage 4 – Termination: In this stage the mentoring relationship may be terminated in a natural

manner or prematurely. It is suggested to have a final review session in which an evaluation

of the goals and of the whole mentoring process. Lewis (1996) suggests that the ending of a

mentoring relationship should be planned. There should be done gradually not abruptly.

The mentoring life cycle models found in documents use by education institutions (e.g.

Cardiff Metropolitan University) have the four components that Hay (1995) suggests (except

for example, Gavrin, 2014 who includes a further stage in which the mentor exclusively

monitors mentee’s progress). Other models may use different terminology however they all

share similar components. For example, The Chartered Society of Psychotherapy (CSP)

(2005) presents the following model.

Figure 1: The Mentoring Cycle (CSP, 2005: p. 6)

6

The CSP (2005) also presents the tasks the mentor and mentee are to do during the four

stages, also the dynamics of the mentoring relationship and skills required by the mentor for

each of the stages (please see, Appendix 1 which is the chart presented by the CSP with the

details just mentioned).

Munro Turner (2004) presents a rather dynamic mentoring cycle that he calls ‘the mentoring

wheel’.

Figure 2: The Mentoring Wheel (Munro Turner, 2004: p. 6)

This model is based on the idea the mentoring experience is two dimensional. One dimension

has to do with the movement from where the mentee is (i.e. ‘here’) to where the mentee

wants to be (i.e. ‘there’). The second dimension is related to the interaction that the mentee

has to have with his or her environment in the process of going from ‘here’ to ‘there’. Such

cycle has four perspectives: Freeing up, Envisioning, Implementing, and Attracting. The

‘Freeing up’ perspective is compatible with stage 2 of Hay’s mentoring life cycle since this

stage is about being aware of the mentee’s strengths and weakness and also because in this

stage there is a reflection and evaluation of the ‘here and now’ mentee’s situation. The

‘Envisioning’ perspective is also compatible with stage 2 with regard to the planning

component of the stage: that is in this stage the mentor and mentee design a plan of action

and set the goals. The ‘Implementing’ and ‘Attracting’ perspectives are compatible with stage

3 of Hay’s model: in these two perspectives the plan is put into action and the mentor

monitors and gives feedback to the mentee. Munro Turner’s model does not mention

7

anything that can be related to Hay’s stage 4. It appears to me that Munro Tuner’s model is a

mentoring cycle that represents the dynamics that could happen during a mentoring session,

that is, it is more particularly oriented to describe the phases mentor and mentee go through

in a particular aspect or task. In contrast, Hay’s model describes the life cycle of a mentorship

relationship: from its beginning to its end.

2.3. Mentor’s roles and characteristics

In general, the role of a mentor is to support the mentee, challenge and discuss the mentee’s

ideas, and guide the mentee in the achievement of his or her goals to develop his or her

career. According to Clutterbuck (2001), in an ideal world, a mentor should not be the formal

supervisor or the line manager of the mentee. Most of the times, the mentor should have

followed a similar path to the mentee (CSP, 2014), so he or she can share his or her

experience and perspective, in an objective way, with the mentee. McKimm, et al. (2007) list

the roles that a mentor may play over the duration of a mentoring relationship:

Teacher/ educator

Confidante

Counsellor

Motivator

Facilitator

Coach

Friend

Adviser

Critic

Guide

Sounding board

devil’s advocate

learning consultant

process consultant

Translator and decoder (e.g. of

organisational culture and values)

Interpreter

Time manager

Planner

Problem-solver

Catalyst

Diagnostician

Energiser

Expert

Taskmaster

Sponsor

Protector

Role model

Target setter

McKimm, et al. (2007) and the CSP (2014) also include an extensive list of the qualities and

skills that a good mentor should have (these lists are included in appendix 2). I consider,

however, that all the qualities and skills do not have the same relevance or importance for

mentoring. For example, I consider it is more important to be able to deliver constructive

feedback than have sense of humour. Jowett (2005) presents a list of qualities a good mentor

should have and lists them in order of importance or priority:

Qualities of a Good Mentor

1. Wants to be a mentor

2. Non – judgemental

8

3. Empathetic

4. Good listener Open/honest

5. Gives feedback, Positive, Sense of humour Challenging

6. Accessible, Trustworthy, Caring, Life Experience

7. Good questioner, Achiever, Goal setter, Reliable, Well organised, Respects

confidentiality, People person

8. Patient, Optimistic, Confident

9. Been a mentor/mentee, Assertive, Professional training, Time management

10. Interesting, Sales and Marketing skills, Counselling skills, Interviewing skills,

Sensitivity

Hay (1995) suggests three ‘thinking modes’ that a good mentor should have:

1. The mentor should be able to consider previous experiences and points of view.

2. The mentor should be able to consider present emotional responses and reactions.

3. The mentor should be able to consider the impact that actions can have in the future.

I consider that the characteristics of the mentor and the way he or she will played the

different roles just described will be related to his or her personality. The Jung’s Personality

Type Framework shows how our personality type will have an effect on the way we

communicate with people. There are four pairs of elements in which one prefers to gather

information and orient oneself to the world, these are: Extraversion and Introversion, Sensing

and Intuition, Thinking and Feeling, Judging and Perceiving (Dunning, 1999). We behave

according to these characteristics at least at some time in our lives; however we tend to prefer

one element of each pair than the other. These preferences will affect how we learn, how we

teach in the classroom and also I think, it will have an effect on how we do mentoring.

In what follows I will reflect on my mentoring experience making reference to the theory

presented above.

3. My Experience as Mentor

3.1. My mentor relationships setting

The mentoring relationship that I have had with my fellow PhD students and GTAs fits with

Hay’s (1995) definition of mentoring in that it has been a relationship between equals.

Despite the fact that as a Prefect I have an official higher position, we are all equals in terms

of our job description. With respect to my role in the reading/research group, I and my other

PhD colleagues are equally ranked since we all are PhD students. I consider that if there is

such a thing as a “hierarchy” in both contexts such “hierarchy” has to do with the fact that I

9

have spent longer time as supervisee of Dr. Clift and as GTA. In both cases I have always

tried to establish a relationship of equality between my colleagues.

3.2. The Start

At the beginning of the academic year a meeting was held in which I was introduced to my

fellow GTAs as the GTA Prefect. In the meeting the Undergraduate Director of the

Department explained my role to the other GTAs. My roles as Prefect were to guide, advice,

and assist the GTAs in terms of teaching and administration. I encouraged my colleagues to

come to me in case they needed any help. I was allocated an office hour every week for that

purpose and also it was said they could contact me by email. With respect to the Reading

group I emailed my fellow PhD students to invite them and arrange the first meeting.

Unfortunately, nobody, except me, made it to the meeting. My supervisor had to write an

email reprimanding my colleagues for not turning up to the meeting. She outlined the benefits

of these meetings so as to persuade them to come. In the second attempt the meeting did take

place. From this second meeting on my PhD colleagues started to ask for advice and guidance

for their research. In the following sessions I tried to balance the time we spent discussion the

reading and the time we spent talking about their research.

Taking into account Hay’s (1995) Stage 1 of the mentoring process, for both cases there was

not a clear establishment of goals. It was assumed that the contact I would have with my

fellow GTAs was going to be with the aim of improving their performance. In a similar way

in the Reading Group, it was assumed that we had these sessions with the objective of be

more knowledgeable about our discipline and improve the research and analytic skills of my

PhD colleagues. I consider that the rules and dynamics were in deed established particularly

for my Prefect role: GTAs would contact me, in my office our or by email, in case they

needed any assistance. With my fellow PhD students the dynamics changed from only

discussing readings to discussing readings and discussing their research.

It was easier to ‘break the ice’ with my fellow PhD students. This had to do with the fact that

we were a small group and we already knew each other from the research group we are

members of. In this particular case I think we were able to form a bound which allowed them

to feel confident to discuss their research with me. It was different with the GTAs. Despite

the fact that I had an office hour every week and that there are about fifteen GTAs in the

department, there was only one time during the autumn term in which another GTA came to

see me during the office hour, must of the contact I had with them was by email. I think that I

did not break the ice enough so as to establish some sort of rapport.

10

3.2.1. How can The Start be improved?

It is important to establish goals once initiated the mentor relationship. I consider that I could

have designed a document in which I describe the possible issues or difficulties that, in my

experience, tend to be recurrent during the academic year as GTA. This document could have

been useful to initiate contact with the other GTAs. I also think that I could have emailed

them regularly asking if they have had any problem and encouraged them to come and talk

about their classes or administrative issues. In that way I consider I could have stimulated the

establishment of rapport and trust between them and me. I think it is equally important the

relationship between the GTA. I could have leased with my line manager, in this case the

Undergraduate Director, to perhaps create a forum in which GTAs can share their teaching

experiences.

With respect to the start of the relationship with my fellow PhD students in the reading group,

I think it would have been better to establish certain individual and group goals. However, as

I have mentioned before, these meeting did not have the original intention of becoming a

supervision session or research forum. In the course of the year the dynamics of the group

and different individual goals, as I will explain later, were established. This experience has

showed me the importance of setting goals between the mentor and the mentee at the

beginning of the relationship. This is a very useful tool to manage the relationship and guide

the development of the mentee. The goals or objectives work as a sort of guide in the

relationship because both the mentor and mentee will work towards their achievement.

3.4. Mentoring in Action

Since mentors are helpers (Shea, 2002), the vital phases of the mentoring process are those in

which the mentor actually helps the mentee. Here I refer to Stages 2 and 3 of Hay’s (1995)

mentoring process and the Envisioning, Implementing, and Attracting perspectives of

Turner’s (2004) mentoring wheel. In what follows I will described how these stages and

perspectives developed in my relationships with my fellow PhD students and GTAs and in

what ways I helped.

In both relationships there was not a formal review of the mentees’ own situation. That is I

did not ask them directly to described their strengths and weakness, or their knowledge and

skills. I did not formally ask about their personal and professional circumstances. All these

aspects, however, were revealed to me during the course of the academic year. During the

meetings I was able to notice their weaknesses and strengths, for example if they have been

11

having problems with managing their data they would bring to the sessions questions about

that. I think that the fact that they knew that I was there to help made them conscious about

the aspects with which they had difficulties. In the meetings I would always make use of my

experience to talk about their problems. I would tell them how I solved s the same or similar

difficulties, what did and did not work for me. They would showed their strengths by saying

things like “I am good at transcribing” or “I don’t have any problem with marking essays”.

But they would show their strengths to me in a more evident ways when I could noticed them

by seeing their work (e.g. a transcription or a marked essay) and I let them know that their

work looked good.

I consider that the mentoring relationship matured when we reach the stage in which the

mentee and I established particular goals, the mentee worked on them and I was able to

provide feedback. For example, My PhD colleague was preparing a report for her supervisor,

she talked me though it and I gave her some comments. For the following session she sent me

the report in which she incorporated my comments and I gave her again feedback. After

revising her report one more time she sent it to her supervisor. Another example of this, is

about a fellow GTA who had some problems with giving written feedback when marking

assignments. Her issue was that she was not sure about the tone of the feedback, that is, she

was not sure whether her comments could be taken by the students as rude. We talked about

the standard conventions of giving feedback and I asked her to mark some essays and then

show them to me. She did and I gave her some comments on her feedback. In both examples,

by shearing my previous experiences of writing a report and giving written feedback I was

able to provide advice and guidance to my fellow PhD colleagues and fellow GTAs

respectively.

Taking into account the Tuner’s (2004) perspectives, I consider that they are also represented

in the cycle of actions described. There was a reflection on a particular issue (Envisioning),

then this issue was discussed and a plan was set up (Implementing), and then the results of the

plan were evaluated and feedback was given (Attracting). In fact, as Turner describes, it all

goes around in a cycle, because, for instance, once the feedback is received there are other

issues that are identified so once again a plan is implemented to tackle the new issues, then

the results from the implementation of the plan are again evaluated and feedback is given

again. As I mentioned before the Tuner model of mentoring cycle is more related to the

dynamics part of the mentoring process as a whole.

3.4.1 What went wrong? and How can it be improved?

12

In general, I think that there was a lack of structural planning in terms of the contents of the

mentoring meetings. Now that I look back I would say that the contents of the mentoring

sessions were set up at the moment of the meetings. I understand that that is part of offering

and giving help: one does not know what would be the requirements, needs, troubles of the

mentees. However, I do believe that there should be some sort of structure in the ‘help’

offering.

I think for example that in the case of being the Prefect of GTAs I could have designed some

sort of booklet for GTAs with information that I consider useful and some of it could be

important; for example, guidelines about marking and giving feedback, what to do in the

revision classes, ways of keeping student marks records, how to create mailing list of classes,

guidance for students to be given in preparation for their exams, etc. I could have address in a

more formal way the need of a standardising marking criteria, particularly between GTA that

teach the same module. The lack of standardization in marking criteria is an recurrent issue

that could cause potential damage in the students’ experience because two students could be

marked in the same module with different criteria depending on the GTA they have. I think I

could have ensure the implementation of peer blind marking. I only did it betweene GTAs

that teach the same module as me. This consists of marking a sample of assignments, then we

interchange them among us and without knowing the mark the other GTA gave to the

assignment we marked them again. Then we compare the marks and discuss them to reach an

agreement on the criteria. This provides a fairer marking for students.

With respect to my fellow PhD student’s mentoring sessions, I consider that if I do it again I

would run sessions on particular topics. Now I have identified issues that new PhD students

that start researching in my field have, for example, how to manage their data, what software

to use for doing video clips and edit data, useful readings, etc. I consider that in this way the

mentoring life cycle would be better structured.

I consider also that in general my mentoring could improve by taking into account, in my

practice, my personality time and the personality type of my the mentees. I am not saying that

I would test all my future mentees with the MBTI test to know what their personality types

are, but instead I could ask them how they would like to work. For example, according to my

personality type I prefer a clear session structure and clearer schedules however my future

mentees may not prefer that and perhaps they will feel pressure if I set deadlines for them. I

prefer to focus on what they have to accomplish however, my future mentees may prefer also

to know or explore other related goals.

13

Finally, another thing that I could improve is the communication between myself and the

mentees, particularly with my fellow GTAs. As I mentioned before, I mostly used email to be

in contact with them. They hardly come to the office hour that I had for them. I would like to

think that perhaps the hour was not convenient for most of them or that they did not have any

issues to discuss. However, I consider that I could have encourage them to come to the office

hour, by email for example. I could have reminded them that I was there to help and invite

them to come.

In the final part of this paper I reflect on the benefits my mentees got from this mentoring

cycle but particularly I will focus on the benefits I gain from being a mentor.

4. The mentoring benefits

I consider that the benefits of mentoring are not only for the mentee but also for the mentor.

In the two mentor experiences that I have just described I was able to notice improvement on

the research skills of my PhD colleagues. They have shown ability to organise their data and

present reports of analysis. They seem more confident doing their research. I must mentioned

that there were times in which they expressed anxiety about not having a define topic for their

PhD. The readings and the discussion we had in the meetings helped them to define their

research topic. In sum, I would say that they have made good progress, they have now a

research topic and they have conducted analysis of their data. With regard to my fellow

GTAs, I could also notice improvement. In this case, they have been able to mark

assignments and implemented the standardised way of giving feedback. In general, I think it

is important to have professional support that can provide you guidance and support so as to

feel more confident.

During these mentoring relationships I have got satisfaction from helping people that are in

the position I was before. When I started my PhD studies there was not anyone senior than

me that I could approach, I believe that I would have greatly benefited from it. My mentoring

experience gave me the opportunity to feel capable of advising people in their research and

their teaching by using my previous experiences and knowledge. I had the opportunity of

showing leadership and it made me feel capable of organising and carrying out projects. This

was the first time, for example, that I lead a complete research group session, it was also the

first time that I could decide in the structure of a research session or meetings. These

experiences made realised of things that work and things that do not work in a session; for

example, I noticed that it was better to discuss articles that are related to the mentees research

14

so in that way they will be more interested and they will be received more benefit from it. I

also had the opportunity of develop my problem-solving, listening and presentation skills.

5. Conclusion

The two roles that I had this year, as GTA Prefect and senior PhD student, allowed me to

experience and act as a mentor for my fellow GTAs and PhD colleagues. The present paper is

an assignment that helped me learn more about mentoring and reflect on my work as a

mentor that I carried out throughout this year. At the beginning of this paper I have presented

the basic theoretical concepts of mentoring. I must mention that before doing this paper I did

not know much about the subject. I only had folk conceptions of this type of relationship. I

have described my experiences and I have attempted to reflect on them by using the

theoretical concepts.

Mentoring should be a structured and solid relationship in which concrete objectives are set,

and support, feedback, and encouragement are given to the mentee. Although the main

component of the definition of mentoring is ‘help’, there are other aspects of the relationship

that I would say are equally vital such as trust and commitment. Both the mentor and mentee

must trust each other and both must be committed to their roles.

Finally, before I had the conception that the in a mentoring relationship the only part that

benefits from such relationship was the mentee, however, I have realised that the mentoring

relationship brings benefits to both parts, the mentor and mentee.

References

Blackwell, James E. (1987). Mentoring and networking among blacks. In A. S. Pruitt ( Ed.),

In pursuit of equality in higher education. Dix Hills, NY: General Hall, pp. 146-162.

Blackwell, James E. (1989). Mentoring: an action strategy for increasing minority faculty.

Academe,75, 8-14.

Clutterbuck, D. (2001) Everyone Needs a Mentor. 2nd edition. London: CIPD.

CPS, The Chartered Society of Psychotherapy (2014). Mentoring: an overview. Information

paper, reference CPD 35, Issuing function: Learning and Development.

Cranwell-Ward, Jane, Patricia Bossons, and Sue Gover, (2004). Mentoring: a Henley review

of best practice. Great Britain: Palgrave Macmillan.

Dunning, Donna (1999). Introduction to Type and Communication. California: Mountain

View.

Eby, Lillian T., Jean E. Rhodes and Tammy D. Allen, (2007). Definition and Evolution of

Mentoring. In Tammy D. Allen, Lillian T. Eby (eds.), The Blackwell handbook of

mentoring : a multiple perspectives approach. Hong Kong: Blackwell, pp. 8-20.

15

Gavrin, Ron (2014). Mentoring Programs - Attract and Retain High-Quality Staff.

Reliability.com. Online document, available at

http://reliabilityweb.com/index.php/articles/Mentoring_Programs_Attract_and_Retain

_High_Quality_Staff/ Accessed 24.04.2014

Hamilton, R. (1993) Mentoring. London. The Industrial Society.

Hay, Julie (1995). Transformational Mentoring: creating developmental alliances for

changing organizational cultures. McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Jacobi, Maryann, (1991). Mentoring and Undergraduate Academic Success: A Literature

Review. Review of Educational Research, 61 (4), 505-532.

Lewis, G. (1996). The Mentoring Manager. Institute of Management Foundation. Pitman

Publishing.

Jowett, V. (1995) Working for a Degree Mentoring Project, Final Project Report Volume 1,

Leeds Metropolitan University

MacKimm, Judy, Carol Jollie, and Mark Hatter (2007). Mentoring: theory and Practice.

Report for the Preparedness to Practice Project, NHSE/Imperial College School of

Medicine.

Merriam, S. (1983). Mentors and protégés: a critical review of the literature. Adult Education

Quarterly, 33, 161-173.

Munro Turner, Mike (2010). Mentoring: an overview. Couch the Couch, Issue 5, 5-8.

Rawlings, Max (2002). What is Mentoring?. On line document, available at

www.hr.salford.ac.uk/development/mentoringonlinepaper.rtf‎ [Accessed 23.04.2014]

Shea, F. Gordon (2002). Mentoring: how to develop successful mentor behaviours. 3rd

Ed.

USA: Crisp Publication.