From Reflection to Mentorship: Coaching Models for Sustained Teacher Growth in Communicative Language Teaching
🪶 Introductory Note to the Reader Every time I have my usual morning and
intellectually stimulating conversations with my partner, Mark Cormier, Head
of Recruitment and Training at the Centro Cultural, I find myself more
engaged in exploring professional development structures that help teachers
move beyond the paradigms they have held onto for too long. As a seasoned professional with over
thirty years of experience, I still believe I have a say in this field and
that I can contribute to ongoing discussions on teacher development. My
motivation to write this paper emerges from my conviction that reflection
must lead to mentorship, an institutionalized form of guidance and
collaboration that truly transforms teaching practices in communicative
language classrooms. |
From Reflection to Mentorship: Coaching Models for Sustained Teacher Growth in Communicative Language Teaching
|
🪶 Abstract This paper explores
the transition from reflective practice to structured mentorship and coaching
in English Language Teaching (ELT). While reflection has long been recognized
as a cornerstone of teacher development (Schön, 1983; Farrell, 2019), it
often remains an isolated or individual endeavor that fails to generate
sustained institutional change. Drawing on the works of Richards and Farrell
(2005), Burns (2010), Freeman (2016), and Timperley (2011), this essay argues
that mentorship operationalizes reflection by embedding it within dialogic,
collaborative, and context-sensitive frameworks. The integration of the
Kirkpatrick Model (1994) into mentoring practices offers a measurable and
structured pathway for evaluating behavioral and institutional transformation.
Ultimately, this paper proposes mentorship and coaching as human-centered
vehicles for professional growth, consistent with the communicative ethos of
ELT. |
Keywords: Reflective Practice, Teacher
Mentorship, Coaching, Professional Development, ELT, Kirkpatrick Model, Communicative
Language Teaching |
|
|
🪶 Resumen Este artículo explora
la transición de la práctica reflexiva individual hacia la mentoría y el
acompañamiento estructurado en la enseñanza del inglés (ELT). Aunque la
reflexión se ha considerado durante décadas la base del desarrollo docente
(Schön, 1983; Farrell, 2019), en muchos casos no logra traducirse en cambios
sostenibles a nivel institucional. Basado en los aportes de Richards y
Farrell (2005), Burns (2010), Freeman (2016) y Timperley (2011), se argumenta
que la mentoría convierte la reflexión en un proceso colaborativo y dialógico
que fomenta el crecimiento profesional. La integración del Modelo de
Kirkpatrick (1994) dentro de los programas de mentoría permite evaluar de
forma estructurada el cambio conductual y los resultados institucionales. En última
instancia, la mentoría se presenta como un vehículo humano y comunicativo que
fortalece el desarrollo profesional en la enseñanza del inglés. |
|
|
|
🪶 Resumo Este artigo investiga
a transição da prática reflexiva para a mentoria e o coaching estruturado no
ensino de inglês (ELT). Embora a reflexão tenha sido reconhecida como base do
desenvolvimento profissional (Schön, 1983; Farrell, 2019), ela frequentemente
permanece um exercício individual, sem impacto coletivo. A partir das
contribuições de Richards e Farrell (2005), Burns (2010), Freeman (2016) e
Timperley (2011), argumenta-se que a mentoria transforma a reflexão em um
processo colaborativo que favorece a aprendizagem docente contínua. A
aplicação do Modelo de Kirkpatrick (1994) fornece um quadro avaliativo para
medir mudanças comportamentais e resultados institucionais. Assim, a mentoria
e o coaching são apresentados como caminhos humanos e comunicativos para o
crescimento profissional sustentável no ELT. |
|
Introduction
Professional development in English Language
Teaching (ELT) has long depended on reflective practice (reflective journaling)
as a foundation for pedagogical and professional growth. However, reflection
alone, though powerful as an individual cognitive and emotional process, often
fails to translate into sustained institutional and personal change. The next
step in teacher learning and training involves transforming individual
reflection into shared mentoring practices that strengthen collective expertise
(hopefully through a CoP - Community of Practice). This transition aligns with
the communicative nature of language education, in which dialogue, scaffolding,
and human interaction are integral to student learning. As Richards and Farrell
(2005) noted, “teachers learn best when they work collaboratively on shared
concerns” (p. 7), things that probably stem out of classroom delivery.
Therefore, mentoring serves as both the operational and human dimension of
reflection, allowing educators to turn insights into guided professional
transformation for the sake of communicative teaching.
The
Limits of Reflection in Isolation
Schön’s (1983) seminal concept of reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action established the
foundation for autonomous professional learning. It is essential that language
teachers engage in reflective cycles to analyze classroom practices, recognize
decision-making patterns, and respond to contextual challenges. Yet, as Farrell
(2019) argues, reflection without social validation or dialogic feedback can
become introspective rather than developmental. The solitary teacher may
recognize personal limitations but lack the structural or emotional support to
overcome them; that is why a teacher coach is necessary. In institutional
settings such as higher order institutions or language schools, this isolation
often leads to stagnation or burnout rather than growth, especially if these
reflective cycles are compulsory and lack a real follow-up structure.
Therefore, while reflection remains indispensable, it must evolve into a
dialogic process where professional learning becomes a shared responsibility,
not a one-person burden.
Mentorship
as the Socialization of Reflection
Teacher mentorship and coaching transform
reflection into a collaborative pedagogical and fruitful endeavor. Richards and
Farrell (2005) describe mentoring as “a developmental relationship in which a
more experienced teacher supports the professional growth of a less experienced
colleague” (p. 52). A relationship like this one described by Richards and Farrell
embodies Vygotsky’s (1978) sociocultural principle that learning occurs through
interaction within the teacher’s zone of proximal development. Within the ELT
context, mentorship allows novice teachers to translate “bookish” theory into
practice through guided in-class experimentation with adjustments in lesson
plan and practice activities, observation protocols to self-observe one’s class
or a peer’s, and feedback sessions to delve into the class continuum. Burns
(2010) reinforces this idea through her work on collaborative action research,
emphasizing that shared inquiry enhances not only individual competence but
also collective institutional learning.
Mentorship thus bridges Schön’s reflective model
with Kirkpatrick’s (1994) evaluation framework by providing mechanisms for
observable behavioral change (Level 3) and institutional results (Level 4).
When reflective practices are integrated into structured mentoring systems,
teacher development transcends the individual level and becomes an embedded
component of institutional culture.
Coaching
as a Vehicle for Sustained Professional Learning
While teacher mentorship often implies hierarchical
relationships, coaching, on the other hand, emphasizes reciprocity and
co-construction of pedagogical and teaching knowledge of one’s subject matter.
Timperley (2011) conceptualizes coaching as a process through which teachers
collaboratively analyze practice, engage with evidence, and make informed
instructional adjustments. This model proposed by Timperley aligns with
Freeman’s (2016) notion of teacher
expertise as socially situated cognition, where knowledge evolves through
guided participation and interaction. That is, teacher coaching encourages
teachers to engage in “reflective dialogue” (Farrell, 2022, p. 4) that fosters
metacognitive awareness and practical experimentation. This type of coaching
language teachers can lead to a better understanding of sound pedagogical and
communication-oriented practices to move away from traditional teaching
practices in the classroom.
In communicative language teaching, coaching
becomes particularly relevant because it mirrors the principles of interaction,
negotiation of meaning, and feedback that underpin the approach itself. A
coaching framework allows teachers to experience the same communicative
dynamics they aim to create for their learners, thereby reinforcing pedagogical
consistency between teaching and professional learning.
Institutionalizing
Mentorship for Sustainable Growth
To ensure professional development continuity, teacher
reflection and mentorship must be institutionalized within structured
professional learning systems; it cannot be an isolated attempt to move language
instructors out of their zone of current development, as Vygotsky would say. It
is for this reason that Burns (2010) and Richards and Farrell (2005) advocate
for the integration of mentoring programs into teacher development policies,
ensuring that experienced practitioners are trained as mentors and recognized
as key contributors to organizational learning. Freeman (2016) further
emphasizes the need for reflective accountability, systems that encourage
ongoing inquiry rather than top-down evaluation. Any of these proposals aims at
equipping language teachers with reflective tools that can help them adjust or
change behavior that is not helping boost student learning.
Through various academic posts on the blob, I
have been insisting that the Kirkpatrick Model provides a practical framework
for assessing the impact of mentorship initiatives. At Level 1 (Reaction), institutions can gather feedback on
mentor–mentee relationships and serves as a needs analysis; at Level 2 (Learning), the evaluation of
the acquisition of pedagogical knowledge can be assessed; at Level 3 (Behavior), language companies,
higher education institutions, or language schools can observe the application
of new practices within the classrooms; and at Level 4 (Results), improvements in student engagement and
achievement can be assessed. This integration ensures that mentorship programs
not only foster teacher reflection on classroom delivery but also demonstrate
measurable outcomes that justify their institutional sustainability to continue
helping instructors move out of their zone of current development.
Challenges
and Ethical Considerations
Despite its benefits, teacher mentoring requires
careful implementation to avoid reinforcing hierarchies (academic heads, coordinators,
supervisors and supervisees) or fostering dependency (If not being told, “I won’t
do it.). Hargreaves (1998) cautions that emotional dynamics within professional
relationships can lead to tension if not managed with empathy and respect. For
this reason, effective mentorship demands emotional intelligence (Goleman,
1995) and inner-cultural awareness, particularly in ELT environments where the
vast majority of the members of the cohort of teachers have the same country of
origin. Additionally, institutions must balance mentorship with autonomy,
ensuring that reflective dialogue empowers teachers rather than prescribing
conformity.
Conclusion
The evolution from reflection to mentorship
represents the maturation of professional development in ELT. By incorporating
reflective practices such as structured reflective journaling within structured
coaching systems, institutions can ensure that teacher learning becomes
continuous, dialogic, and contextually grounded. Mentorship not only extends
Schön’s reflective paradigm but also fulfills the upper levels of Kirkpatrick’s
model by fostering observable behavioral change and institutional
transformation. Ultimately, mentorship operationalizes the communicative ethos
of ELT within the professional domain, where meaning, growth, and human
connection converge to sustain excellence in teaching.
References
Burns, A.
(2010). Doing action research in English
language teaching: A guide for practitioners. Routledge.
Farrell,
T. S. C. (2019). Reflective practice in
ELT: What, why, and how? Equinox Publishing.
Farrell,
T. S. C. (2022). Reflective practice for
language teachers: New research, approaches, and insights. Bloomsbury
Academic.
Freeman,
D. (2016). Educating second language
teachers. Oxford University Press.
Goleman,
D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it
can matter more than IQ. Bantam.
Hargreaves,
A. (1998). The emotional practice of
teaching. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 14(8), 835–854. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(98)00025-0
Kirkpatrick,
D. L. (1994). Evaluating training
programs: The four levels. Berrett-Koehler.
Richards,
J. C., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2005). Professional
development for language teachers: Strategies for teacher learning.
Cambridge University Press.
Schön, D.
A. (1983). The reflective practitioner:
How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Timperley,
H. (2011). Realizing the power of
professional learning. Open University Press.
Handout: Comprehension & Reflection Worksheet
2nd Handout: Reflection & Comprehension Worksheet
Reflection & Comprehension Worksheet by Jonathan Acuña
From Reflection to Mentorship Coaching Models for Sustained Teacher Growth in Communicative Language Teaching by Jonathan Acuña
Post a Comment