Home
Supermentoring in Practice – Language
Most people would agree that feedback is an important part of teaching today. Lecturers all over the university work on their own feedback strategies in the teacher-student relations, and many of them also try out peer-feedback tools.
Feedback is also important for lecturers developing their teaching practice, of course. In many courses, e.g. the teacher training course for assistant professors, the participants get the opportunity to hold lectures with feedback from the instructors and from their peers.
This type of feedback is definitely valuable, for less seasoned teachers get a lot of good advice on their performance. However, one thing is the safe course environment, another thing is the tough reality of the classrooms and lecture halls with real students and all the unexpected situations that occur, not to mention the time frame that goes far beyond the 10-15 minute mock-lectures that a course would typically offer.
It is therefore preferable to get feedback on authentic teaching. However, this can be a time-consuming and therefore expensive task for educational developers, and here supermentoring enters into the picture: brief, targeted pieces of advice in structured written feedback.
Usually, we distinguish between two forms of feedback:
Thus, the summative feedback only sums up whereas the formative feedback contributes to forming and founding further development.
Supermentoring is based on formative feedback, steps 2 and 3. The feedback given should be precise and constructive. In other words: It is not enough to state that something is good or bad – reasons are needed for the supermentee to see and understand his/her good or less good practice.
Traditionally, we have distinguished between two types of teaching observation: supervision and mentoring.
In addition to this, we have the mixed type supermentoring developed at the CTL in the course of the last 10 years.
A short characteristic of the three types:
Supervision:
Actually, supervision is the same as summative feedback, a here-and-now evaluation of a colleague based on his/her teaching one or more lessons.
Usually, supervision is given when a lecturer’s teaching practice must be scrutinized for one reason or another.
Mentoring:
A development process in which the mentor (a seasoned lecturer) gives his/her mentee (typically, a young and less experienced colleague) advice on the development of his/her teaching a long period of time.
The process implies frequent meetings and a relatively close contact between the parties.
Mentoring does not have to be based on observations of practical teaching sessions. The mentoring process may have the mentee’s attitude to teaching, his/her expectations to, fear of, or joy in having to teach as its point of departure. Gradually, the process then moves into the fields of designing and planning a course. Eventually, the mentee’s practical teaching becomes the key point of the cooperation; the core is formative feedback on the teaching, but also personal, sometimes very personal, issues may be addressed.
Supermentoring:
Evidently, the term supermentoring is a mixture of the terms supervision and mentoring and conceptually, supermentoring comprises elements of both processes.
Supermentoring builds on observations of 1-2 lessons and is conducted by a seasoned lecturer.
The target group for supermentoring is (i) un- or less experienced lecturers who would like to get an assessment of their practice and ideas on how to move on, (ii) experienced lecturers with the same needs, or (iii) lecturers at all levels who have run into problems, e.g. poor evaluations.
Of course, the intervention implies an assessment of the mentee’s teaching here and now, but this is not given in its own right, but in order for the supermentee to have a firm starting point for his/her development.
The supermentor writes a report held in a personal and friendly tone with both strengths and weaknesses stated and with advice on how to move on.
It is up to the supermentee whether he/she wants further contact with the supermentor.
Address the supermentee directly using ‘you’ all the time: Not ‘It would be better if more activities were used’, but ‘You should use more activities’.
Be concise and concrete: Pinpoint problems without being tough and unfriendly and list all positive factors.
Use the so-called sandwich method:
Avoid personal remarks like ‘I think you should…’. The report should convey the professionalism of the supermentor.
Avoid technical terms and language if your supermentee has not been through relevant courses such as the teacher training course for assistant professors and therefore might not be familiar with the pedagogical jargon.
You need not use all the headlines from the ‘Outline of the elements of a supermentoring report’. Rather use words and expressions that the supermentee is familiar with. In the downloadable supermentoring reports, the language was adapted to the communication that took place before the supermentoring.
Below you will find an outline of the elements that may be included in a supermentoring report. You may find further information in the sections ‘Language’ and ‘Teaching Practice’.
Wrap up your impressions based on the sandwhich method. This sets the tenor of the report and takes the edge off the critisism that inevitably will occur in the detailed part of the report.
Teaching through Danish:
Focus on tone of voice, distinct articulation and pace as well as vocabulary, paraphrasing and signposting. Correct language use – and avoiding the opposite – is also considered.
Teaching through English:
In addition to the above, focus is on the pronunciation of individual sounds, stress and intonation.
Beginning and managing the lesson:
Is the lesson started on time? Does the lecturer keep the time?
Are there any short breaks?
Content – structure:
Is there a programme and a set of learning goals for the lesson(s)?
Does the lecturer stick to the programme and does s/he refer to it in the course of the lesson(s)?
General performance:
Does the lecturer radiate disciplinary engagement and competence?
Does the lecturer create a good atmosphere in the room?
Gestures, facial expressions, body language, posture and movement:
Does the lecturer use his/her body language to create a sense of presence and engagement? And to stress what s/he says?
Interaction:
Does the lecturer actively involve the students in the teaching process?
What about the way s/he poses his/her questions?
PowerPoint presentation:
Is the layout appropriate?
Are the slides well-structured?
Materials:
Are all materials, including handouts, accessible to the students well in advance of the lesson?
Is the layout of all materials in place?
Blackboard / white board:
Is the board used in the best possible way?
Is the hand-writing legible?
Is there an appropriate order on the board?
Activities:
Does the lecturer include activities that allow the students to use their new knowledge during class? Do such activities keep their attention high?
Here you can download an authentic, but anonymised example of a supermentoring report. The document is in Word-format so that you can easily copy-paste parts of the text into your own report.
This report is a prototypical supermentoring report. All possible elements have been addressed. The report is a translation of a corresponding Danish text (but not a word-for-word-rendering); however, paragraphs from other reports have been copied into this one to get a complete text based on the elements mentioned in the ‘Outline of the elements of a supermentoring report’.
Usually, a supermentoring report comprises three-four pages in Verdana 12. Only in a few exceptional cases will a report have the same length as this one: First, it is more or less impossible to write that much during 1-2 lessons. Second, an experienced supermentor quickly sees what s/he has to focus on and leaves out other topics. Third, you might have agreed with the supermentee in advance on which elements should be addressed.
In this document, you may therefore choose the headlines that you prefer to use in your own report; and you may combine more items into one if you want to do so.
Many sentences may be copied directly into your own report. A good strategy is to collect a number of standard phrases in a Word or Excel file that can easily and quickly be used while you write the report (during the observation). Another option is to write a new report into an existing one.
Report on the teaching process as a whole. The lecturer wanted an all-round impression of his/her teaching. The report builds on altogether four hours of supermentoring.
Report with focus on interaction between the lecturer and the students. Furthermore, the supermentee wanted as many general comments as possible. The report builds on altogether four hours of supermentoring.
This report focuses on the language proficiency of the supermentee, but also other elements were taken into consideration. The report builds on two hours of supermentoring.
