Chapter 2: Developing Mentors Across Contexts: The Reciprocity of Mentorship in School/University Partnerships

The preparation of preservice teachers is an endeavor best shared between university supervisors and collaborating teachers. However, studies indicate that this relationship is often fraught with miscommunication, and conflict, regarding the roles and responsibilities of each partner (Hamel & Jaasko-Fisher, 2011; Rikard & Veal, 1998; Stanulis, 1995; Waring, 2013). Despite knowing the power of field experiences and collaborating teachers on preservice teachers’ development (Bullough & Draper, 2004; Valencia, Martin, Place, & Grossman, 2009), little attention has been paid to developing and studying a shared understanding of the roles and responsibilities of each member of the triad: preservice teacher, collaborating teacher, and university supervisor. Collaborating teachers feel they lack voice and power in regards to how preservice teachers are trained, and often rely on their own personal experiences to mentor university students (Rikard & Veal, 1998; Stanulis, 1995). University supervisors lament lack of time to develop triad relationships (Koehler, 1988; Slick, 1998). Preservice teachers report a tension between university supervisors and collaborating teachers and subsequently, the theories learned at the university and the expected practices of the classroom (Derrick, 1971; Feiman-Nemser & Buchanan, 1985; Labaree, 2004; Rikard & Veal, 1996; Shipman, 1967; Vick, 2006). Many studies indicate that it is the perceived responsibility of the university supervisor to set and communicate student teaching expectations, rather than a shared effort with the collaborating teachers (Rikard & Veal, 1998; Slick, 1998; Stanulis, 1995). Further aggravating these issues is the fact that most university supervisors are graduate students or adjunct faculty who themselves are separated from program development (Slick, 1998). Combining all of these factors, the mentoring of preservice teachers is generally narrow in focus and built upon emotional support and advice, rather than on the skills needed to develop as a highly effective educator (Norman & Feiman-Nemser, 2005).