A More Democratic View of Mentorship, Research Paper Example

Louw and Waghid (2008) argue that mentorship is a necessary step in the education system. The authors argue that classical mentorship has become too much influence by functionalist theory. Education and the capacity of a student or individual to learn in a standardization process cannot be done in a vacuum, that is to say, by a “unidirectional” process, in which identity, culture, and the individual is eclipsed by a more prominent faction: functionalism. The “authoritarian tendencies” (p. 3) of functionalism are founded from the “highly hierarchical mentor-mentee relationship” wherein an elder teaches the progeny. The authors wish to “negate” such a premise in education, mainly education in South Africa.Many political factions had their hands in South Africa, trying to colonize the territory, and by so doing rightly guessed that education (among religion and politics) was the way to go to more thoroughly incorporate peoples into a different governmental body. This new governmental body in South Africa followed a similar path as functionalism in that it was aggressive with its ideas of control, statehood, and repressing the individual for the “greater good” of said European country. Louw and Waghid (2008) argue that “owing to the underlying assumption of an uncritical transmission of knowledge and management skills in a strong hierarchical relationship between mentor and mentee, mentorship conceptualized within the framework of functionalism is inherently conservative and poses a potential threat to the new education system in South Africa.” (p. 3). The authors’ goal is to make a mentorship program inclusive to South African education. In order for this to work however, a shuffling off of former reform in the form of functionalism must be put into place. A new perspective must come in its steed: that of a “humanistic perspective” (Louw and Waghid, 2008, p. 3).A humanistic perspective is key for South African education because it allows for a reproach of previous social injustice in South Africa brought about from Western European settlement and conquest. In order to this to happen, the analysis of “power relations” must come into play with the education reform. South African authorities believe that this new approach will behoove the educational system especially in regards to principals and other learners. The idea is that an enhancement in leadership or mentorship will be beneficial in creating this humanistic perspective in South African education. Thus, the authors bring to the forefront of their argument that a mentorship-training program should be installed and course requirements in mentorship adhering to a certain modality should be put in place for students (i.e.principals). The authors are then assuming that an overall to the South African education system is needed because of past interference from foreign bodies and politics (Western Europe) and that this new mentorship program should focus on the humanistic side in the dynamic between mentor and mentee. Within this program the authors assume that previous education systems have failed (functionalism) because they place too much weight and emphasis on authoritarian views and practices as well as aggressive behavior. With a more humanistic approach Louw and Waghid hope to encourage individuality, caring, and a more cohesive education system. This hope or theory is based on the presumption (somewhat empirical but not altogether so) that individuals who have maintained a course of study in a mentorship program have a higher rate or maintaining a career, working harder, and “experience a greater measure of career satisfaction and are less inclined to changing their work environment” (Louw and Waghid, 2008, p. 3) meaning that mentors who study in South Africa will stay in South Africa to help the next generation of students.

Burley and Pomphrey (2011) navigate defining mentoring and coaching’s purpose as “underpinned by professional cultures and philosophies which are not always explicit but will impact on approaches used in mentoring and coaching relationships.” (p. 30). It is then difficult for a mentor to infiltrate a system or culture alien to their own as the rules, mores, and functions are so culturally ingrained and different. Mentoring is about achieving educational success on an individual level, “The relationship [between mentor and mentee] was intensely personal and mutually respectful but essentially asymmetric” (Louw and Waghid, 2008, p. 4). That is to say that within the individual a system may change. If functionalism is incorporated in a system with alien customs then the educational system adhering to functionalism is meant to falter because of its innate design. Burley and Pomphrey (2011) go on to state that there are two approaches to mentoring and the first is the behaviorist design that “presents fixed definitions and purposes in order to produce improvement  in professional performance either at an individual or an institutional level.” (p. 31). The behaviorist stance and functionalism should be used interchangeably as they deride individual learning in favor institutional control. Burley and Pomphrey (2011) state that the second mentoring approach “underpins the dominant discourse around professional learning…” (p. 31) as it embraces new educational learning techniques that in turn require a change in individual and institutional learning in which “underlying values and power structures can be challenged in order to bring about transformation.” (Burley and Pomphrey, 2011, p. 31). In Louw and Waghid’s case the relationship between mentor and mentee is somewhat fundamentally fragile as “the positive portrayal of mentorship is not consistent with the way it is experienced in real life, that is, as either totally negative or as positive with moments of negativity.” (Louw and Waghid, 2008, p. 5). With South Africa’s past steeped in authoritarian rule, this idea of positive mentorship is a boon. South Africa’s history and previous approaches to education through a functionalist scope stands to reason that continuing in this way would be detrimental to the country’s future in education. This is in large part to the hierarchical structures in place in South Africa that hinder positive growth in education. Since the authors, Louw and Waghid (2008) are trying to conceptualize a South African education system based on humanistic perspectives, the history of the country is paramount in understanding how to achieve this goal, “because this framework prioritises [sic] social justice, views power relations critically, respects worker subjectivity and rejects an uncritical transfer of knowledge in favor of critical dialogue between mentor and mentee.” (p. 5). This statement however must be taken with a large grain of salt because the authors are trying to usurp a system that while not working, has been put in place and people like habit not change. In order to change South Africa’s education system, it is necessary to get a few powerful leaders/mentors that flagship the cause, for without a tribal leader paving the way, others are less likely to follow because of South African’s adherence to community laws.

“Functionalist mentoring or coaching focuses on efficiency and equilibrium, assuming an objective real world, aiming at improved performance and, in order to maintain the status quo, tends to suppress challenge and questioning” (Brockbank, 2006, p. 232) this is to ensure that people’s values and “norms are preserved” (Brockbank 12) in order for a more fluid and quick career progression. There is less diversity in this type of mentoring method as diversity would upset the status quo. The author goes on to state that this type of method reinforces already placed positions of power and “reproduces social inequalities.” (Brockbank, 2006, p. 12). A functionalist mentor ensures the integrity of long held beliefs and mores of a particular culture or educational system. Anything that challenges that culture or status quo, is considered a rogue agent and is treated as detrimental to the mentor/mentee relationship. Brockbank (2006) argues for something called an “engagement approach” wherein deviation or non-conformity is held as the status quo, and divergence from a functionalist perspective is not treated as something counterproductive to the educational system. This type of learning recognizes and fosters the “subjective world of the learner” and further argues that such an approach is the only true humanist approach in education as it accounts for the individual and the individual’s needs above the cultural, societal, or functionalist’s needs. Brockbank (2006) explains the engagement approach “While the mentoring or coaching couple are ‘engaged,’ ie [sic] there is a relationship nevertheless the power horizon remains invisible to the client. The idea of engagement mentoring or coaching includes interventions responding to disaffection and social exclusion: ‘positive action’ or ‘community mentoring’ aimed at supporting young people from oppressed groups, eg [sic] young men from black and Asian communities.” (Brockbank, 2006, p. 13).

Louw and Waghid (2008) continue to argue for a humanistic approach by stating the popularity of their mentorship program on an international level. They state that “numerous organizations” have come to adopt their method of education to great success. They go on to say that such an approach is gaining momentum as people are beginning to recognize the importance of a mentorship program for principals and that “a more experienced colleague is able to facilitate the professional development of newly appointed school principals.” (Louw and Waghid, 2008, p. 6). The authors go to state great success with this mentorship program in the United States, Europe, Singapore, and Australia. The purpose of education in a traditional African society is one of determining the human characteristics of culture. Colonial governments saw that South African society depended on education as its “backbone.” (Mungazi 38). Colonization from Western European countries used education as a way to break South African’s cultural identity in a sense. By breaking their identity through education they were in turn breaking South African’s resistance to their authoritarian view and conquest, and so Europeans, “designed a strategy to discredit it as a justification of colonization.” (Mungazi 38). In order to keep this charade of sorts going European conquerors had to reinforce the idea that Africans were primitive and barbaric and so were not or should not be afforded a progressive education system (something for “civilized” society) but rather, should be treated as conquests in the classroom as well. Education reform in South Africa took the form of improving students “labor skills” (Mungazi, 1997, p. 38) instead of their higher functioning skills as is the course for functionalism. This type of thinking in turn “set the stage for a major conflict to emerge between Africans and the colonial governments.” (Mungazi, 1997, p. 38).  Although Europeans had the right tools to implement a new education system in South Africa this was not done (much to the chagrin of current political leaders) despite such a promotion boosting South Africa’s social, political and economic growth. Instead what happened with colonial government was “a practice that was not only based on race but was also calculated to place Africans at a political, social, and economic disadvantage.” (Mungazi, 1997, p. 39). Such a system was recorded, in 1971, to have such a detrimental affect on South Africans that it seemed to current educators to be creating a “bondage” in South Africans as they were being trained (for labor) instead of being educated. Again, this supports the functionalist way of thinking and the authoritarian view that this was the only way in which to “educate” South Africans.

In Scott’s (2011) research report he addresses similar issues with mentorship at the African school. A functionalist mentor would not have the proper background or theory with which to approach teaching such a diverse classroom. Scott highlights what a good mentor provides in these African schools, “Good mentors provide daily feedback and coaching that help interns transition from the role of classroom teacher to that of school leader. They know how to structure opportunities for interns to solve a range of school problems, first through observing and participating and then by actually leading teams in identifying, implementing and evaluating improvement interventions.” (Scott, 2011, p. 41). Louw and Waghid state that a great mentor’s role “is a complex one encompassing various sub-roles. These sub-roles include, inter alia, the role of counselor, coach, role mode, guide, a wise and patient counselor, and a gifted and experienced role player.” (Louw and Waghid, 2008, p. 7). Scott continues to argue that a good mentor makes a functioning school program, especially in Africa. Scott lists a myriad of benefits of good mentors on students in African schools such as “reduced feelings of isolation, reduced stress and frustration/therapeutic benefits, increased confidence and self esteem, the opportunity to reflect on the new role, an accelerated rate of learning, improved personal skills, including communication/political skills, improved technical expertise/problem analysis and friendship.” (Scott, 2011, p. 43). These elements are then paired with how a mentor grows professionally with their development, and how creating a fostering and caring environment in which diversity is embraced continues to give students the above mentioned feelings thus creating a circle of proper mentoring that is not present in functionalist mentoring program. Brockbank continues to argue against a functionalist approach as in the “telling strategy” doesn’t work then the coach or mentor moves on to the “forcing strategy” wherein “authority and sanctions are employed…uses coercion is likely to generate anger and resistance and the coaching project may lead to disappointment when it fails to achieve its aims.” (Brockbank, 2006, p. 96).  Louw and Waghid (2008) state that mentorship may however be regarded in a negative light, “or that an otherwise healthy mentorship relationship may also have moments of negativity.” (p. 5). The authors do not however state implicitly what this negativity is, nor do they address through any other research.

Mazzeo (1984) discusses the prominence of functionalism in African schools as “accepting the predominance of economics over politics…nationalism and ideology are forces too strong to succumb to a frontal political attack.” (p. 4). Functionalism is approached as a deteriorating concept whose ideology is based and promoted through fear on a regional level in Africa. There is no freedom of movement because politics and economics rule the classes and the common market is the leader in such regions. This lack of regional community or cohesion began after World War II when European countries sought their fortunes in Africa. This created a multitude of varying approaches to all walks of life not excluding education. There was little to no consolidation between regions ruled by the Dutch and the French regardless of previous ties of unity within the African educational system. Africa went from a hunter-gatherer society that migrated with animals to one made to farm through the agricultural needs of European political parties that depended on the country for the large amount of import and export of certain crops. This had a detrimental effect on African ways of life as their entire system of living was changed with the inclusion of agriculture (Muchie, 2013, p. 91-93). European settlements had their work cut out for them with the inclusion of lingering nationalism held by the occupied African tribes. As part of this opposing viewpoints functionalism sprang along with federalism. African pedagogy accepts the “social and emotional adjustment of the student as essential considerations determining appropriate educational practice.” (Murrell, 2002, p. 35). Here, adjustment is key to African educational systems and mentoring programs. Murrell goes on to state that, “…the African cultural system the disposition is to view symbols as the means of communication, and educational activity as the creation of meaning and discovery of truth…These essential cultural practices reflect the cultural values and intellectual heritage of Africans…as they apply to teaching and learning.” (Murrell, 2002, p. 51). In Africa, education is a complete and comprehensive thing. Mungazi (1997) states that African education is such a degree of inherent culturalism and through that identity that functionalism, as a Western European element of education, is difficult to near impossible to incorporate into their education system. Louw and Waghid (2008) state that such difficulty in South Africa may also have something to do with gender and race differences among students, and that an across the platform approach to these mentorships may not be well suited to South Africa. The authors go on to state that the in-place mentorships “are based on, in essence on a functionalist approach to professional development, an approach which advanced the concept of professionalism but which is highly vulnerable to criticism.” (p. 7). Such mentorships function with three key elements in mind: that of society being a “functional entity,” that shares everything except for gender, race, class, culture, there are definite power relations involved in these mentorship groups that are put in place almost inherently thanks to colonization, and the way that existing mentors down play their roles as mentors in order to adhere to a certain set of cultural and or political movements. Louw and Waghid state that although functionalism had its place in South African education, those days, the days of apartheid, are no longer and so the systems that worked during apartheid should be abolished and considered outdated or at least out-moded since the systems that put them in place are no longer functioning or at least not functioning to the degree with which they did in the past.

Mungazi (1997) goes on to state that education is such an “integral part of the entire social, economic and cultural systems…[and] it is related to the individual, the human group and the environment” (p. 38) and as such education is part of the whole and cannot be separated from it other the entire structure collapses. African education could not adopt a functionalist way of doing things as Western European settlements would call for because the identity of the individual is such a large part of Africans cultural heritage.

References

African Regional Organizations (1984). Domenico Mazzeo (ed). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

The African Union Ten Years After: Solving African Problems with Pan-Africanism and The African Renaissance. Muchie, Mammo et al. (2013). Pretoria: The African Institute of South Africa.

Brockbank, Anne. (2006). Facilitating Reflective Learning Through Mentoring & Coaching. London: McGrill Hill.

Burley, Suzanne and Cathy Pomphrey. (2011). Mentoring and Coaching in Schools: Professional Learning Through Collaborative Inquiry. New York City: Routledge.

Louw, T.V. and Y. Waghid. (2008). A Deliberative, Democratic View of Mentorship. South African Journal of Higher Education, 22 (1). 207-221.

Mungazi, Dickson and L. Kay Walker. (1997). Educational Reform and the Transformation of Southern Africa. Westport: Praeger Publishers.

Murrell, Peter et al. (2002). African-Centered Pedagogy: Developing Schools of Achievement for African American Children. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Scott, J.M. (2010). An investigation into the nature of leadership development programmes for South African principals in Gauteng schools. University of Whitwatersrand, 12 (1) 1-111.