Citation
A Qualitative Study of First-Year High School Band Directors and Their Mentors

Material Information

Title:
A Qualitative Study of First-Year High School Band Directors and Their Mentors
Creator:
JACOBS, JAY N.
Copyright Date:
2008

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
High school students ( jstor )
High schools ( jstor )
Marching bands ( jstor )
Mentoring ( jstor )
Mentors ( jstor )
Music education ( jstor )
Music teachers ( jstor )
Musical motives ( jstor )
Schools ( jstor )
Teachers ( jstor )
City of Gainesville ( local )

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright Jay N. Jacobs. Permission granted to University of Florida to digitize and display this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Embargo Date:
7/12/2007
Resource Identifier:
191899738 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:

jacobs_j ( .pdf )

jacobs_j_Page_049.txt

jacobs_j_Page_023.txt

jacobs_j_Page_098.txt

jacobs_j_Page_106.txt

jacobs_j_Page_051.txt

jacobs_j_Page_021.txt

jacobs_j_Page_018.txt

jacobs_j_Page_096.txt

jacobs_j_Page_107.txt

jacobs_j_Page_076.txt

jacobs_j_Page_059.txt

jacobs_j_Page_004.txt

jacobs_j_Page_061.txt

jacobs_j_Page_116.txt

jacobs_j_Page_110.txt

jacobs_j_Page_017.txt

jacobs_j_Page_109.txt

jacobs_j_Page_010.txt

jacobs_j_Page_024.txt

jacobs_j_Page_037.txt

jacobs_j_Page_026.txt

jacobs_j_Page_067.txt

jacobs_j_Page_101.txt

jacobs_j_Page_035.txt

jacobs_j_Page_015.txt

jacobs_j_Page_091.txt

jacobs_j_Page_014.txt

jacobs_j_Page_078.txt

jacobs_j_Page_034.txt

jacobs_j_Page_045.txt

jacobs_j_Page_103.txt

jacobs_j_Page_090.txt

jacobs_j_Page_080.txt

jacobs_j_Page_089.txt

jacobs_j_Page_074.txt

jacobs_j_Page_062.txt

jacobs_j_Page_030.txt

jacobs_j_Page_084.txt

jacobs_j_Page_006.txt

jacobs_j_Page_115.txt

jacobs_j_Page_057.txt

jacobs_j_Page_069.txt

jacobs_j_Page_053.txt

jacobs_j_Page_081.txt

jacobs_j_Page_019.txt

jacobs_j_Page_095.txt

jacobs_j_Page_114.txt

jacobs_j_Page_072.txt

jacobs_j_Page_058.txt

jacobs_j_Page_060.txt

jacobs_j_Page_071.txt

jacobs_j_Page_029.txt

jacobs_j_Page_087.txt

jacobs_j_Page_054.txt

jacobs_j_Page_111.txt

jacobs_j_Page_042.txt

jacobs_j_Page_052.txt

jacobs_j_Page_086.txt

jacobs_j_Page_073.txt

jacobs_j_Page_036.txt

jacobs_j_Page_038.txt

jacobs_j_Page_001.txt

jacobs_j_Page_028.txt

jacobs_j_Page_027.txt

jacobs_j_Page_044.txt

jacobs_j_Page_099.txt

jacobs_j_Page_117.txt

jacobs_j_Page_118.txt

jacobs_j_Page_005.txt

jacobs_j_Page_119.txt

jacobs_j_Page_112.txt

jacobs_j_Page_097.txt

jacobs_j_Page_105.txt

jacobs_j_Page_065.txt

jacobs_j_Page_108.txt

jacobs_j_Page_050.txt

jacobs_j_Page_113.txt

jacobs_j_Page_022.txt

jacobs_j_Page_002.txt

jacobs_j_Page_063.txt

jacobs_j_Page_016.txt

jacobs_j_Page_092.txt

jacobs_j_Page_068.txt

jacobs_j_Page_100.txt

jacobs_j_Page_009.txt

jacobs_j_Page_064.txt

jacobs_j_Page_032.txt

jacobs_j_Page_083.txt

jacobs_j_Page_075.txt

jacobs_j_pdf.txt

jacobs_j_Page_102.txt

jacobs_j_Page_077.txt

jacobs_j_Page_094.txt

jacobs_j_Page_055.txt

jacobs_j_Page_088.txt

jacobs_j_Page_041.txt

jacobs_j_Page_025.txt

jacobs_j_Page_043.txt

jacobs_j_Page_011.txt

jacobs_j_Page_079.txt

jacobs_j_Page_066.txt

jacobs_j_Page_104.txt

jacobs_j_Page_093.txt

jacobs_j_Page_033.txt

jacobs_j_Page_085.txt

jacobs_j_Page_007.txt

jacobs_j_Page_008.txt

jacobs_j_Page_003.txt

jacobs_j_Page_031.txt

jacobs_j_Page_047.txt

jacobs_j_Page_048.txt

jacobs_j_Page_040.txt

jacobs_j_Page_046.txt

jacobs_j_Page_013.txt

jacobs_j_Page_012.txt

jacobs_j_Page_070.txt

jacobs_j_Page_020.txt

jacobs_j_Page_056.txt

jacobs_j_Page_082.txt

jacobs_j_Page_039.txt


Full Text








A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF FIRST-YEAR HIGH SCHOOL
BAND DIRECTORS AND THEIR MENTORS




















By

JAY N. JACOB S


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2007




























O 2007 Jay N. Jacobs



































To my parents, Herbert and Rosemarie Jacobs.
Thank you for all of your love, support and encouragement.









ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the many people who made this research

and the completion of my doctoral degree possible. First, I would like to thank each of my

supervisory committee members. Dr. Timothy Brophy, chair of my committee, patiently taught

me the intricacies of music education research and guided me through the dissertation process.

Dr. David Waybright, on numerous occasions, provided for my growth as a musician and as a

person. He generously shared his musical knowledge and life experiences. I could never have

imagined all of the opportunities and experiences he has provided for me during my years in

Gainesville. Dr. Russell Robinson offered invaluable teaching opportunities while at UF, and he

was a role model for how to inspire future music educators. Dr. Behar-Horenstein guided me

with immeasurable time, effort, and patience through the qualitative research and dissertation

process. She demonstrated passion in every aspect of her teaching in the College of Education.

I would also like to thank Matt Sexton for being so generous with the podium in front of

his ensembles and showing his trust in me. The experiences in front of his groups shaped my

thinking and provided much of the confidence I have today. I am very thankful for the

conducting graduate students I have met and worked with along the way. Without their help,

encouragement and laughter, the graduate experience would have lost much of its value.

I thank all of the high school band directors who participated in this study. These

individuals were gracious enough to take time out of their extremely busy schedules to call,

email, and meet with me over the course of a semester. Their experiences and the willingness to

share them are the heart of this study. These directors are valuable assets to the music education

profession.

Thanks go to my good friends Chris Heffner and Danny Galyen for being available to

answer my numerous questions and offering their opinions on nearly all aspects of my research.










Their friendship and advice kept me moving in the right direction. I must also thank Kelley

Galyen for transcribing the hours of interviews collected for my study.

My doctorate would not have been possible without the reinforcement of my family. I

would like to thank my parents for their unwavering support and financial assistance during my

graduate studies. Thanks go to my grandmother, Elizabeth Taylor, who has been a symbol of

strength, love, and dedication to all her grandchildren. I appreciate her encouragement through

each level of my education. Finally, I thank all my aunts and cousins for their love and support,

even when one of their own became a Gator.












TABLE OF CONTENTS


page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............. ...............4.....


LIST OF FIGURES .............. ...............9.....


AB S TRAC T ............._. .......... ..............._ 10...


CHAPTER


1 INTRODUCTION ................. ...............12.......... ......


Purpose of Study ................. ...............14................
Research Questions............... ............... 1
Definition of Terms .............. .................... 15

Significance of the Study ................. ...............15................
Delimitations ................. ................. 16............


2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................. ...............18................


Philosophical Rationales............... ...............1
Theoretical Rationales .............. ...............19....

M entering .............. .. ...............20...
History and Significance .............. ...............20....

Program Structure ................. ...............22.................
New Teacher Retention .............. ...............25...

Teacher Effectiveness and Mentoring .............. ...............27....
Mentoring for Music Teachers ............... ...............28....
Context of the High School Band Director ................. ...............32........... ..
Summary ................. ...............36.................


3 METHODOLOGY .............. ...............38....


Introducti on ............... ... ...............38.......... ......
Constructivist Research .............. ...............38....
Setting and Participants .............. ...............40....
Selection Criteria ................. ...............40.................

Purposive Sampling .................. ........... .. ...............40......
Negotiating Access and Selection Procedures .............. ...............41....
Data Collection .............. ...............42....

Data Analysis............... ...............43
Presentation of Results .............. ...............46....
Researcher Bias .............. ...............46....
Trustworthiness................ ...........4















4 RE SULT S .............. ...............49....


Introducti on ................. ...............49.................

The Mentees............... ...............50

Mari a ................ ...............50.................

Corey .............. ...............50....

Em ily .............. ...............5 1....
E ric .............. ...............5 1....

M ike ............... .. ..... ...... ... ...............51.......

Through the Eyes of the Mentees ................ ...............52...............
The Extra Hours .............. ...............53....

Self-confidence ................. ...............55.................

Mentor Interaction ................. ...............60.................

Mentoring Program Structure ................. ...............67........... ....
Need for Observation .............. ...............69....

The Mentors ................. ...............71.................

Barry ................. ...............71.......... .....
Tom ............... ...............71..

Jam es .............. ...............72....

K eith .............. ...............72....

K elly .............. ..... ........ ............7
Through the Eyes of the Mentors ................. ...............73............

Perceptions of Mentees............... ...............7
Mentee Interaction............... ..............7

Program Structure ................. ...............80.................
Need for Observation ................. ... ...............82.

Good Intentions-Questionable Results ................ ...............83........... ....

Summary of Results............... ...............8
The Mentees .............. ...............85....

The Mentors........................ ............8

The Mentors and The Mentees ................ ...............87........... ...


5 DI SCUS SSION ................. ...............8.. 9......... ....


Introducti on ................. ...............89.................

Data Collection .............. ...............90....

Findings ................ ...............9 1...

Implications for Theory .............. ...............96....
Issues............... ........ .............9

Purpose of the Programs ................. ...............97................
Pairing Procedures............... ...............9
Ob servation ................. ...............99................

Administrative Awareness............... ...............9

Implications for Music Education .............. ...............100....
Conclusions............... ..............10












APPENDIX



A LETTER OF CONSENT ................. ...............104...............


B DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE............... .............10


C INTERVIEW PROTOCOL ................ ...............106................


M entee Interview 1 .............. ...............106....
M entee Interview 2 ................. ...............107...............
M entor Interview ................. ...............108......... ......


D SAMPLE TEXT CODING REPORT .............. ...............109....


E SAMPLE NODE SUMMARY REPORT ................. ...............110........... ...


F SAMPLE OF MENTEE TREE NODES .....__.....___ ..........._ ..........11


G SAMPLE OF MENTOR TREE NODES ............ .....__ ...............112


LIST OF REFERENCES ............ ..... ._ ...............113...


BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ............ ..... .__ ...............118...










LIST OF FIGURES

Figure page

4-1 Interrelationships of Themes and Categories ................. ...............88...............

5-1 Common and Exclusive Themes. ............. ...............103....









Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF FIRST-YEAR HIGH SCHOOL
BAND DIRECTORS AND THEIR MENTORS


By

Jay N. Jacobs

May 2007

Chair: Timothy S. Brophy
Cochair: David A. Waybright
Major: Music Education

Mentoring first-year music teachers is an increasingly common practice in the United

States. A part of the formal professional induction process, mentoring programs pair a beginning

teacher with an experienced colleague who serves to guide and support the new teacher.

Mentoring has been shown to have positive effects on retention, thereby increasing faculty

stability within classrooms and schools. These and other theoretical rationales exist, but the

current research base provides little insight into how mentoring affects band directors. In

addition, little research has been conducted into the effects of mentoring specifically on first-year

high school band directors.

To help first-year high school band directors meet the unique challenges of the j ob, the

Florida Bandmasters Association and certain school districts in Florida utilize mentoring

programs. The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of first-year high school

band directors and their mentors regarding their mentor-mentee relationships. The following

research questions were designed to guide the implementations of the study:










1. What are the situational contexts of the mentor/mentee pairs?

2. What are the mentees and mentors' perceptions of their respective roles?

3. How do mentees' perceptions of their relationships with mentors change during the
semester?

4. What mentee or mentor-perceived changes occur in the instructional techniques of the
mentee as a result of the mentoring relationships?

5. What are the mentees and mentors' perceptions of the effectiveness of their relationships?

Five first-year high school band directors and their mentors were interviewed over a six-

month period concerning their mentor-mentee relationships. Data from the mentee interviews

and mentor interviews were analyzed separately using constructivist content analysis, and results

of the constructivist analysis were presented as a multiple-case study narrative. The narrative

was grounded in the experiences of the participants, and is presented as two separate stories: one

of the mentees and one of the mentors.

Three common themes emerged from the analysis: mentor-mentee interaction, program

structure, and the need for observation. The results provide insight into the challenges, benefits,

and areas for improvement in these programs. Issues raised by the study and implications for

music education are discussed.









CHAPTER 1
INTTRODUCTION

For someone attempting an activity for the first time, the presence of a mentor can be

comforting and helpful. Historically, mentoring has been a way to assist people in transition to a

new job or profession (Fletcher, 2000). Mentoring can increase the comfort, confidence, and

production of new employees (Johnson, 2002). Businesses have used mentoring in the form of

apprenticeships to their advantage for centuries (Johnson, 2002). Education is no exception, but

an informal or "spontaneous" (Johnson, 2002) version of mentoring has been the norm until

recently. Informal mentoring often occurs naturally, but formal and mandated teacher mentoring

programs aim to achieve higher levels of success in multiple areas. Different specialties of

education, such as music education, present unique settings and challenges for new teachers,

which may increase the importance of mentoring and its structure (Haack, 2003). New high

school band directors may provide the best example of specific needs.

Informally, mentoring has helped new educators enter the teaching profession for decades.

The student teaching process is a form of apprenticeship. University supervisors, principals, and

master teachers, among others, have mentored new teachers. Informal mentoring (new teachers

seeking help or experienced teachers offering unsolicited help) dominated education until the last

15 to 20 years. "During the past 15 years, the significance of mentoring programs as part of the

profession of teaching has grown exponentially" (Ganser, 2005, p. 14). This is a positive step for

education. "Support during the new teachers' first year or two may be just as important to their

effectiveness as their pre-service training, their state certification, and their subj ect matter skills"

(Strong, 2006). Support systems for new educators are critical to building effective teaching

practices and maintaining enthusiasm that these new teachers bring into their classrooms.









Mentoring, a component of the formal induction process, has received substantial attention

as an effective way to provide new teacher support. It has been connected to increased teacher

retention (Ingersol & Smith, 2004). This increased retention could be linked to several benefits

of having a mentor, as listed by Podsen and Denmark (2000): a) speeding up the learning of a

new j ob or skill and reducing the stress of transition; b) improving instructional effectiveness;

and c) helping socialize new teachers into the profession (p. 31). Daresh (2003) added three

additional possible benefits of mentoring: improved communication skills, better opportunities to

put theory into practice, and reduced isolation. School districts in Florida and other states are

providing mentors for new teachers.

Despite the observation that many states include mentoring in educational policy (Conway,

2003b), significant problems still exist. Mentoring programs vary widely in their components

and structure (Conway, 2003a). This variance could be one reason why so many teachers leave

the profession within their first five years. The rate of attrition remains between 40 and 50

percent (Boreen, Johnson, Niday, & Potts, 2000; Ingersoll, 2003; Ingersoll & Smith, 2003;

Madsen & Hancock, 2002). Among music educators, the numbers are equally troublesome

(Lindeman, 2004). What should be the components of a mentoring program? Should all

mentors receive training? Should mentors be compensated? How long should the program last?

How much control should a district have over the components? Many of these questions may be

answered through continuing research.

One additional important question is: Does the structure of one mentoring program meet

the needs of teachers in all subject areas? From the perspective of music educators, one

mentoring program does not always meet teachers' needs. Although instrumental music

educators share many of the same classroom challenges as teachers in other subj ect areas, they









are faced with a multitude of additional duties and responsibilities including, but not limited to,

much larger class sizes, the management of large budgets, and public performances. The

enormity of these responsibilities can easily overwhelm new band or orchestra directors, and

result in the loss of many talented educators from the profession.

First-year band directors at the high school level can be especially susceptible to this type

of situation. Teachers in these positions find themselves in a very different context from general

classroom teachers. Time and class size are often the two major differences. Band directors

have the same regular school day instructional and planning hours as all other faculty members.

However, the hours required outside of the school day can be numerous. Marching band is often

the most time consuming, especially during the summer and fall. Other ensembles and activities

(concerts, festivals, competitions) make frequent demands on evenings and weekends. Class or

ensemble size is another primary contextual difference. Concert bands often number 30 to 100

students (Cooper, 2004), and marching bands can be significantly larger. These numbers can be

daunting, even to the most experienced teacher.

Music education students become familiar with and prepared for these situations through

methods classes and student teaching, but nothing can fully prepare them for the responsibilities

of student learning and the successful performance of their ensembles. Considering the j ob

description of the high school band director and all its implications, effective mentoring

programs could make a significant impact on the success of new high school band directors. The

question is: Are today's mentoring programs providing sufficient support for these new teachers?

Purpose of Study

The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of first-year high school band

directors and their mentors regarding their mentor-mentee relationships.










Research Questions

1. What are the situational contexts of the mentor/mentee pairs?

2. What are the mentees and mentors' perceptions of their respective roles?

3. How do mentees' perceptions of their relationships with mentors change during the
semester?

4. What mentee or mentor-perceived changes occur in the instructional techniques of the
mentee as a result of the mentoring relationships?

5. What are the mentees and mentors' perceptions of the effectiveness of their relationships?

Definition of Terms

The following definitions are provided to clarify terms used within the study.

The FBA is the Florida Band Masters Association.

A General Classroom Teacher is an educator who provides instruction in a traditional
classroom setting.

Induction is an organized professional development system designed by a school or school
district to train and support new teachers.

A New Band Director is a music educator working in his or her first year of instruction with one
or more instrumental music ensembles as part of the teaching assignment.

A New Teacher is an educator working in his or her first year of classroom instruction.

A Mentee is a new teacher who has been assigned a mentor.

A Mentor is an experienced teacher who is paired with a new teacher and provides guidance and
support.

Mentoring is a component of the induction process that pairs one or more experienced teachers
with a new teacher.

Support consists of actions that assist new teachers in developing professionally.

Significance of the Study

The success of new high school band directors is critical to the longevity and future of

school band programs. Retaining talented music educators is a concern of the entire music

education profession. Mentoring offers one solution to these concerns. Various forms of










mentoring are common in most school districts, and research focusing on mentoring and the

attrition of new teachers is abundant. Articles on mentoring and studies of new music teachers

and their mentors are becoming more frequent in the music education literature (Conway, 2003a;

Conway & Zerman, 2003; Conway, Krueger, Robinson, Haack, & Smith, 2002; DeLorenzo,

1992; Krueger, 1999, 2001; Montague, 2000; Smith, 1994). However, only one of these studies

addressed a specific area of music education. The research of Conway and Zerman (2003)

focused on one middle school band director.

The role of mentoring within the unique context of the new high school band director was

of interest to this study. The illumination of mentoring programs through the context-specific

perceptions of new high school band directors and their mentors should be of particular interest

to music teacher educators, mentor teachers, preservice teachers, administrators, and professional

music education organizations. This study expands the literature on mentoring and music

education. The findings from this study may contribute to the development of a standardized

and comprehensive model for mentoring.

Delimitations

The following variables were not controlled in this study:

1. Mentee undergraduate teaching preparation
2. Mentor training
3. Mentor experience (teaching)
4. Mentor experience (mentoring)
5. Learning styles
6. Personality types
7. Prior relationships between mentoring pairs

Findings from a study of this type may not be generalized to all new high school band

director populations. The researcher was able to access only limited number of participants

matching the selection criteria. Moreover, selected study participants represented only a small

sample of mentoring programs statewide. Undergraduate teacher preparation programs










experienced by new teachers may have affected confidence, ability, attitude, and other individual

attributes. These attributes differed in each first-year teacher and may have affected interactions

with the mentor. These attributes could not be controlled or accounted for in this study.

Learning styles and personality types can also affect perceptions of mentoring relationships

(Daresh, 2003). This study did not attempt to account for these variables. The interview

responses were limited by the participants' memory recall. Significant events or information

from the semester may not have been recalled at the time of interviews. Participant responses

were also temporal. If this study had taken place at another time, or with different persons in

different contexts, responses may have been different. Finally, the duration of the study was

limited to only one semester and did not include summer activities, which can be significant to

teachers in these positions.









CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of first-year high school band

directors and their mentors regarding their mentor-mentee relationships. This chapter will

present an overview of the literature relevant to this study. The chapter is organized into eight

sections: (a) philosophical rationales; (b) theoretical rationales; (c) mentoring; (d) new teacher

retention; (e) teacher effectiveness and mentoring; (f) mentoring for music teachers; and

(g) context of the high school band director. The eighth section is a summary statement of what

this literature means and how it relates to this study.

Philosophical Rationales

As educators, "our overall goal is promoting the learning and development of all persons to

their fullest potential" (Reiman & Thies-Sprinthall, 1998, p. 2). Teachers seek to achieve this

goal with their students. Professional development in education is the vehicle for achieving this

goal with teachers. Teachers who are learning are building a library of teaching methods,

classroom management techniques, ways to interact with students, parents and colleagues, and

assessment tools. Mentoring, although primarily focused on the beginning years of teaching, is a

type of professional development, and it is important because it can provide a critical structure to

such learning for beginning teachers.

John Dewey advocated "careful, guided experiences" as a part of what he called "active

learning" in education (Reiman & Thies-Sprinthall, 1998, p. 67). When first-year teachers are

mentored, their first-year experience becomes an example of Dewey's active learning. The first-

year high school band directors in this study are experiencing some level of active learning as

they move from one stage of development (student teaching) into another (teaching in a

classroom of their own). As Wanzare (2007) stated, "Beginning teachers often have a hard time









determining their success, especially during their first year of teaching" (p. 343). Mentoring, as

Dewey would frame it, provides a balance of experiential learning with analysis and reflection

on the experiences. This reflection can help the beginning teachers determine their success.

Without mentoring, the active learning of first-year teachers is largely left to chance.

Mentoring has a place within the philosophy of music educations. Elliott (1995) linked

mentoring to the future of music education: "The future depends on making music education

more musical, more artistic, and more creative .. by continuing to improve the musicianship of

.. in-service teachers" (p. 305). Elliott also presents four tasks required to secure the place of

music education in the future. Two of these tasks fit within the scope of mentoring:

1. To develop and refine the critical thinking abilities of pre-service and in-service music
teachers with regard to the fundamental concepts of our professional practice.

2. To develop and renew the musicianship and educatorship of pre-service and in-service music
teachers through exemplary models of music education in action.

Inducting new teachers into the profession should be a concern for all current music

educators. When new teachers participate in a formal induction process that includes mentoring

as a component, "all students in all schools can achieve the profound values of music education"

(Elliott, 1995, p. 310).

Theoretical Rationales

Argyris (1976) stated, "A theory is not necessarily accepted, good, or true; it is only a set

of interconnected propositions that have the same referent. Theories are vehicles for

explanation, prediction, or control" (p. 4). Theory regarding mentoring can be viewed as one of

both prediction and explanation. Mentoring is grounded in the theoretical framework of

espoused theory (predictive) and theory in action (explanatory). Portner (2002) presented an

espoused theory for general education: "Mentoring is a powerful and effective way to help new

teachers learn to teach" (p. 3). The espoused theory specific to this study is: If a new music










educator participates in a mentoring program, he will be a better teacher and feel good about the

profession. Theory in action seeks to explain better teaching and attitude in a reciprocal manner.

This study attempted to determine if this reciprocal relationship existed, and if so, to what

degree.

This theoretical rationale predicts that the first-year high school band directors will have

positive attitudes about their new professions because they have a mentor. They will be

achieving success with their program and this success will be due, at least in some part, to

interaction with their mentors.

As Nicholls (2002) stated, "The mentor should develop a relationship built on constructive

criticism, support and a relationship that allows for development" (p. 74). Therefore,

theoretically, mentees can benefit from their mentors in developing their professional skills

(methods in the music classroom), plus learning organizational, managerial, and communication

skills. Mentees can also benefit from using their mentors as role models. The mentors and

mentees should report their relationships to include (a) critical conversations to improve the

mentee's teaching; (b) the mentor being available and willing to provide advice and assistance;

and (c) a mentor approach that allows the mentee to ultimately make his own right or wrong

deci sions.

Mentoring

History and Significance

The concept of mentoring has a long history. The process of mentoring can be traced back

to the eighteenth century B.C., when the laws of Hammurabi of Babylon required artisans to

teach their craft to younger students (Boreen et al., 2002). The theory of mentoring is given a

more specific definition in Homer's The Odyssey. The relationship of the character Mentor with

his protege Telemachus is a model of what mentoring should be in general terms: a role model,









teacher, counselor, adviser, challenger, and encourager. Additionally, the epic poem suggests

that mentoring is an intentional, nurturing, insightful, supportive, and protective process

(Fletcher, 2000; Johnson, 2002; Nicolls, 2002; Smith, 2005). Despite centuries of mentoring in

one form or another, a clear consensus on the definition or components of mentoring has not

been reached in any profession.

Successful corporations sometimes include mentoring, coaching, team building, and

empowering as standard practices. However, investing time and money in the professional

development of teachers, which includes these practices, has not caught on in the same way that

it has in business (Fibkins, 2002). Conway (2003a) researched beginning music teachers by

conducting interviews and observing 13 individuals participating in a district-sponsored

mentoring program. One finding was that mentoring programs are mandated in a majority of

states, but a lack of consistency arises in the types of mentor programs, their effectiveness and

the level of commitment from the schools, districts, and states. High quality implementation

requires significant effort and cooperation from all stakeholders. Fibkins (2002) stated,

The maj or goal of a mentoring program should be to help every teacher be highly skilled,
self-aware, inclusive, energetic and creative, and to carry a zest for teaching into the
classroom every day. These are big goals and not easy to achieve. (p. 32)

How to achieve these goals is the maj or question facing educators, administrators, and

politicians.

Ganser (2005) stated, "During the past 15 years, the significance of mentoring programs

as part of the profession of teaching has grown exponentially" (p. 14). In that time, research and

writing has focused on the role of mentoring in the support of new teachers (Conway, 2003a;

Fibkins, 2002; Haack, 2006a; Haack & Smith, 2000; Krueger, 1999; Montague, 2000). Kimpton

(2003) stated, "Bold state and national leadership is required to fully focus our attention on

mentoring and induction" (p. x).









State boards of education have reacted in a myriad of ways. Some merely acknowledge

the possible benefits of mentoring and encourage their schools to incorporate informal

mentoring. Others have linked mentoring to administrative codes and state statutes as a

requirement for teaching licenses. During the 1996-1997 school year, only seven states had

state-mandated induction policies (Ganser, 2005). Conway et al., (2002) examined and

compared mentoring programs in Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota and Washington,

and they provided a national overview of beginning teacher mentor and induction policies. They

found that the number of states with mandated induction policies had increased to 33 states.

However, only 17 of those states required that mentors receive training, and only 12 states

mandated stipends for mentors. Development and implementation of clear and structured

mentoring programs at the state level could alleviate these program variations.

Program Structure

Ingersoll and Kralik (2004) examined more than 500 documents concerned with teacher

induction and mentoring. Using specific criteria, they reduced the list to 10 studies that were

empirical and sought to evaluate the effects of beginning-teacher mentoring programs. In their

examination of these studies, they found in a study of induction-program effectiveness that the

manner in which mentors are selected varies greatly. How carefully are mentors selected? Is the

selection to be a mentor voluntary or mandatory? Some programs devote attention to the match

between mentor and mentee based on level and subj ect; some do not consider grade level or

subj ect. Matching new teachers with mentors can determine the success of the mentoring

relationship. Research has indicated that new music educators preferred having mentors who

taught in their same areas (general music, band, and so forth) and same grade levels (Conway et

al., 2002).










Ingersoll and Smith (2004) studied a large amount of data from the National Center for

Education Statistics' Schools and Staffing Survey and the Teacher follow-up survey. These

surveys provide a large amount of data from the teaching population of the entire United States

during a 12-month period. Teachers who left the profession after the 12-month period were also

surveyed to obtain information on their departures. Their purpose was to determine if types of

induction support, including mentoring, had a positive effect on the retention of beginning

teachers. One conclusion form these data was that the most effective induction programs

provide a mentor from the same field. Pairing teachers at either the same grade level or the same

subj ect area is preferable, and attaining both aspects is optimal (Boreen et al., 2000).

Many mentoring programs are implemented at the district level, and the level at which the

mentoring programs are constructed and maintained can determine the flexibility of matching.

Finding the most effective mentor for a middle school band director in a smaller district would

require a formal system with the ability to network through other schools and districts. Without

this ability, self-contained mentoring programs provide much less of an opportunity for quality

music-teacher mentoring.

Experienced or "master" music educators are at the frontline of music teacher mentoring

and retention. They have experience and enthusiasm at their disposal. As Smith (2003) pointed

out, music education is fortunate in the area of selection:

The challenge is generally not in finding [music education] individuals who are willing to
serve as mentors .. rather one of the primary challenges lies in equipping well-
intentioned and concerned veteran music teachers with strategies that will prove to be
effective methods for offering the support that new music teachers so badly need. (p. 106)

The profession should look beyond using mentors only for advice. The Music Educators

National Conference (MENC) already effectively provides online mentors for general survival-

type questions. What mentoring needs are master teachers, readily available to help shape









instructional practices over time. Casey and Claunch (2005) stated, "The knowledge and skills

needed for working with adults differs from those required for educating young students," and

"the what and how of mentoring remains uncomfortable for many" (p. 98). This is where formal

mentoring programs can excel, but also where the most developmental assistance is needed.

What kind of training should prospective mentors receive? How much training is necessary?

How do districts and teachers find time for such training? These are all relevant questions.

Formal mentoring programs in several states already provide possible answers to these

questions. Connecticut and Washington are two such states, and each state has a program

operating today. Connecticut' s Beginning Educator Support and Training program utilizes a

team approach in a comprehensive three-year teacher induction program, which includes mentor

training. Washington's Teacher Assistance Program (TAP) includes mentor training in

observation techniques. Many similar programs are operating in various states, and more states

are moving in this direction (Robinson & Krueger, 2003).

The length of the mentoring programs is another component. Many schools employ the

use of a mentor for the first year of teaching. Ganser (2005) commented, "The trend in recent

years is to extend teacher mentoring programs beyond one year to the second or even third year

of a new teacher' s employment" (p. 11). As many teachers will attest, many do not feel as if

they "hit their stride" until their third or fourth year of teaching. The first year is spent becoming

familiar with procedures, discipline, students, and other environmental adjustments. These are

challenges that need mentoring, but when it comes to improving and honing teaching skills,

mentoring can affect the quality of teaching in the classroom. Often new teachers are not able to

clearly focus their attention on matters related to effective instruction and structure of curriculum

until well into or after their first year of teaching.









The time and the context of mentor-mentee interaction is critical to the depth and success

reached through the mentoring program. Release time from regular teaching duties for both the

new teacher and mentor is an important component of a mentoring program (Boreen et al.,

2000). This release time can allow for each participant to observe the other within the active

classroom setting and allow for regularly scheduled consultation. It is essential that mentors be

able to observe their mentee from within the actual classroom environment in order to experience

everything affecting the teaching-learning environment. A videotape or narrative of the

classroom situation places the mentor at a disadvantage by not providing a complete picture.

The same is true in order for the new teacher to understand strategies employed by the mentor in

his own classroom. Release time becomes even more important if the mentoring pair is not

teaching in the same building. In this case, time for informal consultation (during lunch,

between classes, and so forth) is not possible, and release time is the only way to ensure that the

necessary interaction will occur.

Generally, mentoring is beginning to receive the attention it deserves in the context of

providing new teachers what they deserve in the way of support. The New Teacher Center

(NTC) at the University of California at Santa Cruz is a center for researching, designing, and

advocating high-quality induction programs for new teachers. The existence of this center and

its collaboration with school districts in 16 states is evidence of the intense interest generated by

the potential of mentoring. Strong support from all stakeholders and a consensus on what

mentoring should include will allow mentoring to reach this potential.

New Teacher Retention

In any type of business, high rates of employee attrition can be linked to substantial

financial costs and decreases in the degree of organizational stability, coherence, and morale

(Fibkins, 2002). Education is a business that provides the consumer (students) with a product










(knowledge and experience), and requires extensive interaction between participants. For the

business of education to thrive, it is dependent on continuity, cohesiveness, and coherence, all of

which are impossible to sustain with high teacher turnover. Ingersoll and Smith (2004) stated,

"High rates of teacher turnover can inhibit the development and maintenance of a learning

community. In turn, a lack of community in a school may have a negative effect on teacher

retention, thus creating a vicious cycle" (p. 32).

These kinds of consequences have become a maj or concern to states and school districts

(Boreen et al., 2000; Ingersoll & Smith, 2003; Madsen & Hancock, 2002). Madsen and Hancock

(2002) conducted two surveys investigating issues related to the retention and attrition of music

educators. The first survey was sent to 225 certified teachers who had earned a bachelor of

music education degree within the past 10 years from the same institution. The second survey

was conducted with the same sample six years following the first survey. One of their findings

indicated that pressure from parents, administrators, and others made the j ob of teaching

difficult. The institution of education has not done a good job assisting people transition from

new teacher to veteran teacher (Hicks, Glasgow, & McNary, 2005). Mentoring has become a

primary tool in attempting to alleviate the problem of teacher attrition. Data from the Schools

and Staffing Survey (SASS) conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)

of the U. S. Department of Education indicated that in the 1990-1991 school year, approximately

40% of beginning teachers had participated in a formal teacher induction program. In the 1999-

2000 school year, participation rates rose to 80% (Ingersoll & Smith 2004).

Mentoring within induction programs has also become more frequent. In the 1999-2000

school year, about two-thirds of beginning teachers said they worked closely with a mentor

(Ingersoll & Smith, 2004). The retention capabilities of mentoring have been documented as









well. In analyzing 1999-2000 SASS data, Ingersoll (2003) reported the following turnover

percentages: 40% teachers with no induction or mentoring; 28% teachers with some

mentoring and induction; 18% teachers with full mentoring and induction.

Studies regarding the effects of mentoring on teacher retention continue to grow.

Statistics are beginning to support the potential of mentoring in this area. The ability of school

districts to provide enough faculty members to staff their classroom teaching positions depends

on recruiting new teachers, but more importantly, retaining those new teachers. Effective

mentoring programs can increase such retention for teachers in all areas.

Teacher Effectiveness and Mentoring

High levels of employee turnover are the cause of low performance in business

organizations. Low performance or ineffectiveness is also the cause of high levels of employee

turnover (Ingersoll & Smith, 2004). This reciprocal relationship between effectiveness and

turnover is increasingly important in the political climate of teacher accountability and

heightened emphasis on student achievement. Studies that might link mentoring to teacher

effectiveness are difficult to conduct, and few have been conducted. Data are often not readily

available. Many factors contribute to changes in student achievement, such as school variables,

family, economic status, tutoring, and language issues. It is therefore difficult to attribute such

increases solely to the kinds of support beginning teachers receive. However, as Strong (2006)

asserted, "Support during the new teachers' first year or two may be just as important to their

effectiveness as their pre-service training, their state certification, and their subj ect matter skills"

(p. 1).

Wong (2005) proposed that student learning depends on teacher effectiveness: "The better

the teacher is able to manage the classroom and deliver the instruction, the more students will

learn" (p. 52). Effective teachers are cultivated from effective professional development










programs, and mentoring is a maj or component of effective professional development programs.

This is a logical progression from student achievement to teacher effectiveness to mentoring (as

part of an induction program).

Teacher effectiveness can be approached from many angles. Teachers who have worked

with a mentor indicate that support with classroom management strategies and support in

instructional strategies are two of the most helpful factors in their development (Odell, 1992).

Observation of new teachers by mentors can lead directly to instructional improvement. Wells

(2002) suggested one such opportunity:

When reviewing a lesson observed, a focus on unplanned "teachable moments" -- taken up
or missed -- can offer the opportunity for the beginning teacher to recognize the
intrinsically negotiatoryy" quality of learning and teaching and to develop strategies for
making the most of what the students bring to each lesson. (p. 6)

The continuing education of teachers may be one key to providing students with the best

education possible. In the United States, millions of new teachers will enter the profession

within the next decade. They will be expected to teach and learn to teach better (Portner, 2002).

It appears that mentoring can facilitate how these new instructors learn to teach better.

Mentoring for Music Teachers

The contextual situations of music teachers are important in understanding the need for

mentoring of these teachers (Conway, 2003a). Conway, Hansen, Schulz, Stimson, & Wozniak-

Reese (2004) demonstrated one contextual factor common among many first-year high school

band directors. This article presented the stories of four beginning music teachers in order to

help illuminate the issues facing teachers in these positions. The contextual element

demonstrated by Stimson was the confidence he had when entering his first year of teaching

band:

I entered my first year as a band director with great expectations. I believed that my
undergraduate preparation and student-teaching experiences were more than sufficient to










prepare me for what was ahead.... Everything I had learned was great preparation for
teaching band. (p. 47)

Schulz explained having similar confidence:

Coming out of college, I felt confident that I could take whatever the professional teaching
world could dish out. I was a good student, had plenty of teaching experience, and had
enough people to call on as resources. I knew I had some weaknesses, but I was sure I
could survive. (p. 46)

Stories of unanticipated challenges followed these statements of confidence, and these challenges

are often the reasons for the implementation of mentoring programs.

The quality of music programs is often dependent on the same teacher serving as the

instructor for long periods of time. Teacher attitude and retention are therefore important to the

music education profession. Krueger (2000) conducted an investigation of job satisfaction and

attrition factors for music teachers. The investigation included interviews of 30 music teachers

in their first 10 years of teaching in the state of Washington. The investigators' questions

focused on the instructors' perceptions of their first years of teaching. Only three of the

participants had been part of formal mentoring programs during their first years of teaching, and

they found those programs to be beneficial. As a whole, the participants regarded collaboration

with other teacher and administrators as rewarding and an important means for professional

development. They also viewed other music teachers as valuable sources for ideas and feedback.

The two significant and interconnected aspects of mentor matching are critically important

to new music educators. First, music teachers are often referred to as "specialists" within the

faculty. This designation should immediately signal implications to designers of mentoring

programs. Research has indicated that new music educators preferred having mentors who

taught in their same areas (general music, band, choir, orchestra) and same grade levels (Conway

et al., 2002). Matching a new music teacher with a mentor who is also a music educator can

make a huge difference in the professional development of the new teacher. New music teachers









are often faced with larger class sizes, performance-based assessments, physically active

classrooms, constantly changing selections of classroom materials (music), and other issues

uncommon in the general classroom. Close matching of music specialty areas is also important.

A high school band director and a high school choir director share the core area of music.

However, the specifics of the two jobs are very different.

Matching music teachers with music mentors within the same grade levels is also

important. While it is true that a band director at a high school and one at a middle school have

even more in common, the activities and music literature encountered at the two levels are

different (Haack, 2006b; Krueger, 1999). New music teachers should be matched with mentors

from within the music education field, the same specialty area, and similar grade levels. Finding

a mentor who meets all of these criteria may be very difficult to achieve within a small school or

school district.

Opportunities for observation are also important in music education. Interviews with new

music teachers indicate that it is important for the mentor to observe the mentee in the classroom

in order to understand the context of the situation (Conway, 2003a; Krueger, 1999; Haack,

2006b). Boreen et al. (2000) and Daresh (2003) emphasized the importance of proximity in

mentoring. Daily schedules of band or orchestra teachers are often extremely busy from before-

school hours through after-school hours. This can make interaction difficult even where

mentoring pairs are in close proximity. There are a limited number of band directors in any

given school district. Avoiding large distances between mentees and mentors may be difficult.

Options are available to help alleviate such difficulties, including available release time for both

parties, which is an essential part of effective mentoring programs (Conway et al., 2002).










On a smaller scale, in what areas should a mentor focus attention to best help the new

music teacher? Some suggestions for general educators include (a) classroom organization and

management; (b) curriculum planning, implementation, and evaluation; (c) instructional

strategies of learning styles and cooperative learning; (d) parent communications; (e) record

keeping; and (f) grading and assessment (Conway, 2003a; Downes, 1998; Hicks et al., 2005).

These are all areas that apply to the new music teacher. They often just occur in a very different

environment.

Conway (2006) pointed out, "School district administrators need to be educated about the

value of content-specific professional development experiences for new music teachers" (p. 56).

Additionally, state boards of education, state music educator organizations, national music

educator organizations, or some combination of the three may be required to assist in the

mentoring process for new music educators. Before administrators and organizations can assist

new music teachers, they must be aware of the difficult situations facing these new teachers, and

that these mentoring programs benefit everyone involved. Haack (2006a) stated the following:

Increased teaching effort and effectiveness are demonstrated outcomes of having
hardworking mentors as models and energetic music educators as mentees. Formally
organized mentoring programs can encourage staff cooperation and interaction and lead to
greater teacher effectiveness. The school as a whole benefits. (p. 63)

Conway (2003a) included the content of first-year teacher and mentor interaction as an

important category in her findings. The frequency of questions about administrative issues was

the most prevalent theme in that category. The question topics included budgets, fund-raising,

and weekend events. She stated, "All of the beginning teachers suggested that they were

unprepared for these tasks" (p. 16). Another theme was classroom management. Conway

(2003a) suggested that mentors observe their mentees in the classrooms in order to understand

the context of the mentees' classrooms.









Based on her study, Conway (2003a) presented suggestions for music mentor practices,

such as scheduling participants' teaching duties to allow mentors to observe mentees in their

classrooms. She also recommended that mentors and mentees have some informal opportunities

to get to know one another. Participants in the study said that meetings in social settings allowed

them to get to know their mentoring partners better.

Montague (2000) conducted a qualitative study of music education mentors and mentees

from a range of public school educational levels. The focus of the study was the experiences of

beginning music teachers within their mentoring relationships. Mentors were found to be "vital"

and "sought to activate, invigorate, and enable .. their novice teacher' s transfer of amassed

knowledge from one community of practice [music teacher preparation] to another [teaching

music in the public schools]" (p. 163). Additionally, the mentors were able to assist the mentees

in adapting to and excelling in their specific situational contexts.

Context of the High School Band Director

Conway et al. (2002) suggested the research that forms the basis for educational policy

may not reflect the needs of the beginning music teacher population. Results of studies

investigating the needs of new music teachers suggest that the issues of mentoring new music

teachers are highly contextual (Conway, 2003a; Haack, 2003; Montague, 2000). Included in this

population are new high school instrumental music educators. These individuals, within their

unique situational contexts, were the subjects of this study.

Requirements of the high school teaching position, generally referred to as a "band

director," vary depending on the size of school, expectations of students, parents, administrators,

and state music organizations. There are, however, characteristics and requirements of the

position that are faced by the maj ority of new teachers in this field. McKee (1996) addressed

new band directors and stated:









There is little question but that band directing is one of the most complicated jobs man
ever invented... As a director you will be expected to prepare bands for concert, marching,
and jazz performances while working one-on-one with students on more than a dozen
entirely different instruments. At the same time you will deal with finances, promotion,
publicity, travel arrangements and fundraising as well as show production and narration,
equipment purchases and management, uniform design and maintenance, library and
inventory, not to mention score selection and preparation, music arranging and marching
band charting, private teaching and ensemble coaching, community service and festival
preparation along with ever-present counseling and parenting. (p. 13)

Several of these aspects (if not all) can be considered when arranging a mentoring program to

support new band directors. The other areas include comparisons, music selection, budgets,

planning, state procedures, booster organizations, and marching band.

One of the first challenges facing a new band director is usually handling comparisons to

the previous director (Asbill & Scott, 1997). Traditions and habits are firmly established. It can

be difficult to change behaviors and rehearsal or performance standards. Comparisons on the

part of students and parents may be unfavorable to the new director and become a distraction.

As Asbill and Scott stated, "After a director has gained the confidence and respect of students,

changes made the following year are easier" (p. 13). However, constant reminders the previous

director' s methods can weigh on the confidence and patience of a first-year teacher.

The selection of music for rehearsal and/or performance is a second aspect with which a

mentor can assist. Each year may bring a different instrumentation and/or ability level to the

ensemble(s), requiring new criteria for the selection of music. New band directors are also often

coming from participation in college ensembles where they have been immersed in highly

difficult music. Therefore, the music most familiar to them is not suitable for their new high

school ensembles, and they tend to choose music that is too difficult (Ling, 1999).

In his book for undergraduate instrumental music education maj ors, Teaching BandBBBBB~~~~~~~BBBBBB and'

Orchestra, Cooper (2004) devoted an entire chapter to "Handling Business Issues." Depending

on the size of the band program, a new director will be in charge of managing thousands of









dollars. The previous director may have planned the first year' s budget, but supervising the use

of that money and constructing the next year' s budget will be the j ob of the new director.

Procedures for the spending of money are always complex, and the additional consideration of

booster contributions can make the finances of the program even more complicated. Cooper

(2004) stated, "Budgeting practices and requirements vary greatly from school to school and

state to state" (p. 288). School districts often require the band director to solicit bids from

retailers for items over a certain dollar amount. This is another process for which the band

director is responsible for learning. Included in this area is the responsibility of the inventory

and maintenance of expensive equipment.

A high school band is typically a very active group that requires a great deal of planning.

Most of this planning must be organized far in advance in order to facilitate communication with

everyone involved (custodians, bus drivers, secretaries, administrators, students, parents,

coaches, and general classroom teachers). The knowledge of school and district procedures and

advanced planning of events, such as evening rehearsals, concerts, and festival trips, are needed

immediately upon acceptance of the j ob by the new teacher (Cooper, 2004). Stimson, from

Conway et al., (2004), recalled his first year as a band director: "I enjoyed the community that I

taught in, but I didn't know about all the events outside school that I had to deal with. I stepped

on quite a few toes when planning concerts and practices" (p. 47).

Planning for rehearsals is also completed well in advance. Ulrich (1992) stated,

Rehearsal planning must occur well in advance of the first rehearsal. Long-term planning
requires that a conductor select the music early enough to ensure adequate rehearsal time.
All conductors would do themselves and their ensembles a favor by planning at least six
months ahead. (p. 34)

This type of planning and preparation is almost impossible for a first-year band director, because

he will not know the appropriate level of music for his students until he hears them in a rehearsal









setting. This initial hearing, especially for the marching band, may only be weeks before the first

performance .

Every state has music organizations. Florida has two for band director consideration: the

Florida Bandmasters Association (FBA) and the Florida Music Educators Association (FMEA).

Each state also has divisions of an activities association. The music division of the Illinois High

School Association (IHSA) is one example. These divisions place demands on bands and band

directors. These groups facilitate all-state auditions, solo and ensemble contests, marching band

assessments, concert band assessments, and much more. Each of these activities may be

required of all bands in the state and have specific application procedures and deadlines

(Dewald, 1998). These activities are a challenge for new band directors and can place directors

who are new to the state at a great disadvantage. Many states administer these activities in very

different ways.

Booster organizations can be a tremendous asset to band programs (Cooper, 2004). Most

band programs require additional fundraising in order to remain active and/or competitive.

Boosters can be of great assistance to the band director in this capacity (Conway et al., 2004).

They can also assist with equipment, transportation, and clerical work. These organizations

usually have a clearly defined structure and constitution with which the new director must

quickly become familiar. Unfortunately, these groups can often hold views and preferences that

differ from those of the new band director. Conway (2004) commented, "They [the boosters]

had a system that worked for them and were very upset when I suggested a few changes" (p. 47).

They may have a reaction to change similar to those of the students, except the reaction of

influential adults may be more difficult to handle. These situations can also lead to a short tenure

for the new director if not handled in the correct manner (Cooper, 2004).










Directing and managing a marching band program starts the year for a first-year high

school band director. It can be a moderately involved marching band that performs at home

football games and a couple parades, or it can be a highly involved marching band that travels to

away football games and weekend competitions. The level of involvement normally determines

the amount of rehearsal time required.

Dunnigan (1998) listed seven of the demands placed on directors early in the school year:

1. Upon hiring, a new director may find July and August full of auditions, rehearsals, and
camps.

2. A concept for the marching show has to be selected.

3. A small to large instructional staff may need to be hired to work with individual sections, as
well as an arranger to write the music and a drill writer to write the movement portion of the
show.

4. Flags for the color guard have to be selected, and student leaders need to be chosen and
organized.

5. Students must be measured and fitted for uniforms.

6. The rehearsal Hield must be painted regularly, and fall band calendars must be mailed to
parents .

7. Applications to fall contests must be sent with payments, and transportation forms must be
completed for buses to fall games and competitions. These are only some of the duties
facing a new high school band director long before the first day of school.

These tasks are in addition to challenges faced by general classroom teachers, such as

classroom management, curriculum development, and instructional strategies. These seven areas

emphasize not only a need for mentoring, but also a mentoring program that starts early and

includes previously discussed components, such as a same-subject, same-level mentor, release

time for observation and consultation, and a multi-year program.

Summary

The research using the espoused theories of mentoring in education (teacher retention and

teacher effectiveness) continues to grow exponentially. The theories in action for mentoring









have been substantiated for increased teacher retention, and to a lesser degree, teacher

effectiveness. It appears the rapid implementation of mentoring programs in school districts

across the United States is justified.

There is a wide variation in the structure, components, and support of mentoring programs.

It appears that the programs that include the elements of mentor training, mentor compensation,

and release time are having the most success with teachers as a whole. However, too many

districts implement a one-size-fits-all mentoring program that may not best serve new music

educators. New high school band directors may be the most extreme example, considering the

multi-dimensional nature of the position.

Teacher attitude is critical to teacher retention, and teacher effectiveness is important to all

the stakeholders in education. Because mentoring can have a positive effect in these areas, this

study attempted to discover the status of mentoring in music education. The authors of the

existing literature suggest the situational contexts of the mentoring pairs are important to

understanding the dynamics of the relationships. These contexts include the structure of the

mentoring programs, demographics of teachers and teaching positions, and responsibilities of the

program participants. Researchers indicate that the level of interaction between mentors and

mentees is critical to the success of the mentoring process.

In order to provide insight into all these areas within this study, the researcher examined

the perceptions of first-year high school band directors and their mentors regarding their mentor-

mentee relationships. By obtaining a view of mentoring from those who were active participants

in mentoring, the study provided a firsthand account of the mentoring programs and the opinions

of those directly involved.









CHAPTER 3
IVETHODOLOGY

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of first-year high school band

directors and their mentors regarding their mentor-mentee relationships. A qualitative research

design was selected for the study in order to explore and "obtain a deep understanding"

(Creswell, 2005, p. 54) of the perceptions of the participants. The qualitative approach allowed

the researcher to personally interview and interact with participants in their natural and unique

contexts (school settings). This approach also enabled the researcher to present the voices of

participants prominently in the reporting, and inductively construct meaning and theory

grounded in the collected data (Hatch, 2002).

In this study, mentees and mentors from different work environments provided varying

perspectives on their mentoring relationships. These multiple realities were explored in the

interviews. Lincoln and Guba (1985) stated, "Qualitative methods are chosen because they are

more adaptable to dealing with multiple realities" (p. 40). It was fitting, therefore, that

qualitative methods were employed as a way of answering the research questions. The

constructivist research paradigm within the qualitative design guided the study and will be

discussed in the following section. The remainder of this chapter will describe the following

methodological elements of the study: setting and participants, data collection, data analysis,

researcher bias, and trustworthiness.

Constructivist Research

This approach to examining the perceptions of first-year high school band directors and

their mentors regarding their mentor-mentee relationship is based on the philosophical and

theoretical positions of the constructivist research paradigm. These positions begin with the









belief that absolute realities are impossible. Individuals form their own realities (Charmaz,

2006). Individuals create realities based on cognitive maps that are constantly written and

rewritten from experiences within a given--and often changing--context (Creswell, 2005; Hatch,

2002; Rodwell, 1998). The constructivist researcher is therefore interested in these individual

constructions of reality.

Developing an understanding of the worldview held by people involved in a process or

situation is optimally accomplished from an insider' s perspective (Rodwell, 1998). Through the

interview process, the researcher becomes part of the process of co-construction (of reality) with

the participants. Rodwell (1998) commented, "The inquirer and the 'object' of inquiry interact

to influence on another" (p. 17).

Constructivist research produces evidence that is specific to individual behaviors that are

time and context-bound. As stated by Rodwell (2002)

What has meaning in one context may be meaningless in another time and place...
Therefore, the desired product of a constructivist study is not one that generalizes to any
other setting, but one that is an accurate, rich, reconstruction of various perspectives within
the context of the investigation. (p. 3 1)

The reader of constructivist research is able to determine the transferability of meaning to his

situation and environment due to the clear picture provided by the researcher.

In this study, the researcher reconstructed the stories of band directors. The contextual

situations of these educators differed in many ways. The reader must therefore consider multiple

contextual variables in determining transferability. The researcher used a combination of

individual realities of mentors and mentees to assemble the stories of the mentoring

relationships.









Setting and Participants

Data collection occurred at the participants' respective schools. In each case, the band

director's office provided a quiet environment with minimal interruptions. One-on-one

interviews were conducted at the beginning or conclusion of the teacher' s school day or during

the teacher' s planning time.

Selection Criteria

Five first-year high school band directors and their mentors -- all from Florida -- were

selected for participation. The criteria for selection of the first-year band directors required the

participant to:

1. Hold a bachelor' s degree in music education and a teaching license

2. Be employed as a public high school band director

3. Be the "head director" if more than one band director is employed by the school

4. Be in their initial year of teaching

5. Be participating in a mentoring program offered or required by the school, school district, or
state music organization

Individual schools had assigned a mentor from another subj ect area to several of the first-year

directors. While these mentors might have been helpful to their mentees, these mentors were not

considered for participation in this study due to their lack of expertise in the Hield of music

education. Mentors participating in this study were high school band directors assigned to the

corresponding mentee by the school district or state music organization. Since redundancy and

variety are both important within the case study (Stake, 2005), an attempt was made to include a

variety of school, teacher, mentor, and program demographics.

Purposive Sampling

Purposive sampling is the sampling technique corresponding to constructivist research.

Taking into account "adequate amounts of local conditions, local mutual shaping, and local









values for possible transferability" (Lincoln & Guba, 1985, p. 226) allows the researcher to

control the range and scope of the data, as well as the contexts from which they will be collected.

Patten (2005) stated, "Qualitative researchers make subj ective judgments regarding the

individuals to select based on the likelihood that they will be able to provide the needed

information" (p. 143). In this study, purposive criterion sampling was used with the criteria

previously listed. In addition, maximum variation sampling was used in order to ensure

heterogeneity in the sample. Such heterogeneity allows for a wide range of contexts and

perspectives from which readers of the study can connect (Creswell, 2005; Rodwell, 1998). The

purposive sample for this study was small in number to allow for the in-depth study of those

perceptions.

Negotiating Access and Selection Procedures

District chairmen of the Florida Bandmasters Association (FBA) and available county

music supervisors in Florida were asked to provide the names and/or locations of first-year high

school band directors and the existence of corresponding mentors. Job listings on the Florida

Music Educator' s Association website from the previous spring were also used to locate schools

that would have new directors in the fall of 2006. Seven first-year high school band directors

matching the criteria for selection were identified in northern and central Florida. Following the

identification of prospective participants, county administrators were contacted in order to obtain

permission to conduct research within the county schools. Upon permission from the county, a

letter introducing the researcher, which explained the purpose of the study and described data

collection, was emailed to the identified first-year high school band directors. Interested

directors were asked to respond to the email.

Six of the seven first-year directors responded to the email or follow-up phone calls,

indicating they would be willing to participate. One director did not respond. A second email to










the positive-response directors asked them to provide the name contact information for their

mentor. If they had more than one mentor, they were asked to provide the information for the

mentor who was also a band director. The corresponding mentors were emailed a letter

introducing the researcher, which explained the purpose of the study and described data

collection. Five of the six mentors contacted responded to the email or follow-up phone calls,

indicating they would be willing to participate. The five responding mentors were then

contacted through a phone call and received a letter of consent (see Appendix A) and interview

protocol (see Appendix C) via email.

The non-responding mentor and the corresponding mentee were not interviewed as part of

the study. The participants therefore included five mentees and five corresponding mentors.

Hard-copy informed consent letters were signed and collected at the first mentee and mentor

interviews. The researcher contacted principals of the schools and explained the purpose and

data collection methods. Permission to interview the teachers at school sites was then obtained.

Data Collection

Each participant completed a brief demographic questionnaire (see Appendix B) in order

to establish an initial context and environment. Two semi-structured interviews were conducted

with each first-year band director, and one semi-structured interview was conducted with each

mentor. The interviews consisted of open-ended questions that allowed the interviewer to probe

for additional meaning. For the first-year band directors, the first interview with each was

conducted early in the fall semester 2006. The second interview with each one was conducted

late in the fall semester. The single interview with each mentor was conducted in December.

Each interview lasted no more than one hour.

The researcher attempted to obtain detailed descriptions of the mentoring experiences and

perceptions of these experiences. All interviews were conducted in a relaxed atmosphere with









little chance of disturbance. Confidentiality was a priority in all interviews and in the handling

of all data. In order to protect the anonymity of participants, pseudonyms were used for all

individuals and schools mentioned in the transcripts.

Separate interview protocols were created for initial and Einal interviews, as well as for the

mentor interview. Protocols from research conducted by Montague (2000) were used as a model

for the protocols in this study. Questions were adjusted, removed, or added to fit this study.

Colleen Conway and Paul Haack, leading researchers in the Hield of mentoring in music

education, reviewed the protocols and agreed they provided the correct direction for the research.

All interviews were recorded using a digital voice recorder. These digital voice Hiles were

saved to multiple hard drives. An individual living in another state transcribed the recordings.

The researcher, while listening to the original digital recordings, reviewed the transcripts to

verify accuracy.

The first set of interviews focused on biographical data, expectations of teaching, and

presumptions of the mentoring experience. The second set of interviews focused on teaching

experiences, mentoring experiences, and other topics emergent from the previous interview.

Permission to conduct the study was requested and granted from the appropriate county school

administration and the University of Florida Institutional Review Board.

Data Analysis

A constructivist approach to data analysis described by Rodwell (1998) was implemented

for this study. The model described by Rodwell included the basic unitizing, coding,

categorizing, and theory construction found in grounded theory research design (Strauss &

Corbin,1998), but the end result is a story grounded in the participants' experiences.

Constructive analysis relies heavily on grounded theory, but from an interpretive tradition, as

opposed to the positivist tradition (Charmaz, 2006). Obj activist grounded theory, part of the









positivist tradition, ignores the social context from which the data emerge. The grounded theory

formal data units and categories are identified very early (following the first interview) and used

to shape all following data collection and analysis. Rodwell explained that constructivist

grounded theory is produced only as the product of final data reduction and interpretation, and it

is used to provide the framework for the storytelling. The narrative, as part of this case study,

related the stories of the participants and provided the rich descriptions required of qualitative

research. The following paragraphs describe the inductive analysis portion of the Rodwell model

utilized in this study.

The inductive data analysis began with a deconstruction of the gathered data (Lincoln &

Guba, 1985; Rodwell, 1998). The data were separated into short sections or units. These units

were informative words, sentences, or short paragraphs that required no additional information or

explanation. N~ivo 7 software from QSR International was used to analyze the data. N~ivo 7

allowed for the open coding of the data units during which the units of the text were copied from

the transcripts and coded with source information (Patten, 2005). N~ivo 7 referred to the

transcripts as sources and displayed reports of the coded text (see Appendix D) along with the

sources for easy comparison. These reports allowed quick reference to the original location of

the data unit within the transcripts.

As initial units of data were pulled from the transcripts, each was labeled, creating what

N~ivo 7 called a "node." A node is any named grouping of coded text. The researcher initially

began coding segments of text into what Nyivo 7 calls "free nodes." Using the constant

comparative method (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Strauss & Corbin, 1998), each identified unit of

data was compared to the labels of existing nodes and the previously coded units of text within

those nodes. If the identified unit was similar to previously coded units within a free node, the









new data unit was assigned to the matching free node. If a data unit was unique, a new free node

was created. N~ivo 7 was able to create node summary reports, providing information on the

amount of coded text and the number of sources and cases from which text was coded (see

Appendix E).

As the next step in analysis, the free nodes created by the grouping of coded data units

were sorted (Rodwell, 1998) and placed in a hierarchy. N~ivo 7 calls this hierarchy "tree nodes"

(see Appendix F and Appendix G). The primary headings were given titles representative of the

nature of their underlying nodes. The researcher determined which headings were supported by

a maj ority of the participants, and these became the over-arching themes emergent from the data.

The underlying nodes became supporting categories. If a node did not specifically provide

evidence for an emergent theme, it remained in the hierarchy but it was not included as a

category in the findings. The placement of data units within nodes and the categorizing of nodes

under themes were fluid processes. These placements changed throughout open coding and the

entire analysis. Ely (1991) stated:

Making categories means reading, thinking, trying out tentative categories, changing them
when others do a better j ob, checking them until the very last piece of meaningful
information is categorized and, even at that point, being open to revising the categories. (p.
145)

This quote accurately describes the process followed in the data analysis for this study.

Once the coding of data units was completed and tree nodes were created, the data units within

each node were reread. Units that did not completely fit the definition of their node were moved

to better-fitting nodes. Some nodes were combined to create new themes, and some nodes were

moved to more logical themes.

It should be noted that the data analysis for this study was conducted in two separate

processes. The data collected from the mentees were analyzed first, followed by the data










collected from the mentors. The separate analyses were justified because of the inherently

different contexts and perspectives of the two groups, as well as the possible value in a

comparison of the two perspectives.

Presentation of Results

A type of case study presented the results of the data analysis. Rodwell (1998) stated,

"The case study or case report is the primary reporting vehicle for constructivism... the primary

goal of the case study is to create understanding" (p. 173). Rodwell refers several times to the

case study report as a narrative: "The reading level of the narrative should be. .. and "The

writing technique should be narration .. the inquirer is telling a story, not obj ectifying the

situation" (p. 174). Because of the narrative nature of the case study report described by

Rodwell and the multiple cases involved, the presentation format here was referred to as a

"multiple-case study narrative."

The model presented by Rodwell (1998) provided the structure of this case study report.

The Eindings of this study are presented as a narrative bounded by the themes and categories that

emerged during the last stages of data analysis. The framework of the story was created by these

major categories and their relationships. Due to this structure of the narrative, separate

discussions about each individual participant were not included. The narrative was presented in

two maj or sections, delineated by the two inherently different contexts. The stories of the

mentees were presented first, followed by the stories of the mentors. In order to preserve

confidentiality, all quotations were edited to eliminate the possibility of gender identification and

the matching of mentors with mentees.

Researcher Bias

The researcher was qualified to undertake a study of this nature. His position as a high

school band director in the public schools of Illinois for eight years provided a level of









knowledge and experience that enabled him to empathize with the participants and the research

setting. The researcher's work with undergraduate students in music education brought him

close to the position and mindset of the first-year band director participants.

In the course of his studies as a graduate student, the researcher constructed his

knowledge and experience in qualitative research methods through general research methods

courses and a qualitative data analysis course. Interviews with higher education administrators

in a previous study allowed for the development of interviewing skills.

The potential for the effect of researcher bias in qualitative analysis is significant. Data

pass through the researcher during interviews and the researcher interprets the data in analysis. It

is therefore subj ect to being shaped by the researcher' s background and beliefs. For these

reasons, the researcher attempted to limit effects of bias through the process of self-disclosure.

Self-disclosure refers to considering the research problem in relation to the interviewer's

background and attitudes before conducting interviews and continuing to do so throughout

analysis (Patten, 2005).

The researcher was not paired with a mentor as a first-year high school band director. The

difficulties encountered as part of the j ob led him to believe that having a mentor would have

made that first year easier in a number of ways. Awareness of this frame of mind deterred the

shading of interview questions and data analysis toward such a perspective.

Trustworthiness

Validity, or trustworthiness, is primarily established in qualitative research through rich,

thick description that is used in relating the participants' stories and experiences. Such

descriptions were an important part of this study. Other verification procedures utilized for this

study included triangulation of data, peer debriefing, and member checks.










Triangulation characteristically depends on the convergence of data gathered by different

methods or different sources (Ely, 1991). Triangulation was accomplished in this study through

interviews of both mentees and mentors.

Peer debriefing served as an external check on the research project. "The process helps

keep the inquirer 'honest,' exposing him to searching questions by an experienced protagonist

doing his best to play the devil's advocate" (Lincoln & Guba, 1978, cited in Ely, 1991, p. 162).

A former high school band director and Ph.D. candidate in music education at the University of

Florida was solicited to read 10% of the data and identify themes. The researcher met with the

reviewer and discussed interpretations of the data. Although fewer in number, the themes

identified in the peer review corresponded with those identified by the researcher. The

researcher used this opportunity to explain and defend additional interpretations and meanings

drawn from the collection of data as a whole.

Finally, member checking was used to determine if the participants felt that the

researcher had accurately portrayed their experiences (Creswell, 2005). The researcher provided

each participant with a copy of that participant' s original transcript and an individual summary of

data. The participants were asked to review the summary and provide the researcher with any

corrections or additions. Adjustments were made to the interpretations based on the responses of

participants.









CHAPTER 4
RESULTS

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of first-year high school band

directors and their mentors regarding their mentor-mentee relationships. The participants in this

study included five first-year high school band directors (the mentees) and their corresponding

mentors. Using a constructivist approach to data analysis (Rodwell, 1998), interview data were

deconstructed into short units, which were coded and categorized. This reconstruction of the

data allowed thematic relationships between the categories to emerge.

Just as the situational context of a new teacher differs greatly from that of a teacher of 20

years, the situational contexts of the mentees differ greatly from those of the mentors. For this

reason, the researcher approached the analysis of the mentee interviews and the analysis of the

mentor interviews separately. The similarities and differences between emergent themes were

considered only after the analysis of both groups was completed. This approach is the

organizing principle for this chapter.

The story of the mentees is presented in the first section of this chapter, and the story of the

mentors follows. The collective story of each group is bounded by the themes and categories

that emerged during the last stages of data analysis. Due to this narrative structure, separate

stories are not presented for individual participants. However, in order to provide the requisite

detail, a brief introduction to each mentee precedes the mentee' s story, and a brief introduction to

each mentor precedes the story of the mentors later in the chapter. These introductions are a

necessary step in helping the reader consider the multiple contextual variables used to determine

transferability of findings.









The Mentees


Maria

Maria was 22 years old and held a bachelor' s degree in music education from a university

outside of Florida. She was a first-year high school band director in a small town in Florida.

The population of her school was approximately 1,200 students, and she saw a total of 100

students in five different classes during the school day. Those classes included concert band,

jazz band, percussion class, keyboard class, and color guard class. Maria indicated she had 50

minutes of planning time each day. The school had a marching band of 60 students whom she

directed. She did not have an assistant director who worked at the high school, but a local

middle school director assisted with the marching band. Her marching band held three-hour

rehearsals three days per week. Maria was paired with her mentor through a mentoring program

administered by her district of the Florida Bandmasters Association (FBA).

Corey

Corey was 23 years old and held a bachelor' s degree in music education from a university

in Florida. He was a first-year high school band director in a metropolitan area of Florida. The

population of his school was approximately 3,885 students, and he saw a total of 137 students in

Hyve different classes during the school day. Those classes included three concert band

ensembles, a percussion class, and an advanced placement music theory class. He had an

assistant band director working with him at the school. Corey had 120 minutes of planning time

each day. He also directed a marching band of 125 students. The marching band rehearsed Hyve

hours per week outside of the school day. Corey was assigned a mentor by the music supervisor

of his school district.










Emily

Emily was 24 years old and held a bachelor' s degree in music education from a university

of Florida. She was a first-year high school band director in a central Florida city. The

population of her school was approximately 1,700 students, and she taught a total of 144 students

in Hyve different courses. Those courses included concert band, instrumental techniques, guitar,

advanced music (International Baccalaureate), and introduction to music performance. Emily

was the only band director at the school; she had 90 minutes of planning time daily. She directed

a marching band of 78 students who rehearsed six hours per week after school. A mentoring

program administered by the local district of the Florida Bandmasters Association provided

Emily's mentor.

Eric

Eric was 24 years old and held a bachelor' s degree in music performance from a

university in Florida. He was a first-year high school band director in a small town, just outside

of a metropolitan area in Florida. The population of his school was approximately 2,900

students, and he saw a total of 147 students in five different classes. One of these classes was a

band class at a local middle school. The other four courses at the high school included two

concert band ensembles, a woodwind ensemble, and a percussion class. Eric was the only band

director at the high school; he had 120 minutes of planning time each day. He directed a

marching band of 85 students who rehearsed eight hours per week outside of the school day.

The local district of the Florida Bandmasters Association administered a mentoring program and

assigned Eric a mentor.

Mike

Mike was 22 years old and held a bachelor' s degree in music education from a university

in Florida. He was a first-year high school band director in a central Florida city. The










population of his school was approximately 2,900 students, and he instructed 1 17 students in

three different classes. Those classes included two concert band ensembles and a percussion

techniques class. Mike had an assistant band director working with him; had 60 minutes of

planning time daily. He also directed a marching band of 120 students who rehearsed six and a

half hours per week after school. Mike was provided a mentor through the mentoring program

of the local district of the Florida Bandmasters Association.

Through the Eyes of the Mentees

Five themes emerged from the data collected from first-year high school band directors

participating in this study. Each theme has several supporting categories that--together with the

words of the participants-- present the story of the mentees' perceptions of the mentoring

relationship. The Hyve themes are:

1. The Extra Hours. The Hyve mentees--Corey, Eric, Emily, Maria and Mike--all said that their
work did not stop with the last bell of the school day. The fall semester was filled with after-
school rehearsals, administrative paperwork, supervision, and performances. Various
errands, meetings, and communications resulted in "60ish-hour work weeks" which did not
often "include whatever it is I do at home" (Maria). These band directors reported being at
school until 6:00 or later every day. Friday night football games and Saturday competitions
frequently extended their work week with important performances.

2. Self-confidence. The job of the high school band director is demanding in many ways, but
these first-year teachers expressed confidence in their abilities. This confidence was
attributed to good preparation as an undergraduate student and networking. Their confidence
was evident in a number of teaching-related areas.

3. Mentor Interaction. The mentees had various perceptions regarding contact time with
mentors. However, several similar perceptions were shared among the mentees. Mentoring
methods, the primary purpose of mentoring, and contact frequency and context were among
the topics discussed with mentors. The mentees were also able to discuss how the
interactions and relationships had changed over the course of the fall semester, and how their
teaching had changed due to mentoring.

4. Mentoring Program Structure. From the mentor-to-mentee pairing procedure to time as
being an obstacle, the mentees frequently offered perceptions of the way the programs were
structured and what might interfere.










5. Need for Observation. While not all the mentees were able to experience observing their
mentor, they all included the opportunity for observation as part of their conversation. They
were able to share or anticipate the benefits of observing their mentors. The importance of
this program component was clear.

In the following sections, these Hyve themes are discussed and illustrated through the words

of the mentees, thereby telling the story of these first-year high school band directors'

perceptions of their mentor-mentee relationships.

The Extra Hours

The time commitment required of high school band directors was addressed by all the

mentees. Working with the marching band, completing administrative tasks, and choosing

literature for their ensembles were among the types of responsibilities that frequently kept them

working beyond the regular school day. The number of duties required of these mentees was

shared by Eric who said that, "Basically every day after school other than Wednesday I'm here

until about 9:00 at night." Maria stated, "I would say it probably turns in average to more of a

60-ish hour week of me here, which doesn't include whatever it is that I do at home."

Marching band. Working with the marching band by far accounted for the most time

outside of the school day. Corey said, "We have marching band rehearsals on Monday nights

from 6:00 to 9:00." He quickly added, "We also have percussion rehearsals from 6:00 to 8:00 on

Thursdays" These Hyve hours, not including Friday night football games, were the least amount

of marching band rehearsal time among the mentees. Emily, Mike, and Eric's marching bands

rehearsed six, six and a half, and eight hours per week, respectively. Maria spent the most time

in after-school rehearsal with her band. She stated:

We have three-hour rehearsals three days a week outside of the school day. On Mondays
and Thursdays they're right after school and they go until 6:00. And then on Tuesdays
they go from 6:00 to 9:00. So really, Wednesday .. is our only day off, so to speak,
because Fridays are often games and then we have a contest [on some Saturdays].










Maria' s description of time spent with the marching band in the fall semester was similar to the

maj ority of mentees: "I'm hunkering down for the next couple of months because other than next

week, which is an SAT testing day, we'll have something every single weekend until Christmas

break is over."

Administrative work. A variety of activities fell under this category. The acknowledgment

of these tasks often came with a sigh or other sign of discontent. Corey and Maria identified

similar jobs. Corey commented, "Outside of the school day [activities] would be receipting

checks, and getting stuff deposited, and going to the bank to get change, and helping with

concessions." Maria stated, "Not to mention staff meetings and booster meetings and meetings

with the executive board and check writing to make sure that our marching techs and all kinds of

supplemental staff are paid and stuff I do at home." In his first interview, Eric mentioned there

was "a ton of paperwork to do, just filling out stuff through the school and for the county." In

Eric's second interview, he was noticeably more frustrated:

I'm fairly organized, but it' s the amount of paperwork that comes through. .. I couldn't
even have fathomed that amount of stuff. And my job every day is about 10% teaching
band and about 90% politics and filling out pieces of paper and it' s just horrible. .. I
could get so much more done if there was 10 times less paper for me to fill out. And it' s
redundancy and .. I just hate doing it. And then I get in trouble because I'd rather teach
band and get a good result and so .. it' s a vicious circle.

The paperwork and administrative-type duties came frequently and from many directions: the

school's required forms and reports for students and parents; the school district's required forms

for transportation; and the FBA district' s required paperwork for performance assessments,

festivals, student ensemble auditions.

Music selection. To someone unfamiliar with the band-director profession, choosing

music for ensembles may seem like an easy task. Contrary to that perception, these first-year

band directors described why choosing music was an activity that took up time outside of the










school day. Choosing music for their concert bands was a topic for the mentees during their

second interviews that occurred after the marching band season. Mike gave some insight into

why this was a time-consuming task:

Well, right now it' s me jumbling through CDs and scores of pieces for district festival, for
festival with the bands. I'm not too familiar with grade 3's and .. the lower grade
material on the FBA handbook or in the FBA book. So I'm having to do a lot of listening
and a lot of searching through things like that in order to pick something that'll fit the
band, and that'll still be challenging for them.

Maria described the difficulty of choosing music when she called it "the most difficult part

of my j ob as a first-year teacher." She added, "The majority of my outside-of-school attention is

towards programming for next spring."

As Eric conveyed, even though it was a significant and important task, the mentees

seemed excited about choosing music: "I've been looking pretty hard-core through a bunch of

music outside of school, and meeting with a bunch of people, and getting advice on their music

things and what they know."

Self-confidence

In providing a better picture of the context of the mentees, it was important to relate their

feelings of confidence. They each communicated this confidence through several interview

topics. The foundation of this confidence seemed to come from positive undergraduate

experiences in college, but confidence continued to build through successes achieved during the

first semester of teaching. Networking with fellow band directors, in addition to an assigned

mentor, often provided feelings of accomplishment. Success in areas such as classroom

management, rapport with students, and ensemble performances built feelings of confidence.

Support from administrators, parents of students, and others contributed as well.

Thidergraduate experience. The mentees were very positive in their assessment of their

college undergraduate experiences. Corey classified his preparation for teaching as "second to










none," and he felt "very prepared" for teaching music at the high school level. Emily felt the

training her college provided "was really good, actually." Mike and Eric had mixed feelings.

Mike stated:

Pretty much in all aspects I think my undergraduate experience was very, very good
coming out to be a first-year teacher. A lot of the paperwork and things that go along with
the high school band .. all got tossed on me right when I got here. So I don't think that I
was well prepared for that--the administrative assistant portion of the j ob.

Eric said:

I would say the education classes I've had taught me little to nothing about what I actually
need to know to teach in high school. The thing that' s helped me the most is my
performance-related classes and .. there was just tons and tons of opportunity to play in
different ensembles and different instruments. And that' s probably been the most help
being a band director.

The mentees expressed an overall positive feeling about their college preparation for teaching

music. That preparation provided a foundation of initial confidence when entering their first

teaching position. However, some felt that they had little to no preparation for the administrative

tasks related to teaching.

Networking. Each of the mentees had been assigned at least one mentor to begin the

school year. Several of the mentees had multiple mentors, including those assigned by their

school, their district, or by FBA. Despite the number of designated mentors and regardless of the

perceived effectiveness of their mentors, the mentees sought out other individuals for help during

their first semester of teaching.

Teachers--those closer in age or closer in terms of distance--were often sources of

information or comfort for the mentees. Corey frequently referenced his contact with other band

directors in his county/district. He maintained a close relationship with the high school band

director under whom he had been a student teacher. He said he was "in constant contact" with

her, and they "get together all the time." He also alluded to the existing culture of the directors










in the district: "We're constantly helping each other out. I'm constantly at rehearsals at other

high schools. .. I'm going to have people out here all the time because I'm a very social

person." Mike felt there was always someone he could go to for help or advice:

I've got a list of numbers I'm able to call if [my mentor] is not around. In this county ..
there are about seven high schools, and all seven of us talk on a regular basis, and we're
able to kind of help each other along.

Eric simply stated, "I have about three mentors that have been helping me with things." These

were other band directors in the area whom he considered "mentors" because of their willingness

to help. Instead of looking to the more experienced teachers, Emily often turned to teachers

closer to her age because of their ability to better relate to her situation:

To be honest, the most beneficial thing has been talking to a few other .. younger band
directors. And just kind of [saying], "Okay, am I normal for feeling this way right now ..
feeling extremely burned out? I ask whoever seems to be willing to give me the time .. a
second-year teacher at a Catholic school .. she's close to my age and we've gotten to
know each other. So I end up asking her a lot of questions .. instead of going to [my
FBA mentor].

Emily was neither pleased nor comfortable with her assigned mentor: "If he wasn't my mentor, I

don't know that he would be one of those people that I would approach." He was much older

than Emily and that may have been the main reason for turning to her friend at the Catholic

school. Her friend was able to confirm that Emily's feelings were normal.

Musical ability. Despite the various aspects of the j ob, the mentees believed they

possessed strong musical abilities. Emily believed conducting was "definitely [her] strength" in

teaching, and that she knew "how to run a rehearsal." Eric credited performing in college

ensembles for his music education expertise:

The amount of music that I've played in college as a performer has really helped me in
knowing the music, being able to relate teaching that aspect of the playing .. I can play
every one of the instruments so I can immediately respond to, you know, it' s this fingering,
this position .. whatever it is.









Maria was confident in her skills and methods in the ensemble classroom: "I feel like I

usually have correctly identified problems and given--if not the best way--a decent way to try to

correct it and to be diverse in my method of trying to correct problems." Mike felt he had

developed his musical abilities: "I have a really good ear for music. .. I know what kind of

sound I'm looking for .. and .. I feel like I'm getting that from the students." Corey believed

he had developed "a good memory for music and for scores." This "musical ability" extension

of their college preparation for teaching completed the level of confidence established prior to

stepping into the classroom. Additional confidence was created through teaching and

performance .

Classroom management. Maintaining order and discipline in the classroom was a strength

clearly identified by several of the mentees. Their confidence in managing the classroom came

through when addressing this aspect of teaching. Corey lightheartedly shared, "Classroom

management for me is not really an issue. I'm a very loud person. .. I get really great results

with what I've done so far." Eric attributed his ability to run orderly rehearsals to something

other than his college classes:

They [classroom management skills] work pretty well. .. The fact that I just grew up in a
household where rules were important just has helped, and there, it' s either black or white
for me. It's not anything personal to the kids, it' s .. this is what the rules are, this is what
I have to follow, this is what you have to follow.

Maria felt lucky in one aspect of her first teaching position. Under the previous director, the

students were "really disciplined, really hard-working, [and] had achieved a lot of success." This

prevailing attitude had carried over under her direction.

Rapport 0I ithr students. Educators may have differing opinions regarding the significance--

or insignificance--of students "liking" or "disliking" a teacher, but having the "respect" of

students was important to the mentees. Signs of students' respect for their new band director










seemed to bolster the confidence of the mentees. Corey related his perception of his students'

view by saying, "The kids respect me a lot here." Emily shared her method of earning her

students' respect: "I think I definitely have a good rapport with the students. I try to make sure

that, you know, every student gets to know me a little bit personally and that I do the same to

them."

In Emily's second interview several months later, she confirmed that this was indeed her

strong pomnt: "I think probably my biggest strength is the rapport that I have with the students."

Eric elaborated on how his "youth" was also valuable in working with his students:

Being young I think helps me engage them better than some of the people that have been
teaching for a while. They know that I'm in charge but there still is that friendship ..
And I still listen to their same music and stuff like that and they really enj oy that.

Through youth or musical ability, these mentees believed they had gained the respect of their

students. However, it was the respect of other groups that raised their confidence to another

level .

Validation. A display of respect or a sign of approval from other educators or parents was

very reassuring to these young music educators. Support from school or district administrators

was cited as a sign of empowerment. Eric summed up the difference these people can make:

"I've heard from a lot of my colleagues that have come to watch the games, and principals, and

parents, and different people, that it sounds greater than it has in the last eight years..."

Corey was specific in addressing the administration at his school: "I have a very supportive

administration... They have the best interests of the band at heart." Compliments from

administrators were a sign of support for Emily's teaching. She received many compliments on

her marching band from her administration, and she indicated those compliments made her "feel

a lot better."










The school districts in which Mike and Corey were teaching employed county music

supervisors. The presence and assistance of those administrators was helpful for Corey and

Mike. The supervisors observed and consulted with those first-year teachers multiple times

during the fall semester.

Parents were also an important factor in the confidence of the mentees. The presence of

quality booster organizations allowed the first-year directors to focus more on teaching. Parental

support of teacher policies and decisions was an indication of a mentee doing something right.

Emily recalled one parent' s support of a discipline issue with a student: "I talked to [the

student's] mom at a football game and .. she's very supportive." Mike provided a summary of

his confidence:

We made leaps and bounds the second performance and I see .. improvement. .. I wake
up every morning happy to come to work, happy to get started, for them to learn something
new. So it' s pretty much the only thing I've wanted to do since middle school .. I'm
happy.

Mentor Interaction

The mentees perceived their interaction with mentors in several categories. Mentors were

there primarily to provide advice and reminders through informal communication. Mentees

believed the relationships with their respective mentors changed during the semester, but few

changes were made in their classroom teaching techniques due to mentoring.

Mentoring technique. It was clear that the mentees understood that the role of the mentors

was not, as Corey said, "to teach you how to teach." Eric gave the following perception:

"They're just here kind of as guides. They've been very careful about saying, 'This is your band.

You run it how you'd like to.' I try some things out. Some work, some don't." Maria gave only

one contradictory example:










When [her mentor] was here last week and we did the clinic, he would react to a certain
technique .. or a certain exercise. In one particular case he said, "Oh, that's not going to
work. That's not going to work.

However, Maria also provided instances where her mentor took a different approach:

"Something he says to me all the time is like, 'Look, it' s your band. I'm here if you need help

from me or advice, but it' s your decision.'" Mike expressed a similar view of the role of his

mentor:

I bring up a piece I'd like to play for festival .. he says, "Wow, that' s pretty brave. .. I
would suggest not doing that." He won't go out and say, "Don't do that. That' s a bad
idea. Don't do it. It's going to ruin whatever you're working towards."

While the mentees believed this was the approach their mentors were taking, the mentors next

identified what they were delivering using this approach.

Survivala~nddeadlines. The mentees saw the purpose of interacting with their mentors as

a means of surviving their first year of teaching and meeting various school, district, and state

deadlines. To "survive through the first year," as Maria described it, encompassed many facets

of high school band directing. Deadlines were one facet of the j ob and included the submittal of

numerous forms, fees, and other administrative paperwork. The mentors' role was largely

viewed as providing reminders of the deadlines and assistance in completing forms.

Mike thought the role of his FBA mentor was "[to make sure] I don't fall on my face.

Those things that you would never think about your first year, the mentor has already been

through it." Emily and Eric also mentioned survival, but addressed the mentor' s role in reducing

feelings of isolation. Emily said,

I think it' s to make sure that nobody drowns .. to get to know someone else in the district
.. Some people maybe aren't as good about meeting others) .. [Mentoring can] be kind
of the support for them we all need.










Eric shared, [The purpose of the mentoring program is] to allow for successful start-up.

It' s such a job where they don't always want to stay after the first year .just a helpful resource

that' theree"

Corey talked about the reduction of isolation as part of the surviving the first year of

teaching band and how a mentor can help:

Being a band director can be a very lonely job, because you teach something that' s
different from everyone else in the entire school. .. to keep you from feeling lonely. ..
to keep communication open.

The mentees, from the beginning, thought that the role of the mentor was going to be one of

assistance with policies and deadlines. Eric described his first FBA meeting where he was told

his mentor was going to be "the .. force .. [reminding] us of things to turn in." Maria, part of

a different FBA district, said, "They acquainted us with our mentor .. gave us a calendar that

had major dates and deadlines .. landmarks in the school year, FBA-wise."

Maria shared that her mentor was there to "make sure that you fill out this form correctly

and turn it in by this date, and you won't have to pay the fine." Mike, from yet another FBA

district, recalled, "The district chair explains that all new teachers really need to have an FBA

mentor to get acclimated .. to know about paperwork." Corey, whose mentor was assigned by

his school district, said, "As the mentee, my role is to call and ask [his mentor] .. not just about

teaching things, but with deadlines and procedures." Similarly, Emily summarized her

interaction with her mentor "to make sure that we [mentees] don't miss deadlines and know

when events are; when meetings are."

Frequency and context. Two perspectives on the frequency of contact between mentors

and mentees were: frequent or limited. The context of the contact was largely by phone or email.

Four of the mentees said they were in frequent contact with their mentors. Corey said he called

his mentor "once [or] twice a week." In his early interview, Eric stated, "I've already called ..










and emailed with my specific mentor about every other day." Maria recalled, "I would say a few

times a week I email him back and forth with questions I have." Mike indicated he had even

more frequent contact with his mentor: "I've called him lots of times.... We talk every day on

the phone."

Emily had far less contact with her mentor. When asked about meetings with her mentor

in her early interview, Emily said, "Nothing has really been planned. .. The only time we've

seen each other is at that [FBA] meeting .. He has called me once." In her interview near the

end of the semester, she said that she had been in contact with her mentor "two to three times a

month, maybe."

Corey, Eric, Maria, and Mike had all met face-to-face with their mentors in situations

other than at FBA meetings, football games, or festivals. As will be discussed in the next

section, they described impromptu meetings with their mentors at school, over dinner, or at

social functions. Corey and Maria also had opportunities during the semester to observe or to be

observed by their mentors. However, the maj ority of interaction with mentors occurred through

phone call or email.

When asked about the context of mentor interaction, Corey said, "We probably prefer

phone to email." Emily also remarked, "Most of our communication has been through email."

Eric believed that "phone call and email .. was the easiest and best way to talk." Mike said,

"Most of the meetings are .. over the phone during the day when I have specific questions."

Early in the semester, Maria "talked .. to him once a week or once every two weeks on the

phone," but the maj ority of contact with her mentor was by email "a few times a week."

None of the individual mentoring programs required a specified type or number of

meetings between mentors and mentees. "[How often, or in what context] hasn't really been ..










a prescribed thing," as Eric said. Maria saw her mentor "every once in a while," not at a specific

meeting time.

Most meetings between mentoring pairs occurred in an "informal" manner, as several of

the mentees called it. Emily said that she would see her mentor "occasionally .. at a

competition or another location." In his early interview, Corey mentioned one meeting he was

about to have with his mentor: "This Saturday, we're actually getting together and having lunch

and just talking and seeing what' s going on." In his later interview, it was apparent that this type

of interaction proved to be beneficial over the course of the semester:

There have been a couple of times where [the meeting] has been outside of school ..
more valuable than the in-school .. You're able to talk more freely and it's more relaxed
and more informal. I really enjoy just going and having dinner and discussing things. ..
And it gives you social interaction and it gets you away from your j ob.

Corey said those meetings with his mentor were more valuable than his typical in-service

meetings with the school faculty or even with countywide music teachers. With his mentor, he

felt he was able to discuss issues specific to his level and area. This was not the case in a general

music teacher setting. Corey commented, "Good teaching is good teaching, yes. But situations

are totally different."

Mike related similar contact with his mentor: "We go out maybe to dinner or something

with a bunch of other teachers locally .. That' s pretty much how we meet and talk." Mike

lightheartedly shared that he and his mentor met for "maybe some poker [laughs] every once in a

while." Eric gave a similar analysis:

We have mutual friends .. as band dorks do, just if you go out with one random friend,
[my mentor] was there tons of times .. It' s not like we ever planned [it]. .. The informal
things are the most helpful events. I can't even call them events. And we sit there with a
pad of paper over your wings and beer and just talk band. And that' s where I've learned
the most stuff.









Relationship changes. There was a range of perceptions concerning how relationships

with the mentors had changed over the semester, but all of the mentees noticed change. The

primary change was an increase in comfort level and confidence within the relationship. Emily

said that early in the semester, her mentor might have felt the need to check on her. She said,

"Whereas now .. I think he knows I'm doing okay, and he'll kind of leave it up to me." The

progress Eric had made with his teaching facilitated a change in his mentoring relationship:

The relationship probably hasn't changed, but the questions probably have. Now it' s more
on the subject that we're actually teaching. Now it' s more literature or, you know, I'm
having trouble with the flute section. How do you get them to change this pitch? And,
you know, what has worked for you? So, it' s more literature-based and more content-
based rather than just general [education] kind of stuff.

Maria saw her dependence on her mentor reduced as she became more confident with her own

expertise in teaching. In addition, she became more discriminating about the advice she

received. Early in the semester, her tendency was to do exactly what her mentor suggested. As

the semester progressed, Maria discovered that the mentor' s suggestions did not always work

well with her beliefs and approach. She discovered that her own methods could work, and felt

"more comfortable and confident." She added, "I felt like I could still use him as a resource, but

I didn't need the verification that I was on the right path quite as much." Mike had a similar

feeling about how the relationship with his mentor had changed:

They [interactions with his mentor] get fewer and fewer. While I would have to talk to
him [almost] after every class period before, it kind of cuts down to once a day. We might
not talk to each other for a couple of days.

He became more comfortable with his teaching and felt that he did not need to seek advice for

every problem.

Changes in teaching techniques. Corey and Maria both referred to "increasing their bag of

tricks" for use in teaching their ensembles. They were referring to methods they had for teaching

or for getting good results from their ensembles. They also believed interactions with their









mentors had added certain "tricks" to their "bags" and allowed them to change some of their

teaching techniques.

Corey had the advantage of observing his mentor teach and adjusted some of his methods

based on the observations:

[My mentor] is .. probably 8 or 10 years older than I am. And I'm trying to establish that
kind of [business-like] rapport with him. .. It worked wonders for marching band. It is
not working for concert band. So I have to take a much more business-like approach. I
learned that today with my wind ensemble. If I take a much more business-like approach,
they respond much better.

Mike shared another aspect of his teaching that had changed due to his mentoring. He had

noticed that he was not having enough time to cover everything in his rehearsals. His mentor

suggested changes in his planning that might help. Mike said his pacing of rehearsals changed

and improved his coverage of material.

Early in the semester, Maria often felt her ensembles were not improving at an acceptable

rate. Her mentor helped her deal with those feelings: "[I was] trying to relax myself, [to] have

the confidence that kind of comes with more experience I think. The mentor helped me to try to

acquire some of that prematurely."

Maria also leaned on her mentor to Eind new ways to motivate her students. For one

marching band contest, Maria wanted her students to appreciate that winning the contest was not

the ultimate goal. For the "second time in like 10 years" the band did not win first place. "A

series of emails back and forth" with her mentor helped Maria communicate the "it' s not about

winning" message to the students.

Eric shared several areas of his teaching where he had tried new techniques suggested by

his mentor: "I kind of took snippets of what he does with different long tones or different things

and listening for balance and things, changing some seating configurations around and doing

some things. And it gets a better sound in the band."










Payoffs. Positive results of mentoring were cited by most mentees after a semester of their

mentoring programs. During the end-of-the-semester interviews, the mentees were asked about

successful moments. One mentee commented on the musical improvements that one group

demonstrated during rehearsal. However, for most of the mentees, success from mentoring was

directly connected to a successful performance of an ensemble. For example, Eric described a

marching band performance as a culminating achievement affected by mentoring:

The night of district FBA marching festival, when they announced the grades, we got
straight superiors .. which the band never has gotten .. We [had] worked really hard
during marching band season and they [the mentors] had a lot of help in it.

Mike simply stated that his mentor played a role in a concert "com[ing] off without some

maj or malfunction." After thinking for a moment, he said, "I mean, just having my past two

concerts [and] just [to] successfully get through them [laughs]. Everyone's still in one piece."

Mentoring Program Structure

While the history and complete structure of their respective mentoring programs were

beyond their knowledge, the mentees relayed their perceptions of one structural element: the

pairing of mentors with mentees. The mentees described one obstacle regarding mentoring high

school band directors.

The pairing procedure. Most of the mentees shared that the way they were paired with

their mentors was informal and dependent upon who was available and volunteered. Corey's

situation was a little different because a school district music supervisor assigned his mentor.

The other mentors were assigned through FBA. Corey was uncertain about how he was paired

with his mentor: "I have no idea. I called... One day and [the music supervisor] told me [who]

my mentoring teacher was going to be."

The other four mentees recalled being paired with a mentor at their first FBA meeting.

Emily and Eric shared very similar memories of the mentor assignments. Emily stated,










I showed up to the first FBA meeting and they said, "Hey, we've got a lot of new directors.
Who would like to be mentors?" A few of the directors, older directors, raised their hand
and [it was] just [a], "Hey, I'll take you" kind of a thing. [They were] pointing, "I'll take
you." And since he and I knew we were in the same district, it made sense that we were
buddied up together .. There was no explanation. It was just kind of informal.

FBA district officers assigned a mentor to Maria. The new teachers within her district met with

their mentors immediately prior to the first district meeting. At that point, she became

"acquainted" with her mentor, and the mentor began to explain the purpose of the FBA and the

responsibilities band directors had to the organization. Maria remarked, "They basically did a

rundown of the year." Mike indicated that his FBA "district chairperson" assigned him his

mentor. The program itself "wasn't really explained. [It was presented] just as, 'Here's a

mentor teacher for you. If you have any questions, concerns, comments, need anything, call

him."

While the process of how a mentee was paired with a mentor was not always clear, the

importance of mentor-mentee observations was clear to all Hyve mentees.

Time a~s an obstacle. When asked about such topics as the frequency of contact with their

mentors, the context of meetings with their mentors, or changes in mentoring programs that

might be beneficial, the mentees commented about the lack of time in their schedules or their

mentors' schedules. The comments came in both short references and longer explanations. At

various times during his first interview, Corey made several statements: "[My mentor] and I have

both been extremely busy," "Right now we're just both swamped," and "We're both so busy."

During the same interview, Corey expressed hope for mentoring time in the future: "Once

festival is over .. I think we'll have a lot more time to devote to fostering that [mentoring]

relationship."

In his second interview, Corey echoed his earlier comments about the lack of time for the

mentoring. The size of each of the band programs, the performance schedules, and director' s










family life left little time outside of the school day for the pair to meet or discuss teaching. Eric

added, "There's just not enough time to even do the paperwork .. let alone drive out to where

he was."

Need for Observation

The mentees stressed the importance of two-way observation. The mentees reported the

role of observation in their mentoring relationship in two distinct ways: the role was either a part

of the relationship or it was not. Where observation had been a part, the mentees expressed

extremely positive views of those experiences. In the relationships without observations,

mentees articulated a need for those opportunities. In both cases, mentor modeling and mentor

feedback were identified as beneficial parts of observation.

Benefits. Two of the five mentees, Corey and Maria, reported they had opportunities for

observation with their mentor within the mentor-mentee relationship. Emily had never observed

her mentor. Eric and Mike had not been able to participate in any kind of observation with their

mentors since they were paired with them as mentees. However, both of these first-year band

directors knew their respective mentors before they started their new j obs. Without being able to

observe the mentor, it was difficult for the mentee to develop a high level of respect or a true

appreciation for the mentor's abilities or methods. The mentee could assume the mentor was a

good teacher and had quality ensembles, but the mentee had no evidence to support an

assumption. Emily stated, "I really don't know much about his teaching to be honest, because I

haven't ever observed him or seen his band."

Emily also expressed the difference in being told about a possible method of teaching and

actually witnessing the method in practice. Observing a mentor teach a class or ensemble was

more valuable to the mentees than a mentor explaining his methods over the phone. Emily

summarized by saying, "Words are [just] words." Mentors were able to model teaching










methods. Corey spoke of the times the mentor came to his to work with the band and the value

of the interaction:

[My mentor has] been out here a couple times to teach, and I've watched him teach and
gleaned .. things that I can use as examples for articulations and all that sort of thing ..
the way that he approaches the kids is totally different from the way I approach the kids.
He .. taught wind ensemble, and it was absolutely wonderful. We basically team taught
the class for two hours .. and it was really, really beneficial for the kids and for me, I
think.

Even with having these opportunities to observe his mentor, Corey thought more chances

would have been beneficial: "If I could have gotten him out here a few more times to teach, I

think that would have been good."

A benefit to mutual observations was the accompanying opportunity for feedback from the

mentor. Without observing the mentee, the mentor was not able to provide advice based on how

the mentee was teaching. The mentor could answer specific questions, but if the mentee was not

asking all the questions or the "right" questions, problems might not be addressed. Mike said,

"What I'm doing in the classroom might be good, [or it] might not be good. And if it' s not good

and I don't know it' s not good, I'm not [able to ask] the mentor and [it cannot] be fixed." Mike

believed that observing and meeting in the school setting would allow the mentor to provide

feedback on the mentee' s teaching methods. He thought that after a semester of feedback in

student teaching, the lack of feedback sends the wrong message to a first-year teacher. The

message might be that his methods are good, and there are no alternative or better methods.

Maria provided an example of immediate feedback when she described the mentor

watching her teach: "This past Tuesday he came out to our evening rehearsal at the stadium. ..

While we were watching rehearsal, [we] .. bounced stuff back and forth..."

Those mentees who had not participated in any observations were clear about their

feelings. Eric stated: "I wished he could have come and watched a rehearsal .. 'This is what










you might want to change.' So, if I could have met him in our work environment that would have

been good."

Finally, Eric provided some thoughts on finding possible observation time:

If [the school] would give us a sub day [to] allow us [or] me to go observe him and/or him
[to] come observe here... [As] with any new teacher, they want me to do observations, but
they always give me an English teacher. And, as good a teacher as they are, that doesn't
help running a marching band rehearsal.

The mentees believed that observation opportunities were or could be a critical component of

their mentoring programs. In only their first year of teaching, they were unaware of what

policies made observations possible or what obstacles might stand in the way. These were

details that an experienced educator might know.

The Mentors

Barry

Barry was a 31i-year-old director of bands at a metropolitan high school in Florida. His

education included a bachelor of music education degree from a university in Florida and a

master of music degree in wind conducting from a university outside of Florida. The population

of Barry's school was approximately 2,300 students, and he saw 183 students in five different

courses. Those courses included three concert band ensembles, a percussion class, and an

advanced placement music theory course. Barry was the only band director at the school; he had

60 minutes of planning time daily. His marching band was comprised of 150 students. This was

Barry's first year serving as a mentor.

Tom

Tom was 28 years old and director of bands at a large high school in Florida. His

education included a bachelor of music in performance degree from a university outside of

Florida. The population of Tom's school was approximately 3,400 students, and he instructed









206 students in five different classes. Those classes included two concert band ensembles, and

advanced music class (IB), and an advanced placement music theory course. Tom was the only

band director at the school; he had 90 minutes of planning time every other day. This was Tom' s

first year serving as a mentor.

James

James was a 55-year-old director of bands at a high school in Florida. He held a bachelor

of music education degree from a university in Florida and a master of music education degree

from the same institution. The population of the high school was approximately 1,750 students,

and he saw 152 students in six different classes. The concert band met during a "zero hour"

before school every day. The other classes included jazz band, chorus, instrumental techniques,

and two "introduction to music performance" courses. James had one assistant band director

working with him and had 55 minutes of planning time daily. James had been serving as a

mentor for approximately 15 years.

Keith

Keith was 3 1 years old and director of bands at a large high school in a metropolitan area

in Florida. He had a bachelor of music education degree from a university in Florida. The

population of Keith's school was approximately 3,100 students, and he taught 148 students in

five different classes. Those classes included two concert band ensembles, jazz band, beginning

band, and advanced placement music theory. Keith had one assistant band director at the high

school; he had approximately 100 minutes of planning time each day. He had been serving as a

mentor for a few years.

Kelly

Kelly was 41 years old and director of bands at a middle school. She had a bachelor of

music education degree from a university in Florida. The population of Kelly's school was










approximately 800 students with 240 students in the band program. Kelly had one assistant band

director. She estimated that she had been mentoring new band directors for 15 years.

Through the Eyes of the Mentors

Five themes emerged from the data collected from the mentors participating in this study.

Each theme and supporting categories present the story of the mentors' perceptions of the

mentoring relationship. The five themes were:

1. Perceptions of Mentees. The mentors shared views of their mentees and the relationship
between them. They discussed mentee strengths in teaching, overall mentee abilities, and
perceived relationship depth. Several mentors also had unique connections to their mentee in
addition to mentoring.

2. Mentee Interaction. Interaction with the mentees came in several forms and included a
common approach by the mentors. Several topics dominated the conversations between the
mentoring pairs. The validation of mentee actions and methods was an important part of the
interactions, and most of the relationships changed in some way over the course of the
semester.

3. Program Structure. Several structural aspects of the mentoring programs were a common
theme among the mentors. Perceptions of how individuals were selected to become mentors
were similar, as were the perceptions of how they were paired with their mentees. An
element of training was shared by several mentors. Mentors believed that their school
administrators had little knowledge of the mentoring programs, and one specific obstacle
interfered with the entire mentoring program.

4. Need for Observation. The mentors spoke about the importance of including observation
opportunities in their mentoring programs. They presented the benefits of including such a
component even though some mentors lacked these observation opportunities. They also
described factors that inhibited mentor and mentee observations.

5. Good Intentions-Questionable Results. The mentors wanted to see their mentees succeed as
high school band directors. They also believed they provide important assistance to the
mentees. However, a theme of uncertainty connected these mentors. In many cases, the
mentors were not able to verify that their mentoring efforts were helping the mentees.

In the sections that follow, these themes are discussed and illustrated through the words of

the mentors.










Perceptions of Mentees

The mentors held some common views about the mentees. These areas included mentee

strengths, strong personal mentee background, unique connections with a mentee, and the depth

of the relationships. The combination of these areas provided a description of how the mentors

perceived the mentees.

SuenthsMentors perceived their mentees to have a generally good rapport with

students. Barry said his mentee had "a great personality" and was "very good with the kids."

Tom agreed that his mentee had such a rapport and was "approachable." This kind of

relationship that mentees fostered with students translated into motivation and direction for the

band programs. According to Barry, it has "given them [the students] a direction and a sense of

achievement, a sense of feeling good and having pride in what they do."

In addition to being approachable, the mentees were very receptive to advice and ideas

from their mentors. Tom thought his mentee was "someone who doesn't have all the answers,

but is more than willing to search." James credited his mentee as being "open-minded" to what

he had to say.

Strong personal background. The mentors thought their mentees overwhelmingly had a

strong personal and educational background. Kelly assessed her mentee as "really on top of

things... and a successful music educator." Keith said his mentee was "a really good musician."

Mentors recalled being enlightened by the mentees at times. Kelly referred to her mentee as

having a very "solid" educational background. Tom believed his mentee was "very smart... and

wants to do well."

Unique connections. Three of the mentors pointed out they had a unique connection to

their mentees. Kelly's was unusual because she was the preceding band director at her mentee's

new high school. She offered this reason for serving as the mentor:









I was very interested in making sure the program stayed on the level that they were used to.
And knowing that a new director was going to come in, that sometimes it takes a dip, and I
didn't want to see that happen so I offered [to be the mentor of the new director].

Kelly was aware of the possible difficulties that this situation presented. The mentee might

think Kelly would become j ealous if he had immediate success. Kelly's presence around the

students could also interfere with the mentee establishing ownership of the band program. She

tried to avoid these potential problems by carefully explaining her advice and by staying away

from band performances. She also realized some possible benefits that a mentor without such a

connection could not offer: "What was unique about being able to help him through that was that

I knew the band. I knew the instrumentation. I knew where their weaknesses were."

Barry's mentee had worked with his band before being hired as a new director in the area.

The mentee had worked at Barry's band camp. Based on what he had observed there, Barry

believed his mentee was making a difference in his new j ob.

Finally, Tom was his mentee's cooperating teacher in his student teaching internship.

They developed a close relationship during the internship, and their mentoring relationship began

there. "He was my student teacher last year, so I did have an opportunity to mentor him in that

aspect, and I think a lot of that has just carried through to this year."

Depth of the relationship. Many mentors felt connected with their mentees in ways that

were deeper than just teacher-to-student. Barry, Tom, and Keith all used the word "friend" or

"friendship" in describing their respective mentee. Keith said, "It's not just a mentor thing. It's .

.. a friendship kind of thing." Tom expanded on how close he and his mentee were: "It would be

great if he and I could go bowling and fishing."

However, not all the relationships were close ones. James had not established a close

relationship with his mentee. He described his mentoring relationship: "I'm mentoring from

afar. I'm not giving him [that] slap on the back he should be having." Kelly also did not










mention developing a close friendship with her mentee. Lack of time and long distance were

often obstacles to forming closer bonds.

Mentee Interaction

Mentors categorized their interaction with mentees in terms of their approach, the

frequency and context of contact, topics of discussion, and changes that occurred within these

interactions as the semester progressed. They also pointed to one particular mentoring action

that was important to the mentee.

Mentoring technique. "I've always made it very clear from the very beginning that this is

his program, not my program. I can only offer to him things that worked and things that didn't."

This quote from Kelly illustrates the belief held by all the mentors that their j ob was not to tell

their mentees how to teach or run their programs. They believed their job was to offer advice

and relate stories from their own experiences. Then mentees could decide the course of action

that best worked for them.

The mentors understood that different methods work for different people. When talking

about his teaching methods, James said he tried to remind his mentee of alternative methods

"without imposing too much of what I think is right and wrong." He also stated, "What they

want to accomplish may be different than what I think is important." Keith remarked, "You

don't want the [mentor] to say 'Don't do that' because some .. things [you] are going to have to

figure out on your own. As a mentor, you can [just] guide them."

Frequency and context. The mentors stated that most of the contact between mentors and

mentees was on an as necessary basis. Tom said his role was best described as "I'm here if you

need me." Additionally, he did not play "an active part in calling" his mentee to see if anything

was needed. He left the initiation of contact up to his mentee. Barry said contact was "as

needed" but was initiated by either party. James said he expected his mentee to "just call or










email me and vice versa" if there were any "grinding questions." Keith and Kelly expressed the

same view.

Phone and email were the main modes of communication. The frequency of the calls and

emails varied among the mentors. Face-to-face meetings between mentors and mentees were

much less frequent, and they usually occurred if they were attending the same meeting, football

game, performance, or social function. James said, "It' s just a matter of whenever we have some

free time at meetings or games for us to share ideas in what works and what doesn't work."

One-on-one meetings occurred from three to five times during the fall semester.

Some mentors favored the social functions as meeting places. Barry said, "Most of the

mentoring process has been over a dinner or an adult beverage." Keith had gone to dinner with

his mentee, and these kind of social settings helped him in "getting to know [his mentee] on a

less professional level." This social occasion helped each person feel more comfortable sharing

problems and experiences.

Mentoring topics. The mentors and mentees had talked about a variety of subj ects over the

course of the semester. Two topics dominated the perceptions of the mentors: deadlines (or

paperwork) and music literature selection.

The topic of administrative paperwork and the meeting of deadlines for this paperwork was

discussed throughout each of the mentor interviews. Tom talked about some activities requiring

paperwork: "I think most of his questions have been geared towards those administrative things.

How do I order stands .. get instruments .. get my schedule to do this .. get kids here?"

However, James and Kelly mentioned the completion of paperwork strictly in terms of

FBA accomplishing a purpose through mentoring. James stated,










[FBA has] asked for someone who could serve as a mentor to a new band director to...
remind them about forms (James). [Mentoring began] so we could help [new directors]
through the paperwork (Kelly).

James thought his responsibility was to remind his mentee to "get forms in" and of "deadlines

approaching." Tom echoed this type of interaction: "I .. make sure he doesn't miss deadlines."

The mentors indicated they often spoke with their mentees about selecting music for their

ensembles. Barry thought that this was one of the most important tasks with which he could help

his mentee: "[For his mentee's program], picking the right literature that fits the program help[s]

them be as successful as possible, and that' s very hard to do." Tom recalled his mentee calling

him to ask about a piece of music he was planning to perform with an ensemble. Tom talked

about the skill level required of certain players for that music, and his mentee decided, "Oh,

okay, [we] can't do that." Keith and Kelly related almost the same story of interaction with their

mentees.

Networking. Although networking in this context referred to a mentee's contact with

people other than his assigned mentor, it was still a type of "mentor interaction." The mentors in

this study were aware that their mentees received mentoring from others. The mentors

acknowledged that their mentees had been assigned mentor teachers from within their own

schools, and that these mentors provided help to address school-specific issues. Aside from

school mentors, participating mentors said their mentees should be contacting other people for

ideas and assistance. Tom stated, "I encourage him to call other people .. since he's already

had experience with me and has gained insight as far as how I do things."

James reflected on the advantages of his mentee contacting other teachers in the district:

"He probably has other .. friends that he talks to .. It appears that the younger band directors

email and call each other a lot more than I do. They help each other .. through this."










Relationship changes. Most of the mentors perceived a change in their respective mentee' s

comfort level and confidence as the semester moved along. Kelly's purpose was to help--not

monitor or judge her mentee. Upon realizing Kelly's goal, the mentee was more open in their

interactions.

James thought his mentee "seemed pretty nervous" coming into the job. "He had a

panicked look on his face, [but] he looks more confident now." Several possible reasons for the

increased confidence included mentor interaction, experience at their new j ob, or positive

feedback from administration, parents, or students. Tom believed this to be the case with his

mentor: "He's starting to feel more comfortable .. and more confident in his role .. with the

positive feedback he's getting from the parents and students and I think his principal."

Validation. The mentors believed that validating mentee teaching methods was also

important to convey. Tom had provided some direction to his mentee regarding the music for his

marching band show. Then the mentee was able to resolve the problem. Tom reflected on his

next interaction with his mentee: "I'm not really sure he had any real questions for me other

than... just hoping for me to say 'Oh, you did it right.' And I did because he handled it pretty

well."

Kelly agreed that the mentee sometimes needs "just someone to talk to and make sure

you're doing things right." Kelly had the opportunity to team teach with her mentee. This was

another chance for her mentee to feel a sense of validation because the mentee could see the

mentor using some of the same techniques he was using. The team-teaching interaction was also

a signal to the mentee that he was using good methods in her instruction.










Keith was also able to validate the progress of his mentee during an observation. He said

his mentee's students "weren't even playing that great, but they behaved so well. I said, 'Man,

that' s good. You're on the right track."'

Program Structure

The manner in which the mentoring programs were set up was another theme. Mentors

described the selection process and the process of pairing. They discussed common aspects in

training and an obstacle to program structure.

Selection as a mentor. The majority of mentors simply volunteered. Barry recalled that

his FBA district sent out an email asking for directors who might be interested in being mentors.

Because he already knew one of the first-year directors in the district, he volunteered to help that

specific person. Tom was also able to select his mentee whom he already knew. Kelly's FBA

district asked her if she would serve as a mentor since she was familiar with the band program

that had the open job.

The pairing procedure. The pairing procedure was different for each mentor-mentee pair.

For Tom, his FBA district did not actually do the pairing: "I know that there was an initiative to

meet monthly at a central location for groups [of mentees and experienced directors] to get

together, but as far as person by person, one-on-one basis, I don't think our district really pushed

that."

James discovered there was going to be a new band director at the school where his wife

worked, so he volunteered to mentor that person. He also believed that the first-year director

requested him as a mentor. Kelly was paired with her mentee because of her firsthand

knowledge of the mentee' s school and band program.

State training. None of the mentors received training to serve as mentors to first-year band

directors. However, for other purposes, state or district personnel had trained several of the










directors. Keith and Tom were trained in programs that required faculty to serve as cooperating

teachers. Both felt that this training was valuable to working with mentees. Training to become

a mentor was a requirement for Keith.

Kelly participated in a school district sponsored program that was designed to train

teachers who would serve as mentors within their schools. The training consisted of "workshops

at the county office" for a "beginning teacher program."

Administrative awareness. The school of individual mentors played no role in the

structure of any of the mentoring programs. The administration of the mentors' schools had little

or no knowledge of the ongoing mentoring programs for first-year high school band directors.

When asked if the administration was aware of the help the mentors were providing to first-year

teachers in their district, the response was largely negative. Kelly said, "No .. It' s really a band

director to band director thing." Barry stated, "No, not that I know of anyway." Tom pointed

out, "I don't think our school is aware of this program." James commented, "I may have

mentioned it to my principal that I serve as a mentor." Keith said, "My administration probably

doesn't even know that I do it."

Time a~s an obstacle. The mentors made it clear that a high school band director's schedule

is very full. Time--or the lack of it--was a maj or hurdle for the mentoring programs and

mentoring relationships. The word "busy" was prevalent among the directors. Tom remarked,

"He's busy; we're all busy; everyone' s busy. I've got a family, and he's got [a] new job--so that

would be it." James expressed, "I know he's very busy, and I'm very busy." Barry did not have

the time to travel the long distance between his school and his mentee's school. He said he

would be able to visit his mentee during his planning period, but the distance was too far to cover

in his planning time.










The lack of time was frustrating to the mentors. Barry was not able to help much with his

mentee's marching band "because I was doing my own marching band." James simply said, "If

we had more time together, we could share more things."

Need for Observation

The mentors believed observation had its benefits. Those mentors who had observation

opportunities valued them. Those mentors who did not have observation opportunities wanted

them. Unfortunately, obstacles were in the path of observation.

Benefits. Mentors who had observed their mentees or who had been observed by their

mentees described the benefits. Keith experienced two-way observations. His mentee had

visited him for an entire school day, and Keith had done some team teaching at his mentee's

school .

During the first visit, they had the chance to sit down and talk for two hours. That amount

of time with a mentee was rare among the mentors. His mentee was also able to compare the

sound of his ensemble to Keith's ensemble. The mentee left realizing how much his ensembles

could still improve. During the second visit, Keith was able to watch and listen to rehearsal, give

immediate and relevant feedback, and demonstrate methods with his mentee's own students. He

stated, "I watched them rehearse and helped out a little bit."

Kelly attended two of her mentee' s marching band rehearsals. As a mentor, Kelly was able

to see her mentee's strengths and weaknesses in person instead of guessing what they might be,

based on questions through email or phone. She commented, "I'm looking at the marching band,

and we're going through the motions [together]." Providing sincere and immediate feedback

validated the mentee's methods and was another observation benefit. Kelly recalled, "I was able

to [say], 'Great j ob picking that out' [and] things like that."










Observation obstacles. Mentors who did not have opportunities to observe their mentees

described the obstacles. For Barry, distance and similar schedules were reasons he could not

exchange observations with his mentee: "We've never met in the classroom because his school

and my school are about an hour apart .. and we have the same exact schedule, so it's kind of

hard to make that happen." Distance was a factor for James as well. His mentee was "a good

half hour drive away."

Keith and Kelly shared some of the challenges they faced in conducting observations.

Keith saw the performance demands on high school bands as a large obstacle for observation

opportunities. The first-year high school director was expected to present a quality performance

a month after being hired. Keith asked, "How is he supposed to go out and observe on any kind

of regular basis?" Kelly agreed: "In the high school band director' s world, we're so pushed for

time and performance pressure every week that [the mentees] are going to be reluctant to .. be

out of the classroom."

As mentioned earlier in this chapter, time was an obstacle for all components of the

mentoring programs, and it impacted observations as well. The mentors believed that time might

be available for observation if substitute teachers were available. This is another obstacle to

overcome. Barry said,

"In a dream world, it would be great if the music supervisor could supply the mentor with
a sub to [allow the mentor to] go out [and observe] at least once a semester, maybe twice a
semester .. but funding for subs is rare.

Good Intentions-Questionable Results

Desire for mentee success. The mentors wanted to see their mentees succeed as high

school band directors, but were they succeeding? Were the mentors having an impact on their

mentees? The mentors' answers to these questions cast some doubts.










The mentors' intentions were unquestionable. They wanted to provide anything they could

to ensure their mentees were successful. Keith said, "I like to go in and see a concert... and hear

them do a great job." The picture of success was larger for James and Barry. Barry said,

We need more successful people and we need higher quality people. There [are] so many
bands and band directors that just don't care, don't do the right things, and the kids
suffer .. I just want .. young people to be successful and give their kids the best
education.

Jame said, "I just want to make sure that everybody .. does what they're supposed to do.

[Then] we [music educators] are all going to look better."

Thicertainty. These mentors might have been a tremendous help to their mentees. Their

mentees might have been failing without them. However, the mentors' lack of certainty about

making a difference for their respective mentees was evident.

The mentors were asked to discuss any changes in their mentees' teaching strategies due to

mentoring. Two mentors responded positively. Keith said his mentee's classroom management

had improved. The students were also more receptive to his mentee, but Keith said, "I'm not

really sure if all that we ever talked about has helped. I think he said it has." Kelly remarked

that she thought her mentee was receptive to some suggestions she had made regarding the

pacing of rehearsals and "[had] made some changes."

Barry responded that he had not observed his mentee teaching, so he did not know of any

changes. James "sensed" that his mentee had grasped the importance of an upcoming

performance. Tom had heard from parents that they were pleased with his mentee's work.

However, he said, "Whether or not I had anything to do with it, it would be nice to think that I

did, but I really can't say."

The mentors did not have many opportunities to receive feedback from their mentees

regarding the mentoring process. Kelly spoke about the lack of feedback from her mentee: "You









don't get that feedback from your mentee: 'Oh great, that was a big help.' Barry felt that the

school district supervisor should hold a meeting with mentors and mentees "maybe three times a

year so that the music supervisor can hear pros and cons."

Finally, when asked to share a successful moment with their mentee, most of the mentors

did not have one to share. Barry said, "Nothing maj or yet; hopefully next semester will be it."

James shared, "Just that he's shown up at everything that he's supposed to." Keith said, "If

they're still teaching, I think that' s pretty successful."

The mentors were only able to provide a few specific examples of how mentoring had

helped their mentees. Those examples came from the mentors who had observed their mentees.

Summary of Results

The Mentees

An analysis of data from the mentees showed that they: (a) work long hours required as

high school band directors; (b) felt self-confident; (c) had some significant interactions with their

mentors; (d) held particular perceptions about the structure of their mentoring programs; and (e)

expressed the need for observation to be part of the mentoring process.

Directing a marching band, completing administrative paperwork, and choosing musical

literature for performing ensembles contributed to their long hours. The mentees' feelings of

confidence came as a result of: (a) their undergraduate experiences; (b) networking with other

band directors; (c) their musical skills and abilities; (d) successful classroom management

results; (e) good rapport with students; and (f) validation of their methods by students, parents,

and others.

The mentees reported that the relationship that they cultivated with their mentor was an

important component of their change and growth as first-year band directors. Other aspects of

their relationships that were cited included: a) help with deadlines; b) frequency and context of









mentor contact; c) informal meetings; d) relationship changes over the semester; e) changes in

mentee teaching techniques; and f) payoffs from mentoring, such as a successful performance.

Mentees thought the procedure for mentor pairing lacked structure, and they shared how time

limited the effectiveness of mentoring in some cases.

Both mentees, who had opportunities for observation and those who had not, described the

important role that observation plays, the perceived benefits available through observation, and

ways to provide opportunities.

The Mentors

An analysis of data from the mentors showed: (a) their perceptions of the mentees; (b) how

particular aspects of their interaction with the mentees were helpful; (c) descriptions of the

structure of the mentoring programs; (d) the need for observation; and (e) their good intentions

as mentors and concern about yielding substantial outcomes through their efforts.

The mentors described the mentees' rapport with students and receptiveness to advice.

They felt that their mentees had strong personal backgrounds. Some of the mentors expressed

their connections to their mentees, and the quality of their relationships.

The mentors' frequent mentee contact was important during their first year. However, they

also encouraged mentees to network with other band directors. They described how their

relationships with mentees evolved, and expressed the importance of validating their mentees'

pedagogical strategies.

Mentors discussed the processes of mentor selection and mentee pairing, and how their

training for other state or district programs influenced their mentoring skills. They suggested

that the school administrators' lack of knowledge of the band director mentoring program and

time were obstacles to mentoring.










The mentors emphasized the importance of observation in the mentoring programs. They

described the benefits oftwo-way observations, as well as obstacles that inhibited observations.

Mentors also expressed their desire for mentees to succeed, but they were typically unable to

provide examples of how mentoring led to mentee success.

The Mentors and The Mentees

Both the mentees and mentors emphasized the importance of mentee/mentor interactions,

program structure, and observation. The mentors did not share the mentees' discussion of long

hours or self-confidence. The mentees did not share the mentor themes of "perceptions of

mentees" or "good intentions-questionable results." Because the analysis of data was conducted

separately for each group, some identical categories of data supported different themes across

groups. Mentors and mentees shared themes, and many categories were also shared (see Figure

4-1).

Only one theme contradicted thematic elements of the other group. The mentees did not

describe the mentors' stated goal of success for mentees. However, the mentees did discuss

positive results from mentoring. The mentees cited changes in their teaching techniques and

"payoffs" from mentoring in the form of successful performances. Conversely, each mentor was

not able to identify changes in his mentee's teaching techniques or any significantly successful

moments with his mentee.












I I I I


Mentor Mentoring
Interaction Technique
Survival &
Deadlines
Frequency &
Context
Relationship
Changes
Changes in
Teaching
Payoffs


Mentoring Mentee
Technique Interaction
Frequency &
context
Mentoring Topics:
(Deadlines &
Admin. Work)
(Mlusic Selection)
Networking
Relationship
Changes
Validation


I I I I


Self-confidence Undergraduate
Experience
Networking
Musical Ability
Classroom
Management
Rapport
Validation


Strengths: Perception of
(Rapport) Mentees
(Open-minded)
Strong Personal
Background
Unique Connections
Depth of
Relationship


Mentee
Themes


Mentee
Categories


Mentor
Categories


Mentor
Themes


Selection as Mentor
Pairing Procedure
State Training
Administrative
Awareness
Time Obstacle


Program
Structure


Pairing Procedure
Time Obstacle


Program
Structure


Need for
Observation


Benefits
Modeling
Feedback


Benefits:
(Feedback)
(Validation)
Obstacles


Need for
Observation


Long Hours


Marching Band
Admin. Work
Music Selection


Desire for Mentee
Success
Uncertainty :
(Changes in
Teaching)
(Successful
Moments)


Intentions-
Results


Figure 4-1.


Interrelationships of themes and categories.


COmparable
Themes

Mentor Interaction-Mentee
Interaction

Program Structure

Need for Observation

Self-confidence-Perception of
Mentee


COmparable

Categories

Mentoring Technique
Deadlines
Frequency & Contact
Relationship Changes
Pairing Procedure
Time Obstacle
Observation Benefits
Networking
Rapport
Validation
Admin. Work
Music Selection









CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of first-year high school band

directors and their mentors regarding their mentor-mentee relationships. The role of mentoring

within the unique context of the new high school band director was the focus of this study. This

study also provided an insider' s perspective of the mentoring process experienced by these music

educators. The situational contexts of the mentoring pairs were described in detail. The

participants shared the roles they played in the mentoring process, and discussed how their

relationships changed over time. The effect of mentoring on the instructional capacity of the

mentees was investigated, and the participants presented their views on the effectiveness of their

relationships.

The mentees were in their initial semester of teaching and were "head" band directors at

their respective schools. The mentors in this study were provided through mentoring programs

implemented by an individual school district or by individual districts of the Florida

Bandmasters Association. Although the perceptions of the 10 participants cannot be generalized

to all first-year high school band directors and their mentors, the results should be of particular

interest to music teacher educators, mentor teachers, preservice teachers, administrators, and

professional music education organizations. The Eindings from this study could be used to create

new mentoring programs for music educators or to refine existing programs.

In this chapter, a summary of the data collection procedure is presented and followed by a

discussion of the findings. Finally, implications for theory, issues regarding mentoring, and

implications for music education are discussed.









Data Collection

Five first-year high school band directors in the state of Florida were interviewed twice

during their first semester of teaching: once early in the semester and once near the end of the

semester. Each of the corresponding mentors was interviewed one time near the end of the

semester to provide his thoughts on the mentoring process. Each semi-structured interview was

conducted at the participant' s school and recorded. The first set of interviews with the mentees

focused on biographical data, expectations of teaching, and presumptions of the mentoring

experience (see Appendix C). The second set of interviews focused on teaching experiences,

mentoring experiences, and other topics emergent from the previous interview (see Appendix C).

Each participant also completed a demographic questionnaire to provide additional contextual

information (see Appendix B).

The research timeline had a possible impact on the results of the study. Presidents of FBA

districts and county music supervisors were contacted in early August 2006 to locate possible

participants. Next, permission to get in touch with them and to conduct the research had to be

obtained from the individual school districts. Potential participants were first notified in late

August. Mentors were then contacted to ensure that both members of the mentoring relationship

were willing to participate. This timeline pushed the first interview back into late September.

The researcher intended to interview the mentees in late August. Results of the study might have

been different if the initial mentee interviews were held at the beginning of the school year. At

that time, mentee recollection of early experiences may have been clearer, and perceptions of the

programs may have been based more on their expectations of mentoring.












Five themes emerged from the mentee data and five themes emerged from the mentor data

during the constructivist content analysis. Of the 10 total themes, three were shared and four

were exclusive (see Figure 5-1). The mentee themes were:

1. Mentor Interaction: The mentees had various perceptions regarding contact time with
mentors, but several similar perceptions were shared. These included topics discussed with
mentors, such as mentoring methods, the purpose of mentoring, and the frequency or context
of contact.

2. Program Structure: From the mentor-to-mentee pairing procedure to the enormous time
obstacle involved, these five mentees frequently offered perceptions of the way the programs
were structured.

3. The Need for Observation: All the mentees included the opportunity for observation as part
of their conversation. They shared or anticipated the benefits of observing their mentors.

4. Extra Hours: The fall semester was filled with after-school rehearsals, administrative
paperwork, supervision, and performances. The five mentees clearly expressed the lack of
free time available for mentoring activities.

5. Self-confidence: The first-year teachers expressed confidence in their abilities as music
educators. This confidence was attributed to good undergraduate preparation and
networking, and it was evident in a number of teaching-related areas.


The mentor themes included:

6. Mentee Interaction: Interaction with the mentees came in several forms and included a
common approach by the mentors. The validation of mentee actions and methods was an
important part of the interactions, and most of the relationships changed in some way over
the course of the semester.

7. Program Structure: Mentors held common views of the selection process for becoming a
mentor and the mentee pairing process. Mentors believed that their school administrators
had little knowledge of the mentoring programs, and the lack of time interfered with the
entire mentoring program.

8. The Need for Observation: The mentors spoke out on the importance of including
observation opportunities in their mentoring programs. The difficulties inhibiting mentor and
mentee observations were also presented.

9. Good Intentions-Questionable Results: Despite wanting to see their mentees succeed as high
school band directors and the perceived benefits to the mentees from the program, many of
the mentors were not able to verify that their mentoring efforts were helping the mentees.


Findings









10. Perceptions of Mentees: The mentors shared views of their respective mentees and the
relationship between them. They discussed strengths in teaching, overall ability, and
perceived relationship depth.

The situational context of the mentees is clear within the mentee themes of "extra hours"

and self-confidence." The mentees described long hours spent working outside the regular

school day. Those hours included conducting marching band rehearsals, completing

administrative paperwork, and choosing music for their ensembles. The time and effort involved

with administrative duties matched one of the themes found by Conway (2003a). Conway

stated, "[These duties] take sophisticated skill in time management and administrative

organization. All of the beginning teachers suggested that they were unprepared for these tasks."

By including these administrative tasks as a primary reason for their long hours, the mentees in

the present study suggested they, too, were unprepared.

The mentees were very confident in their abilities. This confidence resulted from the

combination of many factors, which included positive undergraduate experiences, successful

classroom management, and the validation of their methods, among other factors. Confidence,

based on positive undergraduate experiences, was also a strong theme in the Conway et al.

(2004) study. One contributing author from that study stated, "Coming out of college, I felt

confident that I could take whatever the professional teaching world could dish out" (p. 47).

Similarly, that level of confidence was evident from the mentees in the present study.

The mentors had positive opinions of their mentees. The mentor perceptions of the

mentees included strengths of rapport and receptiveness to advice. The mentors also felt the

mentees had strong personal backgrounds, expressed some unique connections to their mentees,

and communicated the depth of their relationships. The mentors had good intentions in

mentoring the first-year band directors, but could not confirm many positive results from their

mentoring. This was the only theme in the study contradicted by perceptions of the other group










of participants. The mentees perceptions contradicted this mentor perception. Mentees did not

cite a desire for their success coming from their mentors, although it might have been implied.

More importantly, the mentees attributed positive changes in their teaching and successful

performances to mentoring.

The mentees and mentors held similar views of their interactions and of the structure of the

mentoring programs in which they were participating. "The need for observation" was the most

prevalent theme from both the mentees and the mentors. Whether participants had experienced

some observation opportunities or no such opportunities, they were clear in expressing their

beliefs that observation should play a prominent role in a mentoring program. This theme was

also supported in Conway's (2003a) study of 13 beginning music teachers. Based on comments

from participants, she included "Scheduling So Mentors Can Observe" (p. 19) as one of her

suggestions for music mentor practices.

The Research Questions

The findings of this study provided the following answers to the five research questions:

1. What are the situational contexts of the mentor/mentee pairs?

The FBA districts operated four of the mentoring programs, and a school district music

supervisor operated the fifth. The school district mentoring program differed in structure from

FBA mentoring programs, and the district FBA mentoring programs differed among each other.

The differences included methods of mentor selection, mentor-mentee pairing, and allocated

resources. This finding supports the lack of consistency in mentoring programs cited by Conway

(2003a).

With the school district program and the FBA programs, the administration at every

participant' s school had little to no awareness of the mentoring program. The participant schools

varied in student population, location, and size of the band program. Despite this wide variety,










the context of the mentor/mentee pairs included "very busy" schedules. The responsibilities to

their own band programs interfered with interactions with their mentoring partner. The mentees

spent numerous hours completing administrative paperwork, choosing music for their ensembles,

and rehearsing with their marching bands. The mentees were confident in their abilities, and

they had a positive view of their undergraduate experience in music education.

The traveling time between mentor and mentee schools was anywhere from 15 to 45

minutes. All the mentors had very positive opinions of their mentees. Several of them had

unique connections to their mentees. One mentee had served as an instructor at the mentor' s

school before graduating from college. Another mentee had been a student teacher with the

mentor during the final semester of college. Finally, one mentor had been the mentee's

immediate predecessor at the same school.

2. What are the mentees and mentors' perceptions of their respective roles?

The mentees believed their role was simply to ask the mentors questions through phone or

email. The mentors perceived their role to be maintaining availability to answer the mentees'

questions on an as-needed basis.

Mentors believed they should answer mentee questions by providing advice, stories, or

examples to the mentees. They did not want to tell the mentees exactly what to do or how to do

it. The mentees should be allowed to make their own decisions and determine the direction of

their band programs. The mentors also felt that the development of a closer relationship or

friendship with their mentees was important. They thought that informal meetings over dinner or

drinks were a good way to achieve this relationship and to get to know their mentees on a more

personal level.









The single biggest role perceived by the mentors was their responsibility to remind

mentees of approaching deadlines and to get forms in. Some even suggested the purpose of the

FBA mentoring program was to ensure that new band directors accomplished the required

paperwork in a timely fashion.

3. How do mentees' perceptions of their relationships with mentors change during the semester?

The mentees became more comfortable interacting with their mentors over the course of

the semester. The types of questions asked of the mentors became more specific in nature,

dealing more with pedagogical issues and less with management or rehearsal technique. The

contact between the mentoring pairs became less frequent, and the mentees felt less need for

verification that they were on the right path.

4. What mentee or mentor-perceived changes occur in the instructional techniques of the mentee

as a result of the mentoring relationships?

All the changes in mentee teaching techniques were perceived by the mentees. Mentees

referred to "increasing their bag of tricks" for use in teaching their ensembles. Some of the

changes included: (a) the use of different demeanors with students; (b) the pacing of rehearsals;

(c) the motivation of students; and (d) the use of different warm-up techniques.

5. What are the mentees' and mentors' perceptions of the effectiveness of their relationships?

The mentors and mentees believed their relationship to be most effective in ensuring that

the mentees met deadlines for the submittal of paperwork and fees to the FBA. This was

especially evident in the mentees' perception that their mentors' role was largely viewed as

providing reminders of deadlines and assistance in completing forms.

The mentees believed that the mentoring relationship was effective in assisting them

during their first semester. They saw the successful performances of their ensembles as evidence










of this effectiveness, but they were not specific with what mentoring moments contributed to the

success. The mentors did not have a perception of how effective their relationship had been.

They did not say their relationships were ineffective, but they also could not confirm that the

relationships were effective. They had not witnessed enough--or any--of their mentees' teaching

or performances of their ensembles to evaluate the effects of the relationship.

Implications for Theory

The theory in action for mentoring suggests that the positive attitudes and teaching

improvements of these first-year high school band directors should have been a result of

mentoring. A positive mentee attitude was displayed through the theme of self-confidence, but

the researcher could not conclude this attitude was a result of mentoring. The categories behind

the mentees' self-confidence suggest that certain factors, such as solid undergraduate experience

and personal musical ability, contributed more to their positive attitude than did the mentors.

However, the mentees attributed a limited number of changes in their teaching and

successful performances of their ensembles to their mentors. Despite the contributions of these

two examples to positive attitudes, the mentors were not able to say the success or attitudes of

their mentees were a result of mentoring. The mentors hoped they had helped but had no way to

be certain. With such a large degree of ambiguity regarding the source of mentee success, the

researcher can include the theory in action as only one possible explanation of mentee

perceptions.

The theoretical framework in Chapter 2 indicated that three additional components should

be evident in mentoring. First, conversations involving constructive criticism by the mentor

should have occurred. These conversations were extremely rare or non-existent due to the lack

of time available and few face-to-face meetings. Second, mentors should be available and

supportive of the mentees. This was the case in this study. The mentors indicated their role was









to answer questions that the mentees posed to them, and the mentees indicated their mentors

answered their questions. Third, as suggested by theory, mentors should allow mentees to make

their own decisions by providing advice, as opposed to mandating methods. Both the mentees

and mentors affirmed this to be the approach used in their relationships.

Theories regarding mentoring were not completely supported by this study. Reasons for

the lack of support are open to interpretation. One interpretation could be that the theories

regarding mentoring are incorrect. However, the researcher believes the theories regarding

mentoring rely strongly on the structure and components of the mentoring program. It is logical

to assume that incomplete mentoring programs would not achieve the levels of success necessary

to support the theories. With adjustments in structure and procedure, these mentoring programs

would support the theories.

Issues

This study prompts several issues that should be considered by school districts and state

music organizations. Some of the issues are directly related to the FBA mentoring programs,

and some are common with both the FBA programs and the school district program involved in

the study.

Purpose of the Programs

The timely completion of forms and submittal of fees and forms to the FBA are important

responsibilities of every high school band director in Florida. Without the orderly completion of

forms and submittal of fees, fines are imposed and/or students are not able to participate in

important FBA-sponsored events. The participants in this study frequently stated that the timely

submittal of forms and fees was the primary purpose of the mentoring programs. These

statements suggest that the full potential of the mentoring programs is not realized.









The FBA personnel have taken an important step in providing mentoring to young band

directors, but the FBA should realize and emphasize to their mentors all the benefits mentoring

can and should provide. The improvement of teacher effectiveness through modeling,

constructive criticism, and feedback is one possible and important benefit.

Pairing Procedures

The administrators of mentoring programs should consider unique relationships that exist

prior to, or may arise from, the pairing of mentors and mentees. Two of the mentoring pairs in

this study had worked closely together prior to being paired as mentor-mentee. While the

established familiarity might eliminate the need for a lengthy period of getting acquainted, the

mentee loses the opportunity to learn from someone new.

The same possibility of advantages and disadvantages existed with one other mentoring

pair in the study. The mentor who was the immediate predecessor of his mentee at the mentee' s

new school acknowledged the advantages and disadvantages of that unique situation. The

mentor had an advantage toward helping the mentee because he intimately knew the mentee's

new program and students. However, this familiarity did not prevent an obvious sense of

uneasiness that was evident to the researcher during the interviews. The presence of the mentor

around his former program and students, and the mentee' s unavoidable questioning of his

mentor' s motives may not have allowed this pairing to reach optimal effectiveness.

The haphazard method of pairing mentors and mentees used by many of the FBA districts

can lead to less than ideal pairings. Several of the districts asked for volunteer mentors and

matched them with mentees closest to them. Personalities were not always a good match, and

not all the mentoring relationships were successful in the eyes of the mentees. One pairing had

little to no interaction and left the mentee wishing the mentor "would take more initiative" in his

role. With the lack of opportunities for reflection or evaluation of the pairing, the FBA districts










will likely never know the level of success of their programs beyond the demonstrated success of

the mentee ensembles.

Observation

First-year high school band directors were paired with mentor teachers through the

mentoring programs encountered in this study. Little structure existed beyond this pairing.

There was no mentor training, protocol for mentors to follow, or prescribed number or types of

contact to be completed. Many of the mentors said they did not want this type of structure, but

both the mentees and mentors wanted opportunities for observation.

One of the mentoring pairs had observed each other in their respective classrooms. They

said that period of time was not enough. The other mentoring pairs had not experienced mutual

observations. They said they wanted to have such observation opportunities, but the lack of free

time in their schedules would not permit them.

The prevailing methods of contact between the mentoring pairs--phone calls and emails--

severely limited the amount and specificity of advice the mentor was able to give. The chance

for a mentee to observe a mentor would allow the mentee to increase his repertoire of classroom

teaching methods based on the successful methods of the mentor. The chance for a mentor to

observe a mentee would allow the mentor to witness the mentee's classroom teaching methods

and provide immediate feedback and constructive criticism.

Administrative Awareness

The lack of awareness of these mentoring programs on the part of the individual school

administrations is surprising. If the school administrators were familiar with the programs and

were aware of the benefits provided by the programs, perhaps they could assist in providing the

best resources and opportunities to the mentors and mentees involved.










The participants in this study mentioned that the availability of substitute teachers would

make observations of each other much easier or even simply possible. School administrators

might be able to make this possible, therefore limiting the obstacle created by the lack of time

available to their high school band directors. A partnership between the administrators of the

mentoring programs and school administrators could greatly improve the effectiveness of music

educator mentoring.

Implications for Music Education

All the mentees' schools had individual mentoring programs. Most of the mentors

assigned through those programs were considered ineffective for helping the mentees with

music-related issues. Despite shortcomings identified by participants, the mentoring programs

that provided an experienced high school band director as a mentor were deemed valuable by the

participants. Therefore, music education organizations should encourage the creation or

continuation of such music educator-specific programs and participation in them. School

districts with music supervisors could administer these mentoring programs, as was the case with

one of the pairs in this study. The FBA could fulfill this role in the rural districts where a district

music supervisor is not employed.

Communication between music educators and school, district and state administrators is

essential. If administrators are not aware of the programs and accompanying benefits provided

to their students, they cannot capably fulfill this role. This important role consists of providing

the release time that is essential to effective mentoring programs (Conway et al., 2002).

The Eindings of this study suggest that more structured mentoring programs might increase

benefits experienced by mentees. Mentors were enthusiastic about supporting their mentees, but

most waited by the phone or computer for the mentees to contact them with questions. The

simplest document could provide suggestions for successful mentoring to mentors. A few short




Full Text

PAGE 1

1 A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF FIRST-YEAR HIGH SCHOOL BAND DIRECTORS AND THEIR MENTORS By JAY N. JACOBS A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2007

PAGE 2

2 2007 Jay N. Jacobs

PAGE 3

3 To my parents, Herbert and Rosemarie Jacobs. Thank you for all of your love, support and encouragement.

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my sincere appreciati on to the many people who made this research and the completion of my doctoral degree possible. First, I would like to thank each of my supervisory committee members. Dr. Timothy Brophy, chair of my committee, patiently taught me the intricacies of music education research and guided me through the dissertation process. Dr. David Waybright, on nu merous occasions, provided for my growth as a musician and as a person. He generously shared hi s musical knowledge and life experiences. I could never have imagined all of the opportunities and experiences he has provided for me during my years in Gainesville. Dr. Russell Robinson offered invaluab le teaching opportunities while at UF, and he was a role model for how to inspire future mu sic educators. Dr. Behar-Horenstein guided me with immeasurable time, effort, and patience th rough the qualitative research and dissertation process. She demonstrated passion in every aspe ct of her teaching in th e College of Education. I would also like to thank Matt Sexton for being so generous with the podium in front of his ensembles and showing his trust in me. The experiences in front of his groups shaped my thinking and provided much of the confidence I have today. I am very thankful for the conducting graduate students I ha ve met and worked with along the way. Without their help, encouragement and laughter, the graduate expe rience would have lost much of its value. I thank all of the high school band directors who participated in this study. These individuals were gracious enough to take time out of their ex tremely busy schedules to call, email, and meet with me over th e course of a semester. Their experiences and the willingness to share them are the heart of this study. These dire ctors are valuable assets to the music education profession. Thanks go to my good friends Chris Heffner and Danny Galyen for being available to answer my numerous questions and offering their opi nions on nearly all aspects of my research.

PAGE 5

5 Their friendship and advice kept me moving in the right direction. I must also thank Kelley Galyen for transcribing the hours of interviews collected for my study. My doctorate would not have been possible wi thout the reinforcement of my family. I would like to thank my parents for their unwaver ing support and financial assistance during my graduate studies. Thanks go to my grandmothe r, Elizabeth Taylor, who has been a symbol of strength, love, and dedication to all her grandchildren. I appreciate her encouragement through each level of my education. Finally, I thank all my aunts and cousins for their love and support, even when one of their own became a Gator.

PAGE 6

6 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...............................................................................................................4 LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................ .........9 ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................... ............10 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................12 Purpose of Study............................................................................................................... ......14 Research Questions............................................................................................................. ....15 Definition of Terms............................................................................................................ ....15 Significance of the Study...................................................................................................... ..15 Delimitations.................................................................................................................. .........16 2 LITERATURE REVIEW.......................................................................................................18 Philosophical Rationales....................................................................................................... ..18 Theoretical Rationales......................................................................................................... ...19 Mentoring...................................................................................................................... .........20 History and Significance.................................................................................................20 Program Structure............................................................................................................22 New Teacher Retention..........................................................................................................25 Teacher Effectiveness and Mentoring....................................................................................27 Mentoring for Music Teachers...............................................................................................28 Context of the High School Band Director.............................................................................32 Summary........................................................................................................................ .........36 3 METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................................38 Introduction................................................................................................................... ..........38 Constructivist Research........................................................................................................ ..38 Setting and Participants....................................................................................................... ...40 Selection Criteria.............................................................................................................40 Purposive Sampling.........................................................................................................40 Negotiating Access and Selection Procedures................................................................41 Data Collection................................................................................................................ .......42 Data Analysis.................................................................................................................. ........43 Presentation of Results........................................................................................................ ...46 Researcher Bias................................................................................................................ ......46 Trustworthiness................................................................................................................ .......47

PAGE 7

7 4 RESULTS........................................................................................................................ .......49 Introduction................................................................................................................... ..........49 The Mentees.................................................................................................................... ........50 Maria.......................................................................................................................... ......50 Corey.......................................................................................................................... .....50 Emily.......................................................................................................................... .....51 Eric........................................................................................................................... .......51 Mike........................................................................................................................... ......51 Through the Eyes of the Mentees...........................................................................................52 The Extra Hours..............................................................................................................53 Self-confidence................................................................................................................55 Mentor Interaction...........................................................................................................60 Mentoring Program Structure..........................................................................................67 Need for Observation......................................................................................................69 The Mentors.................................................................................................................... ........71 Barry.......................................................................................................................... ......71 Tom............................................................................................................................ ......71 James.......................................................................................................................... .....72 Keith.......................................................................................................................... ......72 Kelly.......................................................................................................................... ......72 Through the Eyes of the Mentors...........................................................................................73 Perceptions of Mentees....................................................................................................74 Mentee Interaction...........................................................................................................76 Program Structure............................................................................................................80 Need for Observation......................................................................................................82 Good Intentions-Questionable Results............................................................................83 Summary of Results............................................................................................................. ...85 The Mentees....................................................................................................................85 The Mentors.................................................................................................................... .86 The Mentors and The Mentees........................................................................................87 5 DISCUSSION..................................................................................................................... ....89 Introduction................................................................................................................... ..........89 Data Collection................................................................................................................ .......90 Findings....................................................................................................................... ...........91 Implications for Theory........................................................................................................ ..96 Issues......................................................................................................................... ..............97 Purpose of the Programs..................................................................................................97 Pairing Procedures...........................................................................................................98 Observation.................................................................................................................... ..99 Administrative Awareness...............................................................................................99 Implications for Music Education........................................................................................100 Conclusions.................................................................................................................... .......102

PAGE 8

8 APPENDIX A LETTER OF CONSENT......................................................................................................104 B DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE................................................................................105 C INTERVIEW PROTOCOL..................................................................................................106 Mentee Interview 1............................................................................................................. ..106 Mentee Interview 2............................................................................................................. ..107 Mentor Interview............................................................................................................... ...108 D SAMPLE TEXT CODING REPORT..................................................................................109 E SAMPLE NODE SUMMARY REPORT............................................................................110 F SAMPLE OF MENTEE TREE NODES..............................................................................111 G SAMPLE OF MENTOR TREE NODES.............................................................................112 LIST OF REFERENCES.............................................................................................................113 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.......................................................................................................118

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 4-1 Interrelationships of Themes and Categories....................................................................88 5-1 Common and Exclusive Themes....................................................................................103

PAGE 10

10 Abstract of Dissertation Pres ented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF FIRST-YEAR HIGH SCHOOL BAND DIRECTORS AND THEIR MENTORS By Jay N. Jacobs May 2007 Chair: Timothy S. Brophy Cochair: David A. Waybright Major: Music Education Mentoring first-year music teachers is an increasingly common practice in the United States. A part of the formal professional induc tion process, mentoring programs pair a beginning teacher with an experienced colleague who serves to guide and support the new teacher. Mentoring has been shown to have positive e ffects on retention, thereby increasing faculty stability within classrooms and schools. These and other theore tical rationales exist, but the current research base provides li ttle insight into how mentori ng affects band directors. In addition, little research has been conducted into the eff ects of mentoring specifically on first-year high school band directors. To help first-year high school band directors meet the unique challenges of the job, the Florida Bandmasters Association and certain sc hool districts in Flor ida utilize mentoring programs. The purpose of this study was to exam ine the perceptions of first-year high school band directors and their mentors regarding thei r mentor-mentee relationships. The following research questions were de signed to guide the implem entations of the study:

PAGE 11

11 1. What are the situational contexts of the mentor/mentee pairs? 2. What are the mentees and mentors pe rceptions of their respective roles? 3. How do mentees perceptions of their rela tionships with mentors change during the semester? 4. What mentee or mentor-perceived changes o ccur in the instructional techniques of the mentee as a result of the mentoring relationships? 5. What are the mentees and mentor s perceptions of the effectiv eness of their relationships? Five first-year high school band directors a nd their mentors were interviewed over a sixmonth period concerning their mentor-mentee re lationships. Data from the mentee interviews and mentor interviews were analyzed separately using constructivist content analysis, and results of the constructivist analysis were presented as a multiple-case study narrative. The narrative was grounded in the experiences of the participants, and is presente d as two separate stories: one of the mentees and one of the mentors. Three common themes emerged from the anal ysis: mentor-mentee interaction, program structure, and the need for obser vation. The results prov ide insight into the challenges, benefits, and areas for improvement in these programs. I ssues raised by the study and implications for music education are discussed.

PAGE 12

12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION For someone attempting an activity for the first time, the presence of a mentor can be comforting and helpful. Historical ly, mentoring has been a way to assist people in transition to a new job or profession (Fletcher, 2000). Mentor ing can increase the comfort, confidence, and production of new employees (Johnson, 2002). Busine sses have used mentoring in the form of apprenticeships to their advantage for centuri es (Johnson, 2002). Education is no exception, but an informal or spontaneous (Johnson, 2002) version of mentoring has been the norm until recently. Informal mentoring often occurs natu rally, but formal and mandated teacher mentoring programs aim to achieve higher levels of success in multiple areas. Different specialties of education, such as music education, present uniq ue settings and challenges for new teachers, which may increase the importance of mentor ing and its structure (Haack, 2003). New high school band directors may provide the best example of specific needs. Informally, mentoring has helped new educator s enter the teaching profession for decades. The student teaching process is a form of apprenti ceship. University supervisors, principals, and master teachers, among others, have mentored ne w teachers. Informal mentoring (new teachers seeking help or experienced teachers offering unsolicited help) dominated education until the last 15 to 20 years. During the past 15 years, the si gnificance of mentoring programs as part of the profession of teaching has grown exponentially (Ganser, 2005, p. 14). This is a positive step for education. Support during the new teachers first y ear or two may be just as important to their effectiveness as their pre-servi ce training, their state ce rtification, and their subject matter skills (Strong, 2006). Support systems for new educator s are critical to build ing effective teaching practices and maintaining enthusiasm that th ese new teachers bring into their classrooms.

PAGE 13

13 Mentoring, a component of the formal induction process, has received substantial attention as an effective way to provide new teacher support It has been connected to increased teacher retention (Ingersol & Smith, 2004). This increased retention could be linked to several benefits of having a mentor, as listed by Podsen and De nmark (2000): a) speeding up the learning of a new job or skill and reducing the stress of transi tion; b) improving instructional effectiveness; and c) helping socialize new t eachers into the profession (p. 31) Daresh (2003) added three additional possible benefits of mentoring: improved communication skills, better opportunities to put theory into practice, and reduced isolation. School districts in Florid a and other states are providing mentors for new teachers. Despite the observation that many states incl ude mentoring in educational policy (Conway, 2003b), significant problems still exist. Mentoring programs vary widely in their components and structure (Conway, 2003a). This variance c ould be one reason why so many teachers leave the profession within their first five years. The rate of at trition remains between 40 and 50 percent (Boreen, Johnson, Nida y, & Potts, 2000; Ingersoll, 20 03; Ingersoll & Smith, 2003; Madsen & Hancock, 2002). Among music educat ors, the numbers are equally troublesome (Lindeman, 2004). What should be the compone nts of a mentoring program? Should all mentors receive training? Shoul d mentors be compensated? Ho w long should the program last? How much control should a district have over th e components? Many of these questions may be answered through cont inuing research. One additional important question is: Does the structure of one mentoring program meet the needs of teachers in all s ubject areas? From the perspective of music educators, one mentoring program does not always meet teah ers needs. Although instrumental music educators share many of the same classroom challe nges as teachers in other subject areas, they

PAGE 14

14 are faced with a multitude of additional duties an d responsibilities including, but not limited to, much larger class sizes, the management of large budgets, and public performances. The enormity of these responsibili ties can easily overwhelm new ba nd or orchestra directors, and result in the loss of many talented educators from the profession. First-year band directors at the high school level can be especia lly susceptible to this type of situation. Teachers in these positions find themselves in a ve ry different context from general classroom teachers. Time and class size are of ten the two major differences. Band directors have the same regular school day instructional a nd planning hours as all ot her faculty members. However, the hours required outs ide of the school day can be nu merous. Marching band is often the most time consuming, especially during the su mmer and fall. Other ensembles and activities (concerts, festivals, competitions) make frequent demands on evenings and weekends. Class or ensemble size is another primary contextual di fference. Concert bands often number 30 to 100 students (Cooper, 2004), and marchi ng bands can be significantly la rger. These numbers can be daunting, even to the most experienced teacher. Music education students become familiar with and prepared for these situations through methods classes and student teaching, but nothing can fully prepare them for the responsibilities of student learning and the successful performance of thei r ensembles. Considering the job description of the high school band director and all its imp lications, effective mentoring programs could make a significant impact on the su ccess of new high school band directors. The question is: Are todays mentori ng programs providing sufficient s upport for these new teachers? Purpose of Study The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of first-year high school band directors and their mentor s regarding their mentor-m entee relationships.

PAGE 15

15 Research Questions 1. What are the situational contexts of the mentor/mentee pairs? 2. What are the mentees and mentors pe rceptions of their respective roles? 3. How do mentees perceptions of their rela tionships with mentors change during the semester? 4. What mentee or mentor-perceived changes o ccur in the instructional techniques of the mentee as a result of the mentoring relationships? 5. What are the mentees and mentor s perceptions of the effectiv eness of their relationships? Definition of Terms The following definitions are provided to clarify terms used within the study. The FBA is the Florida Band Masters Association. A General Classroom Teacher is an educator who provides instruction in a traditional classroom setting. Induction is an organized professi onal development system designed by a school or school district to train a nd support new teachers A New Band Director is a music educator working in his or her first year of in struction with one or more instrumental music ensembles as part of the teaching assignment. A New Teacher is an educator working in his or he r first year of classroom instruction. A Mentee is a new teacher who has been assigned a mentor. A Mentor is an experienced teacher who is paired with a new teacher and provides guidance and support. Mentoring is a component of the induction process th at pairs one or more experienced teachers with a new teacher. Support consists of actions that assist ne w teachers in developing professionally. Significance of the Study The success of new high school ba nd directors is critical to the longevity and future of school band programs. Retaining talented music educators is a concern of the entire music education profession. Mentoring offers one so lution to these concerns. Various forms of

PAGE 16

16 mentoring are common in most school districts, and research focusing on mentoring and the attrition of new teachers is a bundant. Articles on mentoring and studies of new music teachers and their mentors are becoming more frequent in the music education literature (Conway, 2003a; Conway & Zerman, 2003; Conway, Krueger, Robinson, Haack, & Smith, 2002; DeLorenzo, 1992; Krueger, 1999, 2001; Montague, 2000; Smith, 1994). However, only one of these studies addressed a specific area of mu sic education. The research of Conway and Zerman (2003) focused on one middle school band director. The role of mentoring within the unique cont ext of the new high sc hool band director was of interest to this study. The illumination of mentoring programs through the context-specific perceptions of new high school band directors and their mentors shoul d be of particular interest to music teacher educators, mentor teachers, pres ervice teachers, administrators, and professional music education organizations. This study e xpands the literature on mentoring and music education. The findings from this study may cont ribute to the development of a standardized and comprehensive model for mentoring. Delimitations The following variables were not controlled in this study: 1. Mentee undergraduate teaching preparation 2. Mentor training 3. Mentor experience (teaching) 4. Mentor experience (mentoring) 5. Learning styles 6. Personality types 7. Prior relationships between mentoring pairs Findings from a study of this type may not be generalized to all new high school band director populations. The researcher was able to access only limited number of participants matching the selection criteria. Moreover, sele cted study participants represented only a small sample of mentoring programs statewide. Undergraduate teacher preparation programs

PAGE 17

17 experienced by new teachers may have affected c onfidence, ability, attitu de, and other individual attributes. These attributes differed in each firstyear teacher and may have affected interactions with the mentor. These attributes could not be controlled or accounted for in this study. Learning styles and personality types can also affect perceptions of mentoring relationships (Daresh, 2003). This study did not attempt to account for these variables. The interview responses were limited by the participants memo ry recall. Significant events or information from the semester may not have been recalled at the time of interviews. Participant responses were also temporal. If this st udy had taken place at another time, or with different persons in different contexts, responses may have been di fferent. Finally, the duration of the study was limited to only one semester and did not include summer activities, which can be significant to teachers in these positions.

PAGE 18

18 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of first-year high school band directors and their mentors regarding their me ntor-mentee relationships. This chapter will present an overview of the litera ture relevant to this study. The chapter is organized into eight sections: (a) philosophical rationa les; (b) theoretical rationales; (c) mentoring; (d) new teacher retention; (e) teacher effectiveness and mentor ing; (f) mentoring for music teachers; and (g) context of the high school band director. The eighth section is a summary statement of what this literature means and how it relates to this study. Philosophical Rationales As educators, our overall goal is promoting th e learning and development of all persons to their fullest potential (Reiman & Thies-Sprintha ll, 1998, p. 2). Teachers seek to achieve this goal with their students. Profe ssional development in education is the vehicle for achieving this goal with teachers. Teachers who are learni ng are building a library of teaching methods, classroom management techniques, ways to interact with students, parents and colleagues, and assessment tools. Mentoring, although primarily focused on the beginning years of teaching, is a type of professional development, and it is import ant because it can provide a critical structure to such learning for beginning teachers. John Dewey advocated careful, guided experien ces as a part of what he called active learning in education (Reiman & Thies-Sprinthall, 1998, p. 67). Wh en first-year teachers are mentored, their first-year experience becomes an example of Deweys active learning. The firstyear high school band directors in this study are experiencing some level of active learning as they move from one stage of development (st udent teaching) into an other (teaching in a classroom of their own). As Wanzare (2007) stat ed, Beginning teachers often have a hard time

PAGE 19

19 determining their success, especially during their first year of teaching (p. 343). Mentoring, as Dewey would frame it, provides a balance of expe riential learning with analysis and reflection on the experiences. This reflection can help the beginning teachers determine their success. Without mentoring, the active learning of firstyear teachers is largely left to chance. Mentoring has a place within the philosophy of music educations. Elliott (1995) linked mentoring to the future of music education: The future depends on making music education more musical, more artistic, and more creative . by continuing to improve the musicianship of . in-service teachers (p. 305). Elliott also presents four tasks required to secure the place of music education in the future. Two of these tasks fit within the scope of mentoring: 1. To develop and refine the cri tical thinking abilities of preservice and in-service music teachers with regard to the fundamental concepts of our professional practice. 2. To develop and renew the musicianship and edu catorship of pre-servi ce and in-service music teachers through exemplary models of music education in action. Inducting new teachers into the profession s hould be a concern for all current music educators. When new teachers participate in a formal induction process that includes mentoring as a component, all students in all schools can achieve the prof ound values of music education (Elliott, 1995, p. 310). Theoretical Rationales Argyris (1976) stated, A theory is not necessa rily accepted, good, or true; it is only a set of interconnected propositions that have the sa me referent. Theori es are vehicles for explanation, prediction, or control (p. 4). Theory regarding mentoring can be viewed as one of both prediction and explanation. Mentoring is grounded in th e theoretical framework of espoused theory (predictive) and theory in ac tion (explanatory). Portner (2002) presented an espoused theory for general education: Mentori ng is a powerful and effective way to help new teachers learn to teach (p. 3). The espoused th eory specific to this study is: If a new music

PAGE 20

20 educator participates in a mentoring program, he will be a better teacher and feel good about the profession. Theory in action seeks to explain better teaching and att itude in a reciprocal manner. This study attempted to determine if this recipr ocal relationship existed, and if so, to what degree. This theoretical rationale predicts that the first-year high school band directors will have positive attitudes about their new professions be cause they have a mentor. They will be achieving success with their program and this succe ss will be due, at leas t in some part, to interaction with their mentors. As Nicholls (2002) stated, The mentor shoul d develop a relationship built on constructive criticism, support and a relations hip that allows for developm ent (p. 74). Therefore, theoretically, mentees can benefit from their mentors in developing their professional skills (methods in the music classroom), plus learni ng organizational, managerial, and communication skills. Mentees can also benefit from using th eir mentors as role models. The mentors and mentees should report their relati onships to include (a) critical conversations to improve the mentees teaching; (b) the mentor being availabl e and willing to provide advice and assistance; and (c) a mentor approach that allows the me ntee to ultimately make his own right or wrong decisions. Mentoring History and Significance The concept of mentoring has a long history. The process of mentoring can be traced back to the eighteenth century B.C., when the laws of Hammurabi of Babylon required artisans to teach their craft to younger students (Boreen et al., 2002). The theory of mentoring is given a more specific definition in Homers The Odyssey The relationship of the character Mentor with his protg Telemachus is a model of what mentoring should be in general terms: a role model,

PAGE 21

21 teacher, counselor, adviser, challenger, and en courager. Additionally, the epic poem suggests that mentoring is an intentional, nurturing, insightful, supportive, and protective process (Fletcher, 2000; Johnson, 2002; Nicolls, 2002; Sm ith, 2005). Despite centur ies of mentoring in one form or another, a clear consensus on the definition or components of mentoring has not been reached in any profession. Successful corporations sometimes include mentoring, coaching, team building, and empowering as standard practices. However, investing time and money in the professional development of teachers, which includes these pr actices, has not caught on in the same way that it has in business (Fibkins, 2002). Conway ( 2003a) researched beginni ng music teachers by conducting interviews and obser ving 13 individuals participa ting in a district-sponsored mentoring program. One finding was that mentori ng programs are mandated in a majority of states, but a lack of consistency arises in the types of mentor programs, their effectiveness and the level of commitment from the schools, dist ricts, and states. High quality implementation requires significant effort and cooperation from all stakeholders. Fi bkins (2002) stated, The major goal of a mentoring program should be to help every teacher be highly skilled, self-aware, inclusive, energetic and creative, and to carry a zest for teaching into the classroom every day. These are big goa ls and not easy to achieve. (p. 32) How to achieve these goals is the major que stion facing educators, administrators, and politicians. Ganser (2005) stated, During the past 15 years, the significance of mentoring programs as part of the profession of t eaching has grown exponentially (p. 14) In that time, research and writing has focused on the role of mentoring in the support of new teachers (Conway, 2003a; Fibkins, 2002; Haack, 2006a; Haack & Smith, 2000; Krueger, 1999; Montague, 2000). Kimpton (2003) stated, Bold state and nati onal leadership is required to fully focus our attention on mentoring and induction (p. x).

PAGE 22

22 State boards of education have reacted in a myriad of ways. Some merely acknowledge the possible benefits of mentoring and encour age their schools to incorporate informal mentoring. Others have linked mentoring to administrative c odes and state statutes as a requirement for teaching licenses. During the 1996-1997 school year, only seven states had state-mandated induction policies (Ganser, 2005) Conway et al., (2002) examined and compared mentoring programs in Connecticut, Illinois, Mich igan, Minnesota and Washington, and they provided a national overview of beginni ng teacher mentor and induction policies. They found that the number of states with mandated induction policies had increased to 33 states. However, only 17 of those states required that mentors receive training, and only 12 states mandated stipends for mentors. Development and implementation of clear and structured mentoring programs at the state level c ould alleviate these program variations. Program Structure Ingersoll and Kralik (2004) examined more than 500 documents concerned with teacher induction and mentoring. Using sp ecific criteria, they reduced the list to 10 studies that were empirical and sought to evaluate the effects of beginning-teacher mentoring programs. In their examination of these studies, they found in a st udy of induction-program effectiveness that the manner in which mentors are selected varies greatl y. How carefully are mentors selected? Is the selection to be a mentor volunt ary or mandatory? Some program s devote attention to the match between mentor and mentee based on level and subject; some do not consider grade level or subject. Matching new teacher s with mentors can determine the success of the mentoring relationship. Research has indicated that ne w music educators preferred having mentors who taught in their same areas (general music, band, a nd so forth) and same grade levels (Conway et al., 2002).

PAGE 23

23 Ingersoll and Smith (2004) studi ed a large amount of data from the National Center for Education Statistics Schools and Staffing Surv ey and the Teacher follow-up survey. These surveys provide a large amount of data from the teaching population of the entire United States during a 12-month period. Teachers who left the profession after the 12-month period were also surveyed to obtain information on their departur es. Their purpose was to determine if types of induction support, including mentoring, had a pos itive effect on the retention of beginning teachers. One conclusion form these data was that the most effective induction programs provide a mentor from the same field. Pairing teach ers at either the same grade level or the same subject area is preferable, and attaining both aspects is optimal (Boreen et al., 2000). Many mentoring programs are implemented at the district level, and th e level at which the mentoring programs are constructed and maintained can determine the flexibility of matching. Finding the most effective mentor for a middle sc hool band director in a smaller district would require a formal system with the ability to ne twork through other schools a nd districts. Without this ability, self-contained mentoring programs provide much less of an opportunity for quality music-teacher mentoring. Experienced or master music educators are at the frontline of music teacher mentoring and retention. They have experience and enthusia sm at their disposal. As Smith (2003) pointed out, music education is fortunate in the area of selection: The challenge is generally not in finding [mus ic education] individua ls who are willing to serve as mentors . rather one of the primary challenges li es in equipping wellintentioned and concerned veteran music teacher s with strategies that will prove to be effective methods for offering th e support that new music teachers so badly need. (p. 106) The profession should look beyond using mentor s only for advice. The Music Educators National Conference (MENC) already effectively provides online mentors for general survivaltype questions. What mentoring needs are mast er teachers, readily av ailable to help shape

PAGE 24

24 instructional practices over time. Casey and Claunch (2005) stated, T he knowledge and skills needed for working with adults differs from those required for educating young students, and the what and how of mentoring remains uncomfort able for many (p. 98). This is where formal mentoring programs can excel, but also where th e most developmental assistance is needed. What kind of training should pros pective mentors receive? How much training is necessary? How do districts and teachers fi nd time for such training? Thes e are all relevant questions. Formal mentoring programs in several states already provide possi ble answers to these questions. Connecticut and Washington are tw o such states, and each state has a program operating today. Connecticuts Beginning Educat or Support and Training program utilizes a team approach in a comprehensive three-year teacher induction program, which includes mentor training. Washingtons Teacher Assistance Program (TAP) includes mentor training in observation techniques. Many sim ilar programs are operating in various states, and more states are moving in this direction (Robinson & Krueger, 2003). The length of the mentoring programs is a nother component. Many schools employ the use of a mentor for the first year of teaching. Ganser (2005) commented, The trend in recent years is to extend teacher mentoring programs be yond one year to the second or even third year of a new teachers employment (p. 11). As many teachers will a ttest, many do not feel as if they hit their stride until their third or fourth year of teaching. The first year is spent becoming familiar with procedures, discipline, students, and other environmental adjustments. These are challenges that need mentoring, but when it comes to improving and honing teaching skills, mentoring can affect the quality of teaching in th e classroom. Often new teachers are not able to clearly focus their attention on ma tters related to effective instru ction and structure of curriculum until well into or after their first year of teaching.

PAGE 25

25 The time and the context of mentor-mentee inte raction is critical to the depth and success reached through the mentoring program. Release time from regular teaching duties for both the new teacher and mentor is an important com ponent of a mentoring program (Boreen et al., 2000). This release time can allow for each part icipant to observe the other within the active classroom setting and allow for regularly scheduled consultation. It is essential that mentors be able to observe their mentee from within the actu al classroom environment in order to experience everything affecting the teaching-learning enviro nment. A videotape or narrative of the classroom situation places the mentor at a disa dvantage by not providing a complete picture. The same is true in order for the new teacher to understand strategies employed by the mentor in his own classroom. Release time becomes even more important if the mentoring pair is not teaching in the same building. In this case, time for informal consultation (during lunch, between classes, and so forth) is not possible, and rele ase time is the only way to ensure that the necessary interaction will occur. Generally, mentoring is beginni ng to receive the attention it deserves in the context of providing new teachers what they deserve in th e way of support. The New Teacher Center (NTC) at the University of Calif ornia at Santa Cruz is a cente r for researching, designing, and advocating high-quality induction programs for new t eachers. The existence of this center and its collaboration with school districts in 16 states is evidence of the intense interest generated by the potential of mentoring. St rong support from all stakeholders and a consensus on what mentoring should include will allow me ntoring to reach this potential. New Teacher Retention In any type of business, high rates of empl oyee attrition can be linked to substantial financial costs and decreases in the degree of organizational st ability, coherence, and morale (Fibkins, 2002). Education is a business that pr ovides the consumer (students) with a product

PAGE 26

26 (knowledge and experience), and re quires extensive interaction be tween participants. For the business of education to thrive, it is dependent on continuity, cohe siveness, and coherence, all of which are impossible to sustain wi th high teacher turnover. Inge rsoll and Smith (2004) stated, High rates of teacher turnove r can inhibit the development and maintenance of a learning community. In turn, a lack of community in a school may have a negative effect on teacher retention, thus creating a vicious cycle (p. 32). These kinds of consequences have become a major concern to states and school districts (Boreen et al., 2000; Ingersoll & Smith, 2003; Ma dsen & Hancock, 2002). Madsen and Hancock (2002) conducted two surveys inves tigating issues related to the re tention and attrition of music educators. The first survey was sent to 225 certified teachers who had earned a bachelor of music education degree within the past 10 years from the same institution. The second survey was conducted with the same sample six years fo llowing the first survey. One of their findings indicated that pressure from parents, administrators, and others made the job of teaching difficult. The instituti on of education has not done a good jo b assisting people transition from new teacher to veteran teacher (Hicks, Glasgow, & McNary, 2005). Mentoring has become a primary tool in attempting to alleviate the prob lem of teacher attrition. Data from the Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS) conducted by the Nati onal Center for Educati on Statistics (NCES) of the U.S. Department of Edu cation indicated that in the 19 90-1991 school year, approximately 40% of beginning teachers had participated in a formal teacher induction program. In the 19992000 school year, participation rates rose to 80% (Ingersoll & Smith 2004). Mentoring within induction pr ograms has also become more frequent. In the 1999-2000 school year, about two-thirds of beginning teachers said they worked closely with a mentor (Ingersoll & Smith, 2004). The re tention capabilities of mentor ing have been documented as

PAGE 27

27 well. In analyzing 1999-2000 SASS data, Inge rsoll (2003) reported the following turnover percentages: 40% teachers w ith no induction or mentoring; 28% teachers with some mentoring and induction; 18% teachers with full mentoring and induction. Studies regarding the effects of mentori ng on teacher retention continue to grow. Statistics are beginning to support the potential of mentoring in th is area. The ability of school districts to provide enough faculty members to staff their classroom teaching positions depends on recruiting new teachers, but more important ly, retaining those new teachers. Effective mentoring programs can increase such retention for teachers in all areas. Teacher Effectiveness and Mentoring High levels of employee turnover are the cause of low performance in business organizations. Low performance or ineffectiveness is also the cause of high levels of employee turnover (Ingersoll & Smith, 2004). This recipr ocal relationship between effectiveness and turnover is increasingly important in the pol itical climate of teach er accountability and heightened emphasis on student achievement. Studies that mi ght link mentoring to teacher effectiveness are difficult to conduct, and few ha ve been conducted. Data are often not readily available. Many factors contribut e to changes in student achievem ent, such as school variables, family, economic status, tutoring, an d language issues. It is theref ore difficult to attribute such increases solely to the kinds of support beginning teachers receive. However, as Strong (2006) asserted, Support during the new teach ers first year or two may be just as important to their effectiveness as their pre-servi ce training, their state ce rtification, and their subject matter skills (p. 1). Wong (2005) proposed that studen t learning depends on teacher effectiveness: The better the teacher is able to manage the classroom a nd deliver the instruction, the more students will learn (p. 52). Effective teachers are cult ivated from effective professional development

PAGE 28

28 programs, and mentoring is a major component of effective professional development programs. This is a logical progression from student achieve ment to teacher effectiveness to mentoring (as part of an induction program). Teacher effectiveness can be approached from many angles. Teachers who have worked with a mentor indicate that s upport with classroom management strategies and support in instructional strategies are two of the most helpful factors in their development (Odell, 1992). Observation of new teachers by mentors can lead directly to instructi onal improvement. Wells (2002) suggested one such opportunity: When reviewing a lesson observed, a focus on unplanned teachable moments -taken up or missed -can offer the opportunity for the beginning teacher to recognize the intrinsically negotiatory quali ty of learning and teaching an d to develop strategies for making the most of what the stude nts bring to each lesson. (p. 6) The continuing education of teachers may be one key to providing students with the best education possible. In the United States, millio ns of new teachers will enter the profession within the next decade. They will be expected to teach and learn to teach bette r (Portner, 2002). It appears that mentoring can facilitate how these new instru ctors learn to teach better. Mentoring for Music Teachers The contextual situations of music teachers are important in understanding the need for mentoring of these teachers (Conway, 2003a). Conway, Hansen, Schulz, Stimson, & WozniakReese (2004) demonstrated one contextual f actor common among many fi rst-year high school band directors. This article presented the stor ies of four beginning musi c teachers in order to help illuminate the issues facing teachers in these positions. The contextual element demonstrated by Stimson was the confidence he had when entering his first year of teaching band: I entered my first year as a band director wi th great expectations. I believed that my undergraduate preparation and student-teaching e xperiences were more than sufficient to

PAGE 29

29 prepare me for what was ahead. Everything I had learned was great preparation for teaching band. (p. 47) Schulz explained having similar confidence: Coming out of college, I felt confident that I could take whatever the professional teaching world could dish out. I was a good student, had plenty of teaching experience, and had enough people to call on as resources. I knew I had some weaknesses, but I was sure I could survive. (p. 46) Stories of unanticipated challenges followed thes e statements of confidence, and these challenges are often the reasons for the impl ementation of mentoring programs. The quality of music programs is often depe ndent on the same teacher serving as the instructor for long periods of time. Teacher attitu de and retention are therefore important to the music education profession. Krue ger (2000) conducted an investig ation of job satisfaction and attrition factors for music teachers. The invest igation included interviews of 30 music teachers in their first 10 years of teaching in the state of Washington. The investigators questions focused on the instructors perceptions of thei r first years of teaching. Only three of the participants had been part of formal mentori ng programs during their first years of teaching, and they found those programs to be beneficial. As a whole, the participants regarded collaboration with other teacher and administrators as rewarding and an important means for professional development. They also viewed other music teac hers as valuable sources for ideas and feedback. The two significant and interconnected aspects of mentor matching are critically important to new music educators. First, music teachers ar e often referred to as specialists within the faculty. This designation should immediately si gnal implications to designers of mentoring programs. Research has indicated that new music educators preferred having mentors who taught in their same areas (general music, band, c hoir, orchestra) and same grade levels (Conway et al., 2002). Matching a new music teacher with a mentor who is also a music educator can make a huge difference in the professional development of the new teacher. New music teachers

PAGE 30

30 are often faced with larger cl ass sizes, performance-based assessments, physically active classrooms, constantly changing selections of classr oom materials (music), and other issues uncommon in the general classroom. Close matching of music specialty areas is also important. A high school band director and a high school choir director share the core area of music. However, the specifics of the two jobs are very different. Matching music teachers with music mentors within the same grade levels is also important. While it is true that a band director at a high school and one at a middle school have even more in common, the activities and music literature encountered at the two levels are different (Haack, 2006b; Krueger, 1999). New mu sic teachers should be matched with mentors from within the music education field, the same specialty area, and similar grade levels. Finding a mentor who meets all of these criteria may be ve ry difficult to achieve within a small school or school district. Opportunities for observation are also important in music education. Interviews with new music teachers indicate that it is important for th e mentor to observe the mentee in the classroom in order to understand the c ontext of the situation (Conw ay, 2003a; Krueger, 1999; Haack, 2006b). Boreen et al. (2000) and Daresh (2003 ) emphasized the importance of proximity in mentoring. Daily schedules of band or orchestr a teachers are often extremely busy from beforeschool hours through after-school hours. This can make interaction difficult even where mentoring pairs are in close proximity. There are a limited number of band directors in any given school district. Avoiding large distances between mentees and mentors may be difficult. Options are available to help al leviate such difficulties, includi ng available release time for both parties, which is an essential part of eff ective mentoring programs (Conway et al., 2002).

PAGE 31

31 On a smaller scale, in what areas should a mentor focus attention to best help the new music teacher? Some suggestions for general e ducators include (a) classroom organization and management; (b) curriculum planning, implem entation, and evaluation; (c) instructional strategies of learning styles and cooperative learning; (d) pa rent communications; (e) record keeping; and (f) grading and assessment (C onway, 2003a; Downes, 1998; Hicks et al., 2005). These are all areas that apply to the new music teacher. They often just occur in a very different environment. Conway (2006) pointed out, School district administrators need to be educated about the value of content-specific profe ssional development experiences for new music teachers (p. 56). Additionally, state board s of education, state music educat or organizations, national music educator organizations, or some combination of the three may be required to assist in the mentoring process for new music e ducators. Before administrators and organizations can assist new music teachers, they must be aware of the difficult situations facing these new teachers, and that these mentoring programs benefit everyone involved. Haack (2006a) stated the following: Increased teaching effort and effectiven ess are demonstrated outcomes of having hardworking mentors as models and energetic music educators as mentees. Formally organized mentoring programs can encourage st aff cooperation and inte raction and lead to greater teacher effectiveness. The sc hool as a whole benefits. (p. 63) Conway (2003a) included the cont ent of first-year teacher an d mentor interaction as an important category in her findings. The frequenc y of questions about ad ministrative issues was the most prevalent theme in th at category. The question topi cs included budgets, fund-raising, and weekend events. She stated, All of the beginning teachers suggested that they were unprepared for these tasks (p. 16). Anothe r theme was classroom management. Conway (2003a) suggested that mentors observe their ment ees in the classrooms in order to understand the context of the me ntees classrooms.

PAGE 32

32 Based on her study, Conway (2003a) presented s uggestions for music mentor practices, such as scheduling participants teaching duties to allow mentor s to observe mentees in their classrooms. She also recomme nded that mentors and mentees have some informal opportunities to get to know one another. Partic ipants in the study said that meetings in social settings allowed them to get to know their mentoring partners better. Montague (2000) conducted a qualitative study of music education mentors and mentees from a range of public school educational levels. The focus of the study was the experiences of beginning music teachers within their mentoring re lationships. Mentors we re found to be vital and sought to activate, invigorate, and enable . their novice teachers transfer of amassed knowledge from one community of practice [music teacher preparation] to another [teaching music in the public schools] (p. 163). Additionally, the mentors were able to assist the mentees in adapting to and excelling in th eir specific situational contexts. Context of the High School Band Director Conway et al. (2002) suggested the research that forms the basis for educational policy may not reflect the needs of the beginning mu sic teacher population. Results of studies investigating the needs of new music teachers su ggest that the issues of mentoring new music teachers are highly contextual (Conway, 2003a; H aack, 2003; Montague, 2000). Included in this population are new high school instru mental music educators. These individuals, within their unique situational contexts, were the subjects of this study. Requirements of the high school teaching pos ition, generally referred to as a band director, vary depending on the size of school, e xpectations of students, parents, administrators, and state music organizations. There are, how ever, characteristics and requirements of the position that are faced by the majority of new teachers in this field. McKee (1996) addressed new band directors and stated:

PAGE 33

33 There is little question but that band directing is one of th e most complicated jobs man ever invented As a director you will be exp ected to prepare bands for concert, marching, and jazz performances while working one-on-one with students on more than a dozen entirely different instruments. At the sa me time you will deal with finances, promotion, publicity, travel arrangements and fundraising as well as show production and narration, equipment purchases and management, unifo rm design and maintenance, library and inventory, not to mention score selection a nd preparation, music arranging and marching band charting, private teaching and ensemble coaching, community service and festival preparation along with ever-present counseling and parenting. (p. 13) Several of these aspects (if not all) can be considered when arranging a mentoring program to support new band directors. The other areas include comparisons, music selection, budgets, planning, state procedures, booster organizations, and marching band. One of the first challenges facing a new band di rector is usually ha ndling comparisons to the previous director (Asbill & Scott, 1997). Traditi ons and habits are firmly established. It can be difficult to change behaviors and rehearsal or performance standard s. Comparisons on the part of students and parents may be unfavorable to the new director and become a distraction. As Asbill and Scott stated, After a director has gained the confidence and respect of students, changes made the following year are easier (p. 13) However, constant reminders the previous directors methods can weigh on the confiden ce and patience of a first-year teacher. The selection of music for rehe arsal and/or performance is a second aspect with which a mentor can assist. Each year may bring a differe nt instrumentation and/or ability level to the ensemble(s), requiring new criteria for the selectio n of music. New band di rectors are also often coming from participation in college ensemble s where they have been immersed in highly difficult music. Therefore, the music most famili ar to them is not suitable for their new high school ensembles, and they tend to choose mu sic that is too difficult (Ling, 1999). In his book for undergraduate instru mental music education majors, Teaching Band and Orchestra Cooper (2004) devoted an entire chapter to Handling Business Issues. Depending on the size of the band program, a new director will be in charge of managing thousands of

PAGE 34

34 dollars. The previous director may have planne d the first years budget, but supervising the use of that money and constructing the next years budget will be the job of the new director. Procedures for the spending of money are always complex, and the additional consideration of booster contributions can make the finances of the program even more complicated. Cooper (2004) stated, Budgeting practices and requirements vary greatly from school to school and state to state (p. 288). School districts often require the band director to solicit bids from retailers for items over a certain dollar amount. This is another process for which the band director is responsible for learni ng. Included in this area is th e responsibility of the inventory and maintenance of expensive equipment. A high school band is typically a very active group th at requires a great deal of planning. Most of this planning must be organized far in advance in order to facilitate communication with everyone involved (custodians, bus drivers, secretaries, admini strators, students, parents, coaches, and general classroom teachers). The kn owledge of school and district procedures and advanced planning of events, such as evening reh earsals, concerts, and festival trips, are needed immediately upon acceptance of the job by the new teacher (Cooper, 2004). Stimson, from Conway et al., (2004), recalled his first year as a band director: I enjoyed the community that I taught in, but I didnt know about all the events outside school th at I had to deal with. I stepped on quite a few toes when planning concerts and practices (p. 47). Planning for rehearsals is also completed well in advance. Ulrich (1992) stated, Rehearsal planning must occur well in advance of the first rehearsal. Long-term planning requires that a conductor select the music earl y enough to ensure ade quate rehearsal time. All conductors would do themselves and thei r ensembles a favor by planning at least six months ahead. (p. 34) This type of planning and preparation is almost impossible for a first-year band director, because he will not know the appropriate level of music for his students until he hears them in a rehearsal

PAGE 35

35 setting. This initial hearing, especially for the marching band, may only be weeks before the first performance. Every state has music organizati ons. Florida has two for band director consideration: the Florida Bandmasters Association (FBA) and the Florida Music Educators Association (FMEA). Each state also has divisions of an activities a ssociation. The music divi sion of the Illinois High School Association (IHSA) is one example. These divisions place demands on bands and band directors. These groups facilita te all-state auditions, solo and ensemble contests, marching band assessments, concert band assessments, and much more. Each of these activities may be required of all bands in the state and have sp ecific application procedures and deadlines (Dewald, 1998). These activities are a challenge for new band directors a nd can place directors who are new to the state at a great disadvantage. Many states administer these activities in very different ways. Booster organizations can be a tremendous a sset to band programs (Cooper, 2004). Most band programs require additional fundraising in or der to remain active and/or competitive. Boosters can be of great assistance to the band director in this capacity (Conway et al., 2004). They can also assist with equipment, transpor tation, and clerical work. These organizations usually have a clearly defined structure and c onstitution with which the new director must quickly become familiar. Unfortunately, these groups can often hold views and preferences that differ from those of the new band director. Conway (2004) commented, They [the boosters] had a system that worked for them and were very upset when I suggested a few changes (p. 47). They may have a reaction to change similar to those of the students, except the reaction of influential adults may be more difficult to handle. These situations can also lead to a short tenure for the new director if not handled in the correct manner (Cooper, 2004).

PAGE 36

36 Directing and managing a marc hing band program starts the year for a first-year high school band director. It can be a moderately involved ma rching band that performs at home football games and a couple parades, or it can be a highly involved marching band that travels to away football games and weekend competitions. The level of involvement normally determines the amount of rehearsal time required. Dunnigan (1998) listed seven of the demands placed on directors early in the school year: 1. Upon hiring, a new director may find July and August full of auditions, rehearsals, and camps. 2. A concept for the marching show has to be selected. 3. A small to large instructional staff may need to be hired to work with individual sections, as well as an arranger to write the music and a dr ill writer to write the movement portion of the show. 4. Flags for the color guard have to be selecte d, and student leaders n eed to be chosen and organized. 5. Students must be measured and fitted for uniforms. 6. The rehearsal field must be painted regularl y, and fall band calendars must be mailed to parents. 7. Applications to fall contests must be sent w ith payments, and transportation forms must be completed for buses to fall games and competitions. These are only some of the duties facing a new high school band director l ong before the first day of school. These tasks are in addition to challenges faced by general classroom teachers, such as classroom management, curriculum development, a nd instructional strategi es. These seven areas emphasize not only a need for ment oring, but also a mentoring pr ogram that starts early and includes previously discussed components, such as a same-subject, same-level mentor, release time for observation and consultation, and a multi-year program. Summary The research using the espoused theories of mentoring in education (teacher retention and teacher effectiveness) continues to grow expone ntially. The theories in action for mentoring

PAGE 37

37 have been substantiated for increased teacher retention, and to a lesser degree, teacher effectiveness. It appears the rapid implemen tation of mentoring progr ams in school districts across the United States is justified. There is a wide variation in the structure, components, and support of mentoring programs. It appears that the programs that include the el ements of mentor trai ning, mentor compensation, and release time are having the most success wi th teachers as a whole. However, too many districts implement a one-size-fits-all mentori ng program that may not best serve new music educators. New high school band directors may be the most extreme example, considering the multi-dimensional nature of the position. Teacher attitude is critical to teacher retenti on, and teacher effectiveness is important to all the stakeholders in education. Because mentoring can have a positive effect in these areas, this study attempted to discover the status of ment oring in music education. The authors of the existing literature suggest the situational contexts of the mentoring pairs are important to understanding the dynamics of the relationships. These contexts include the structure of the mentoring programs, demographics of teachers and teaching positions and responsibilities of the program participants. Researchers indicate that the level of interaction between mentors and mentees is critical to the su ccess of the mentoring process. In order to provide insight into all these areas within this study, the researcher examined the perceptions of first-year high school band dir ectors and their mentors regarding their mentormentee relationships. By obtaining a view of ment oring from those who were active participants in mentoring, the study provided a firsthand account of the mentoring programs and the opinions of those directly involved.

PAGE 38

38 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY Introduction The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of first-year high school band directors and their mentors regarding their ment or-mentee relationships. A qualitative research design was selected for the study in order to explore and obtain a deep understanding (Creswell, 2005, p. 54) of the per ceptions of the participants. The qualitative approach allowed the researcher to personally interview and interact with participants in their natural and unique contexts (school settings). This approach also enabled the researcher to present the voices of participants prominently in the reporting, and inductively construct meaning and theory grounded in the collected data (Hatch, 2002). In this study, mentees and me ntors from different work environments provided varying perspectives on their mentoring relationships. These multiple realities were explored in the interviews. Lincoln and Guba ( 1985) stated, Qualitative methods are chosen because they are more adaptable to dealing with multiple realit ies (p. 40). It was fitting, therefore, that qualitative methods were employed as a way of answering the research questions. The constructivist research paradigm within the qualitative de sign guided the study and will be discussed in the following section. The remainde r of this chapter will describe the following methodological elements of the study: setting and participants, data colle ction, data analysis, researcher bias, and trustworthiness. Constructivist Research This approach to examining the perceptions of first-year high sc hool band directors and their mentors regarding their mentor-mentee relationship is based on the philosophical and theoretical positions of the constructivist res earch paradigm. These positions begin with the

PAGE 39

39 belief that absolute realities are impossible. Individuals form their own realities (Charmaz, 2006). Individuals create realit ies based on cognitive maps that are constantly written and rewritten from experiences with in a given--and often changing--c ontext (Creswell, 2005; Hatch, 2002; Rodwell, 1998). The construc tivist researcher is therefore interested in these individual constructions of reality. Developing an understanding of the worldview held by people involved in a process or situation is optimally accomplished from an in siders perspective (Rodwell, 1998). Through the interview process, the researcher becomes part of the process of co-construction (of reality) with the participants. Rodwell (1998) commented, The inquirer and the object of inquiry interact to influence on another (p. 17). Constructivist research produces evidence that is specific to individua l behaviors that are time and context-bound. As stated by Rodwell (2002) What has meaning in one context may be meaningless in another time and place Therefore, the desired product of a constructiv ist study is not one that generalizes to any other setting, but one that is an accurate, ric h, reconstruction of various perspectives within the context of the investigation. (p. 31) The reader of constructivist research is able to determine the transferability of meaning to his situation and environment due to the cl ear picture provided by the researcher. In this study, the researcher reconstructed the stories of ba nd directors. The contextual situations of these educators differed in many ways. The reader must therefore consider multiple contextual variables in determining transferab ility. The researcher used a combination of individual realities of mentors and mentees to assemble the stories of the mentoring relationships.

PAGE 40

40 Setting and Participants Data collection occurred at the participants respective schools. In each case, the band directors office provided a qui et environment with minima l interruptions One-on-one interviews were conducted at th e beginning or conclusion of the teachers school day or during the teachers planning time. Selection Criteria Five first-year high school band directors a nd their mentors -all from Florida -were selected for participation. The criteria for sele ction of the first-year ba nd directors required the participant to: 1. Hold a bachelors degree in musi c education and a teaching license 2. Be employed as a public high school band director 3. Be the head director if more than one band director is employed by the school 4. Be in their initial year of teaching 5. Be participating in a mentori ng program offered or required by the school, school district, or state music organization Individual schools had assigned a me ntor from another subject area to several of the first-year directors. While these mentors might have been helpful to their mentees, these mentors were not considered for participation in this study due to their lack of expertise in the field of music education. Mentors participating in this study were high school band directors assigned to the corresponding mentee by the school district or state music organization. Since redundancy and variety are both important within the case study (Stake, 2005), an attempt was made to include a variety of school, teacher, mentor and program demographics. Purposive Sampling Purposive sampling is the sampling technique corresponding to constructivist research. Taking into account adequate amounts of local conditions, local mutual shapings, and local

PAGE 41

41 values for possible transferability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985, p. 226) allows the researcher to control the range and scope of the da ta, as well as the contexts from which they will be collected. Patten (2005) stated, Qualitati ve researchers make subjective judgments regarding the individuals to select based on the likelihood that they will be able to provide the needed information (p. 143). In this study, purposive criterion sampling was used with the criteria previously listed. In addition, maximum variat ion sampling was used in order to ensure heterogeneity in the sample. Such heterogene ity allows for a wide range of contexts and perspectives from which readers of the study can connect (Creswell, 2005 ; Rodwell, 1998). The purposive sample for this study was small in numb er to allow for the in-depth study of those perceptions. Negotiating Access and Selection Procedures District chairmen of the Florida Bandma sters Association (FBA) and available county music supervisors in Florida were asked to provide the names and/ or locations of first-year high school band directors and the exis tence of corresponding mentors. Job listings on the Florida Music Educators Association website from the prev ious spring were also used to locate schools that would have new directors in the fall of 2006. Seven first-year hi gh school band directors matching the criteria for selection were identifie d in northern and central Florida. Following the identification of prospective partic ipants, county administrators were contacted in order to obtain permission to conduct research within the count y schools. Upon permission from the county, a letter introducing the research er, which explained the purpose of the study and described data collection, was emailed to the identified first-ye ar high school band dire ctors. Interested directors were asked to respond to the email. Six of the seven first-year directors res ponded to the email or follow-up phone calls, indicating they would be willing to participate. One director did not respond. A second email to

PAGE 42

42 the positive-response directors asked them to pr ovide the name contact information for their mentor. If they had more than one mentor, they were asked to provide the information for the mentor who was also a band director. Th e corresponding mentors were emailed a letter introducing the research er, which explained the purpose of the study and described data collection. Five of the six mentors contacted responded to the email or follow-up phone calls, indicating they would be willi ng to participate. The five responding mentors were then contacted through a phone call and received a lett er of consent (see Appendix A) and interview protocol (see Appendix C) via email. The non-responding mentor and th e corresponding mentee were not interviewed as part of the study. The participants therefore included five mentees and five corresponding mentors. Hard-copy informed consent letters were signed and collected at the first mentee and mentor interviews. The researcher contacted principa ls of the schools and explained the purpose and data collection methods. Permission to intervie w the teachers at school sites was then obtained. Data Collection Each participant completed a brief demogra phic questionnaire (see Appendix B) in order to establish an initial context and environment. Two semi-struc tured interviews were conducted with each first-year band director, and one se mi-structured interview was conducted with each mentor. The interviews consisted of open-ended questions that allowed the interviewer to probe for additional meaning. For the first-year band directors, the first interview with each was conducted early in the fall semester 2006. Th e second interview with each one was conducted late in the fall semester. The single interview with each mentor was conducted in December. Each interview lasted no more than one hour. The researcher attempted to obtain detailed de scriptions of the mentoring experiences and perceptions of these experiences. All interviews were conducted in a relaxed atmosphere with

PAGE 43

43 little chance of disturbance. Confidentiality was a priority in all interviews and in the handling of all data. In order to protect the anonymity of participants, pseudonyms were used for all individuals and schools menti oned in the transcripts. Separate interview protocols were created for initial and final interviews, as well as for the mentor interview. Protocols fr om research conducted by Montague (2000) were used as a model for the protocols in this study. Questions were adjusted, remove d, or added to fit this study. Colleen Conway and Paul Haack, leading resear chers in the field of mentoring in music education, reviewed the protocols an d agreed they provided the correct direction for the research. All interviews were recorded using a digital vo ice recorder. These digital voice files were saved to multiple hard drives. An individual living in another state transcribed the recordings. The researcher, while listening to the original digital recordings, review ed the transcripts to verify accuracy. The first set of interviews focused on biogr aphical data, expectations of teaching, and presumptions of the mentoring experience. Th e second set of interviews focused on teaching experiences, mentoring experiences and other topics emergent fr om the previous interview. Permission to conduct the study was requested an d granted from the appropriate county school administration and the University of Florida Institutional Review Board. Data Analysis A constructivist approach to data analysis described by Rodwell (1998) was implemented for this study. The model described by Rodwell included the basic unitizing, coding, categorizing, and theory construction found in grounded theory research design (Strauss & Corbin,1998), but the end result is a story grounded in the participants experiences. Constructive analysis relies heavily on grounded theory, but from an interpretive tradition, as opposed to the positivist tradition (Charmaz, 2006). Objectivist grounded theory, part of the

PAGE 44

44 positivist tradition, ignores the social context from which the data emerge. The grounded theory formal data units and categories are identified very early (following the first interview) and used to shape all following data collection and analys is. Rodwell explained that constructivist grounded theory is produced only as the product of final data re duction and interpretation, and it is used to provide the framework for the storytel ling. The narrative, as part of this case study, related the stories of the partic ipants and provided the rich desc riptions required of qualitative research. The following paragraphs describe the inductive analysis portio n of the Rodwell model utilized in this study. The inductive data analysis began with a d econstruction of the gath ered data (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Rodwell, 1998). The data were separate d into short sections or units. These units were informative words, sentences, or short paragraphs that required no additional information or explanation. NVivo 7 software from QSR International was used to analyze the data. NVivo 7 allowed for the open coding of the data units during which the units of the text were copied from the transcripts and coded with s ource information (Patten, 2005). NVivo 7 referred to the transcripts as sources and displa yed reports of the coded text (see Appendix D) along with the sources for easy comparison. These reports allowe d quick reference to the original location of the data unit within the transcripts. As initial units of data were pulled from the transcripts, each was labeled, creating what NVivo 7 called a node. A node is any named grouping of coded text. The researcher initially began coding segments of text into what NVivo 7 calls free nodes. Using the constant comparative method (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Stra uss & Corbin, 1998), each identified unit of data was compared to the labels of existing nodes and the previous ly coded units of text within those nodes. If the identified unit was similar to previously c oded units within a free node, the

PAGE 45

45 new data unit was assigned to the matching free n ode. If a data unit was unique, a new free node was created. NVivo 7 was able to create node summary re ports, providing information on the amount of coded text and the number of sources and cases from which text was coded (see Appendix E). As the next step in analys is, the free nodes created by the grouping of coded data units were sorted (Rodwell, 1998) and placed in a hierarchy. NVivo 7 calls this hierarchy tree nodes (see Appendix F and Appendix G). The primary head ings were given titles representative of the nature of their underlying nodes. The research er determined which headings were supported by a majority of the participants, and these became th e over-arching themes emergent from the data. The underlying nodes became supporting categories. If a node did not specifically provide evidence for an emergent theme, it remained in the hierarchy but it was not included as a category in the findings. The placement of data un its within nodes and the categorizing of nodes under themes were fluid processes. These pl acements changed throughout open coding and the entire analysis. Ely (1991) stated: Making categories means reading, thinking, trying out tentativ e categories, changing them when others do a better job, checking them until the very last piece of meaningful information is categorized and, even at that point, being open to revi sing the categories. (p. 145) This quote accurately describes the process follo wed in the data analysis for this study. Once the coding of data units was completed and tr ee nodes were created, the data units within each node were reread. Units that did not comple tely fit the definition of their node were moved to better-fitting nodes. Some nodes were combin ed to create new themes, and some nodes were moved to more logical themes. It should be noted that the data analysis for this study was conducted in two separate processes. The data collected from the mentees were analyzed first, followed by the data

PAGE 46

46 collected from the mentors. The separate anal yses were justified because of the inherently different contexts and perspec tives of the two groups, as we ll as the possible value in a comparison of the two perspectives. Presentation of Results A type of case study presented the results of the data analysis. Rodwell (1998) stated, The case study or case report is the primary repo rting vehicle for constructivism the primary goal of the case study is to create understanding (p. 173). Rodw ell refers several times to the case study report as a narrative: T he reading level of the narrati ve should be. . and The writing technique should be narra tion . the inquirer is tel ling a story, not objectifying the situation (p. 174). Because of the narrative nature of the case study report described by Rodwell and the multiple cases involved, the presentation format here was referred to as a multiple-case study narrative. The model presented by Rodwell (1998) provide d the structure of this case study report. The findings of this study are presented as a narrative bounded by the themes and categories that emerged during the last stages of data analysis. The framework of the story was created by these major categories and their relati onships. Due to this structure of the narrative, separate discussions about each individual pa rticipant were not included. The narrative was presented in two major sections, delineated by the two inherently different c ontexts. The stories of the mentees were presented first, followed by the st ories of the mentors. In order to preserve confidentiality, all quotations were edited to eliminate the possibility of ge nder identification and the matching of mentors with mentees. Researcher Bias The researcher was qualified to undertake a st udy of this nature. His position as a high school band director in the pub lic schools of Illinois for eigh t years provided a level of

PAGE 47

47 knowledge and experience that enabled him to empa thize with the particip ants and the research setting. The researchers work with undergra duate students in musi c education brought him close to the position and mindset of the first-year band director participants. In the course of his studies as a gradua te student, the researcher constructed his knowledge and experience in qualit ative research methods thr ough general research methods courses and a qualitative data an alysis course. Interviews with higher education administrators in a previous study allowed for the development of interviewing skills. The potential for the effect of researcher bias in qualitative analysis is significant. Data pass through the researcher during interviews and the re searcher inte rprets the data in analysis. It is therefore subject to being shaped by the researchers background and beliefs. For these reasons, the researcher attempted to limit effects of bias through the proces s of self-disclosure. Self-disclosure refers to considering the res earch problem in relation to the interviewers background and attitudes before conducting inte rviews and continuing to do so throughout analysis (Patten, 2005). The researcher was not paired with a mentor as a first-year high school band director. The difficulties encountered as part of the job led h im to believe that having a mentor would have made that first year easier in a number of ways Awareness of this frame of mind deterred the shading of interview questions and data analysis toward such a perspective. Trustworthiness Validity, or trustworthiness, is primarily es tablished in qualitative research through rich, thick description that is used in relating the participants stories and experiences. Such descriptions were an important pa rt of this study. Other verificati on procedures utilized for this study included triangulation of data, p eer debriefing, and member checks.

PAGE 48

48 Triangulation characteristica lly depends on the convergence of data gathered by different methods or different sources (Ely, 1991). Tria ngulation was accomplishe d in this study through interviews of both mentees and mentors. Peer debriefing served as an external check on the research project The process helps keep the inquirer honest, e xposing him to searching questions by an experienced protagonist doing his best to play the devils advocate (L incoln & Guba, 1978, cited in Ely, 1991, p. 162). A former high school band director and Ph.D. candida te in music education at the University of Florida was solicited to read 10% of the data and identify themes The researcher met with the reviewer and discussed interpretations of th e data. Although fewer in number, the themes identified in the peer review corresponded with those identified by the researcher. The researcher used this opportunity to explain a nd defend additional interp retations and meanings drawn from the collection of data as a whole. Finally, member checking was used to determine if the participants felt that the researcher had accurately portrayed their experien ces (Creswell, 2005). The researcher provided each participant with a copy of that participants original transcript and an individual summary of data. The participants were asked to review the summary and provide the researcher with any corrections or additions. Adjustments were made to the interpretations ba sed on the responses of participants.

PAGE 49

49 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS Introduction The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of first-year high school band directors and their mentors regard ing their mentor-mentee relationshi ps. The participants in this study included five first-year high school band directors (the mentees) and their corresponding mentors. Using a constructivist approach to da ta analysis (Rodwell, 1998), interview data were deconstructed into short units, which were coded and categorized. This reconstruction of the data allowed thematic relationships between the categories to emerge. Just as the situational context of a new teacher differs greatly from that of a teacher of 20 years, the situational contexts of the mentees diff er greatly from those of the mentors. For this reason, the researcher approached the analysis of the mentee interv iews and the analysis of the mentor interviews separately. The similarities and differences between emergent themes were considered only after the anal ysis of both groups was comple ted. This approach is the organizing principle for this chapter. The story of the mentees is presented in the firs t section of this chapte r, and the story of the mentors follows. The collective story of each group is bounded by the themes and categories that emerged during the last stages of data analysis. Due to this narrative structure, separate stories are not presented for indivi dual participants. However, in order to provide the requisite detail, a brief introduction to each mentee precedes the mentees story, and a brief introduction to each mentor precedes the story of the mentors la ter in the chapter. These introductions are a necessary step in helping the reader consider th e multiple contextual variables used to determine transferability of findings.

PAGE 50

50 The Mentees Maria Maria was 22 years old and held a bachelors degree in music education from a university outside of Florida. She was a fi rst-year high school band director in a small town in Florida. The population of her school was approximately 1,200 students, and she saw a total of 100 students in five different classes during the school day. Those classes included concert band, jazz band, percussion class, keyboard class, and co lor guard class. Maria indicated she had 50 minutes of planning time each day. The school had a marching band of 60 students whom she directed. She did not have an assistant dir ector who worked at the high school, but a local middle school director assisted with the ma rching band. Her marching band held three-hour rehearsals three days per week. Maria was pair ed with her mentor through a mentoring program administered by her district of the Fl orida Bandmasters Association (FBA). Corey Corey was 23 years old and held a bachelors degree in music education from a university in Florida. He was a first-ye ar high school band director in a metropolitan area of Florida. The population of his school was appr oximately 3,885 students, and he saw a total of 137 students in five different classes during the school day. Those classes included three concert band ensembles, a percussion class, and an advanced placement music theory class. He had an assistant band director worki ng with him at the school. Corey had 120 minutes of planning time each day. He also directed a marching band of 125 students. The marching band rehearsed five hours per week outside of the school day. Corey was assigned a mentor by the music supervisor of his school district.

PAGE 51

51 Emily Emily was 24 years old and held a bachelors degree in music education from a university of Florida. She was a first-y ear high school band director in a central Florida city. The population of her school was approximately 1,700 stude nts, and she taught a total of 144 students in five different courses. T hose courses included concert band, instrumental techniques, guitar, advanced music (International Baccalaureate), an d introduction to music performance. Emily was the only band director at the school; she had 90 minutes of planning time daily. She directed a marching band of 78 students who rehearsed si x hours per week after school. A mentoring program administered by the local district of the Florida Bandmaster s Association provided Emilys mentor. Eric Eric was 24 years old and held a bachel ors degree in music performance from a university in Florida. He was a first-year high school band director in a small town, just outside of a metropolitan area in Florida. The population of his school was approximately 2,900 students, and he saw a total of 147 students in five different classe s. One of these classes was a band class at a local middle sc hool. The other four courses at the high school included two concert band ensembles, a woodwind ensemble, a nd a percussion class. Eric was the only band director at the high school; he had 120 minutes of planning time each day. He directed a marching band of 85 students who rehearsed eight hours per week outside of the school day. The local district of the Florida Bandmasters As sociation administered a mentoring program and assigned Eric a mentor. Mike Mike was 22 years old and held a bachelors degree in music education from a university in Florida. He was a firstyear high school band director in a central Florida city. The

PAGE 52

52 population of his school was approximately 2,900 st udents, and he instructed 117 students in three different classes. Those classes includ ed two concert band ensembles and a percussion techniques class. Mike had an assistant band director working with him; had 60 minutes of planning time daily. He also di rected a marching band of 120 st udents who rehearsed six and a half hours per week after school. Mike was pr ovided a mentor through the mentoring program of the local district of the Florida Bandmasters Association. Through the Eyes of the Mentees Five themes emerged from the data collected from first-year hi gh school band directors participating in this study. Each theme has se veral supporting categories that--togethe r with the words of the participants-present the story of the mentees perceptions of the mentoring relationship. The five themes are: 1. The Extra Hours. The five mentees--Corey, Eric Emily, Maria and Mike--all said that their work did not stop with the last bell of the sc hool day. The fall semester was filled with afterschool rehearsals, administrative paperwork, supervision, and performances. Various errands, meetings, and communications resulted in ish-hour work weeks which did not often include whatever it is I do at home (Maria). These band directors reported being at school until 6:00 or later every da y. Friday night football game s and Saturday competitions frequently extended their work w eek with important performances. 2. Self-confidence. The job of the high school band director is demanding in many ways, but these first-year teachers expressed confidence in their abilities. This confidence was attributed to good preparation as an undergradu ate student and networking. Their confidence was evident in a number of teaching-related areas. 3. Mentor Interaction. The mentees had various perceptions regarding contact time with mentors. However, several similar percepti ons were shared among the mentees. Mentoring methods, the primary purpose of mentoring, a nd contact frequency and context were among the topics discussed with mentors. The me ntees were also able to discuss how the interactions and relationships had changed over the course of the fall semester, and how their teaching had changed due to mentoring. 4. Mentoring Program Structure. From the me ntor-to-mentee pairing procedure to time as being an obstacle, the mentees frequently offe red perceptions of the way the programs were structured and what might interfere.

PAGE 53

53 5. Need for Observation. While not all the ment ees were able to experience observing their mentor, they all included the opportunity for obser vation as part of thei r conversation. They were able to share or anticipate the benefits of observing their ment ors. The importance of this program component was clear. In the following sections, these five themes are discussed and illustrated through the words of the mentees, thereby telling the story of these first-year high school band directors perceptions of their ment or-mentee relationships. The Extra Hours The time commitment required of high school band directors was addressed by all the mentees. Working with the marching band, comp leting administrative tasks, and choosing literature for their ensembles were among the types of responsibilities that frequently kept them working beyond the regular schoo l day. The number of duties required of these mentees was shared by Eric who said that, B asically every day after school other than Wednesday Im here until about 9:00 at night. Maria stated, I woul d say it probably turns in average to more of a 60-ish hour week of me here, which doesnt include whatever it is that I do at home. Marching band. Working with the marching band by far accounted for the most time outside of the school day. Corey said, We have marching band rehearsals on Monday nights from 6:00 to 9:00. He quickly added, We also have percussion rehearsals from 6:00 to 8:00 on Thursdays. These five hours, not including Frid ay night football games, were the least amount of marching band rehearsal time among the ment ees. Emily, Mike, and Erics marching bands rehearsed six, six and a half, and eight hours per week, respectively. Mari a spent the most time in after-school rehearsal w ith her band. She stated: We have three-hour rehearsals three days a week outside of the school day. On Mondays and Thursdays theyre right after school and they go until 6:00. And then on Tuesdays they go from 6:00 to 9:00. So really, Wednesday . is our only day off, so to speak, because Fridays are often games and then we have a contest [on some Saturdays].

PAGE 54

54 Marias description of time spent with the marc hing band in the fall semester was similar to the majority of mentees: Im hunkering down for the ne xt couple of months because other than next week, which is an SAT testing day, well have something every single weekend until Christmas break is over. Administrative work. A variety of activities fell unde r this category. The acknowledgment of these tasks often came with a sigh or other sign of disconten t. Corey and Maria identified similar jobs. Corey commented, Outside of the school day [activities ] would be receipting checks, and getting stuff deposited, and going to the bank to get change, and helping with concessions. Maria stat ed, Not to mention staff meetings and booster meetings and meetings with the executive board and check writing to make sure that our marching techs and all kinds of supplemental staff are paid and stuff I do at home. In his first interview, Eric mentioned there was a ton of paperwork to do, just filling out st uff through the school and for the county. In Erics second interview, he was noticeably more frustrated: Im fairly organized, but its the amount of pa perwork that comes through. . I couldnt even have fathomed that amount of stuff. And my job every day is about 10% teaching band and about 90% politics and filling out pie ces of paper and its just horrible. . I could get so much more done if there was 10 tim es less paper for me to fill out. And its redundancy and . I just hate doing it. And th en I get in trouble b ecause Id rather teach band and get a good result and so . its a vicious circle. The paperwork and administrative-type duties ca me frequently and from many directions: the schools required forms and reports for students a nd parents; the school districts required forms for transportation; and the FBA districts re quired paperwork for performance assessments, festivals, student ensemble auditions. Music selection. To someone unfamiliar with the band-director profession, choosing music for ensembles may seem like an easy task. Contrary to that per ception, these first-year band directors described why choos ing music was an activity that took up time outside of the

PAGE 55

55 school day. Choosing music for their concert ba nds was a topic for the mentees during their second interviews that occurred after the marchi ng band season. Mike gave some insight into why this was a time-consuming task: Well, right now its me jumbling through CDs and scores of pieces for district festival, for festival with the bands. Im not too familia r with grade 3s and . the lower grade material on the FBA handbook or in the FBA book. So Im having to do a lot of listening and a lot of searching through th ings like that in order to pi ck something thatll fit the band, and thatll still be challenging for them. Maria described the difficulty of choosing musi c when she called it the most difficult part of my job as a first-year teacher. She added, T he majority of my outside-of-school attention is towards programming for next spring As Eric conveyed, even though it was a si gnificant and important task, the mentees seemed excited about choosing music: Ive be en looking pretty hard-core through a bunch of music outside of school, and meeting with a bunch of people, and getting advice on their music things and what they know. Self-confidence In providing a better picture of the context of the mentees, it was important to relate their feelings of confidence. They each communicat ed this confidence through several interview topics. The foundation of this confidence s eemed to come from positive undergraduate experiences in college, but confidence contin ued to build through successes achieved during the first semester of teaching. Networking with fellow band directors, in addition to an assigned mentor, often provided feelings of accomplishment. Success in areas such as classroom management, rapport with students, and ensemble performances built feelings of confidence. Support from administrators, parents of stude nts, and others cont ributed as well. Undergraduate experience The mentees were very positiv e in their assessment of their college undergraduate experiences. Corey classifi ed his preparation for teaching as second to

PAGE 56

56 none, and he felt very prepared for teaching mu sic at the high school level. Emily felt the training her college provided was really good, actually. Mike and Eric had mixed feelings. Mike stated: Pretty much in all aspects I think my undergraduate experience was very, very good coming out to be a first-year teacher. A lot of the paperwork and th ings that go along with the high school band . all got tossed on me ri ght when I got here. So I dont think that I was well prepared for that--the administ rative assistant portion of the job. Eric said: I would say the education classes Ive had taugh t me little to nothing about what I actually need to know to teach in high school. The thing thats helped me the most is my performance-related classes and . there was ju st tons and tons of opportunity to play in different ensembles and different instruments. And thats probably been the most help being a band director. The mentees expressed an overall positive feelin g about their college preparation for teaching music. That preparation provided a foundation of initial confidence when entering their first teaching position. However, some felt that they ha d little to no preparation for the administrative tasks related to teaching. Networking. Each of the mentees had been assign ed at least one mentor to begin the school year. Several of the mentees had multip le mentors, including those assigned by their school, their district, or by FBA. Despite the number of designated mentors and regardless of the perceived effectiveness of their mentors, the mentees sought out ot her individuals for help during their first semester of teaching. Teachers--those closer in age or closer in terms of distance--were often sources of information or comfort for the mentees. Corey fr equently referenced his contact with other band directors in his county/di strict. He maintained a close re lationship with the high school band director under whom he had been a student teacher He said he was in constant contact with her, and they get together all the time. He al so alluded to the existing culture of th e directors

PAGE 57

57 in the district: Were constantly helping each other out. Im c onstantly at rehearsals at other high schools. . Im going to have people out here all the time because Im a very social person. Mike felt there was always someone he could go to for help or advice: Ive got a list of numbers Im ab le to call if [my mentor] is not around. In this county . there are about seven high schools, and all seven of us talk on a regular basis, and were able to kind of help each other along. Eric simply stated, I have about three mentors that have been he lping me with things. These were other band directors in the area whom he co nsidered mentors because of their willingness to help. Instead of looking to the more experienced teachers, Em ily often turned to teachers closer to her age because of their ability to better relate to her situation: To be honest, the most beneficial thing has been talking to a few other . younger band directors. And just kind of [saying], Okay, am I normal for feeling this way right now . feeling extremely burned out? I ask whoever seem s to be willing to give me the time . a second-year teacher at a Catho lic school . shes close to my age and weve gotten to know each other. So I end up asking her a lo t of questions . instead of going to [my FBA mentor]. Emily was neither pleased nor comfortable with he r assigned mentor: If he wasnt my mentor, I dont know that he would be one of those people that I would approach. He was much older than Emily and that may have been the main reason for turning to her friend at the Catholic school. Her friend was able to confirm that Emilys feelings were normal. Musical ability. Despite the various aspects of the job, the mentees believed they possessed strong musical abilities. Emily believe d conducting was definitely [her] strength in teaching, and that she knew how to run a reh earsal. Eric credited performing in college ensembles for his music education expertise: The amount of music that Ive pl ayed in college as a performe r has really helped me in knowing the music, being able to relate teaching that aspect of the playing . I can play every one of the instruments so I can imme diately respond to, you know, its this fingering, this position . whatever it is.

PAGE 58

58 Maria was confident in her ski lls and methods in the ensemble classroom: I feel like I usually have correctly identified problems and give n--if not the best way--a decent way to try to correct it and to be diverse in my method of trying to correct problems. Mike felt he had developed his musical abilities: I have a rea lly good ear for music. . I know what kind of sound Im looking for . and . I feel like Im getting that from the students. Corey believed he had developed a good memory for music and fo r scores. This musical ability extension of their college preparation for teaching complete d the level of confidence established prior to stepping into the classroom. Additional confidence was created through teaching and performance. Classroom management. Maintaining order and disciplin e in the classroom was a strength clearly identified by several of the mentees. Their confidence in managing the classroom came through when addressing this aspect of teach ing. Corey lightheartedly shared, Classroom management for me is not really an issue. Im a very loud person. . I get really great results with what Ive done so far. Eric attributed hi s ability to run orderly rehearsals to something other than his college classes: They [classroom management skills] work pretty well. . The fact that I just grew up in a household where rules were important just has he lped, and there, its either black or white for me. Its not anything personal to the kids, its . this is wh at the rules are, this is what I have to follow, this is what you have to follow. Maria felt lucky in one aspect of her first teach ing position. Under the previous director, the students were really disciplined, really hard-w orking, [and] had achieved a lot of success. This prevailing attitude had carried over under her direction. Rapport with students. Educators may have differing opin ions regarding the significance-or insignificance--of students liking or dis liking a teacher, but having the respect of students was important to the mentees. Signs of students respect for their new band director

PAGE 59

59 seemed to bolster the confidence of the mentees. Corey related his perc eption of his students view by saying, The kids respect me a lot he re. Emily shared her method of earning her students respect: I think I defini tely have a good rapport with the students. I try to make sure that, you know, every student gets to know me a little bit personally and that I do the same to them. In Emilys second interview several months late r, she confirmed that this was indeed her strong point: I think probably my biggest strength is the rapport th at I have with the students. Eric elaborated on how his youth was also valuable in working with his students: Being young I think helps me engage them better than some of the people that have been teaching for a while. They know that Im in charge but there still is that friendship . And I still listen to their sa me music and stuff like that and they really enjoy that. Through youth or musical ability, these mentees be lieved they had gained the respect of their students. However, it was the respect of other groups that raised their confidence to another level. Validation. A display of respect or a sign of appr oval from other educators or parents was very reassuring to these young music educators. Support from school or di strict administrators was cited as a sign of empowerment. Eric su mmed up the difference these people can make: Ive heard from a lot of my colleagues that have come to watch the games, and principals, and parents, and different people, that it sounds greater than it has in the last eight years Corey was specific in addressing the administration at his schoo l: I have a very supportive administration They have the best interests of the band at heart. Compliments from administrators were a sign of support for Emilys teaching. She received many compliments on her marching band from her administration, and sh e indicated those compliments made her feel a lot better.

PAGE 60

60 The school districts in whic h Mike and Corey were t eaching employed county music supervisors. The presence and assistance of those administrators was helpful for Corey and Mike. The supervisors observed and consulted with those first-year teachers multiple times during the fall semester. Parents were also an important factor in th e confidence of the mentees. The presence of quality booster organizations allowe d the first-year directors to fo cus more on teaching. Parental support of teacher policies and decisions was an indication of a mentee doing something right. Emily recalled one parents support of a discip line issue with a studen t: I talked to [the students] mom at a football game and . shes very supportive. Mike provided a summary of his confidence: We made leaps and bounds the second performan ce and I see . improvement. . I wake up every morning happy to come to work, happy to get started, for them to learn something new. So its pretty much the only thing Iv e wanted to do since middle school . Im happy. Mentor Interaction The mentees perceived their interaction with me ntors in several categories. Mentors were there primarily to provide advice and reminde rs through informal co mmunication. Mentees believed the relationships with their respectiv e mentors changed during the semester, but few changes were made in their classroo m teaching techniques due to mentoring. Mentoring technique. It was clear that the mentees unders tood that the role of the mentors was not, as Corey said, to teach you how to teach. Eric gave the following perception: Theyre just here kind of as gui des. Theyve been very carefu l about saying, This is your band. You run it how youd like to. I try some things out. Some work, some don t. Maria gave only one contradictory example:

PAGE 61

61 When [her mentor] was here la st week and we did the clinic he would react to a certain technique . or a certain exercise. In one pa rticular case he said, Oh, thats not going to work. Thats not going to work. However, Maria also provided instances wh ere her mentor took a different approach: Something he says to me all the time is like Look, its your band. Im here if you need help from me or advice, but its your decision. Mike expressed a si milar view of the role of his mentor: I bring up a piece Id like to play for festival . he says, Wow, thats pretty brave. . I would suggest not doing that. He wont go out and say, Dont do th at. Thats a bad idea. Dont do it. Its going to ru in whatever youre working towards. While the mentees believed this was the approa ch their mentors were taking, the mentors next identified what they were de livering using this approach. Survival and deadlines. The mentees saw the purpose of interacting with their mentors as a means of surviving their first year of teachi ng and meeting various sch ool, district, and state deadlines. To survive through th e first year, as Maria descri bed it, encompassed many facets of high school band directing. Deadlines were on e facet of the job and included the submittal of numerous forms, fees, and other administrative paperwork. The mentors role was largely viewed as providing reminders of the deadlin es and assistance in completing forms. Mike thought the role of his FBA mentor was [to make sure] I dont fall on my face. Those things that you would never think about y our first year, the mentor has already been through it. Emily and Eric also mentioned surviv al, but addressed the mentors role in reducing feelings of isolation. Emily said, I think its to make sure that nobody drowns . to get to know someone else in the district . Some people maybe arent as good about meeting other(s) . [Mentoring can] be kind of the support for them we all need.

PAGE 62

62 Eric shared, [The purpose of the mentoring prog ram is] to allow for successful start-up. Its such a job where they dont alwa ys want to stay after the first ye ar . just a helpful resource thats there. Corey talked about the reduction of isolation as part of the surviving the first year of teaching band and how a mentor can help: Being a band director can be a very lone ly job, because you teach something thats different from everyone else in the entire school. . to keep you from feeling lonely. . to keep communication open. The mentees, from the beginning, thought that the role of the mentor was going to be one of assistance with policies and deadlines. Eric desc ribed his first FBA mee ting where he was told his mentor was going to be the . force . [remi nding] us of things to turn in. Maria, part of a different FBA district, said, T hey acquainted us with our mentor . gave us a calendar that had major dates and deadlines . landma rks in the school year, FBA-wise. Maria shared that her mentor was there to m ake sure that you fill out this form correctly and turn it in by this date, and you wont have to pay the fine. Mike from yet another FBA district, recalled, The district ch air explains that all new teachers really need to have an FBA mentor to get acclimated . to know about paperwork. Corey, whose mentor was assigned by his school district, said, As the mentee, my role is to call and ask [his mentor] . not just about teaching things, but with deadlines and pro cedures. Similarly, Emily summarized her interaction with her mentor to make sure that we [mentees] dont miss deadlines and know when events are; when meetings are. Frequency and context. Two perspectives on the freque ncy of contact between mentors and mentees were: frequent or limited. The context of the contact was largely by phone or email. Four of the mentees said they were in frequent c ontact with their mentors. Corey said he called his mentor once [or] twice a week. In his earl y interview, Eric stated, Ive already called .

PAGE 63

63 and emailed with my specific mentor about every other day. Maria recall ed, I would say a few times a week I email him back and forth with qu estions I have. Mike indicated he had even more frequent contact with his mentor: Ive ca lled him lots of times. We talk every day on the phone. Emily had far less contact with her mentor. When asked about meetings with her mentor in her early interview, Emily said, Nothing has really been planned. . The only time weve seen each other is at that [FBA] meeting . He has called me once. In her interview near the end of the semester, she said that she had been in contact with her mentor two to three times a month, maybe. Corey, Eric, Maria, and Mike had all met face-to-face with their mentors in situations other than at FBA meetings, football games, or festivals. As will be discussed in the next section, they described impromptu meetings with their mentors at school, over dinner, or at social functions. Corey and Maria also had opport unities during the semester to observe or to be observed by their mentors. However, the majority of interaction with mentors occurred through phone call or email. When asked about the context of mentor interaction, Corey said, We probably prefer phone to email. Emily also remarked, Most of our communication has been through email. Eric believed that phone call and email . was th e easiest and best way to talk. Mike said, Most of the meetings are . over the phone duri ng the day when I have specific questions. Early in the semester, Maria t alked . to him once a week or once every two weeks on the phone, but the majority of contact with her mentor was by email a few times a week. None of the individual mentoring programs required a specified type or number of meetings between mentors and mentees. [How often, or in what context] ha snt really been .

PAGE 64

64 a prescribed thing, as Eric said. Maria saw her mentor every once in a wh ile, not at a specific meeting time. Most meetings between mentoring pairs occurr ed in an informal manner, as several of the mentees called it. Emily said that she w ould see her mentor occasionally . at a competition or another location. In his early interview, Corey mentioned one meeting he was about to have with his mentor: This Saturday, were actually getting t ogether and having lunch and just talking and seeing whats go ing on. In his later interview, it was apparent that this type of interaction proved to be benefici al over the course of the semester: There have been a couple of times where [the meeting] has been outside of school . more valuable than the in-school . Youre able to talk more freely and its more relaxed and more informal. I really enjoy just going and having dinner and di scussing things. . And it gives you social interaction a nd it gets you away from your job. Corey said those meetings with his mentor we re more valuable than his typical in-service meetings with the school faculty or even with countywide music teachers. With his mentor, he felt he was able to discuss issues specific to his level and area. This was not the case in a general music teacher setting. Corey commented, Good t eaching is good teaching, yes. But situations are totally different. Mike related similar contact with his ment or: We go out maybe to dinner or something with a bunch of other teachers loca lly . Thats pretty much how we meet and talk. Mike lightheartedly shared that he a nd his mentor met for maybe so me poker [laughs] every once in a while. Eric gave a similar analysis: We have mutual friends . as band dork s do, just if you go out with one random friend, [my mentor] was there tons of times . Its no t like we ever planned [it]. . The informal things are the most helpful events. I cant ev en call them events. And we sit there with a pad of paper over your wings and beer and just talk band. And thats where Ive learned the most stuff.

PAGE 65

65 Relationship changes. There was a range of percepti ons concerning how relationships with the mentors had changed over the semester, but all of the mentees noticed change. The primary change was an increase in comfort leve l and confidence within the relationship. Emily said that early in the semester, her mentor might have felt the need to check on her. She said, Whereas now . I think he knows Im doing okay, and hell kind of leave it up to me. The progress Eric had made with his teaching facil itated a change in his mentoring relationship: The relationship probably hasnt changed, but the questions probably have. Now its more on the subject that were actually teaching. Now its more literature or, you know, Im having trouble with the flute se ction. How do you get them to change this pitch? And, you know, what has worked for you? So, its more literature-based and more contentbased rather than just genera l [education] kind of stuff. Maria saw her dependence on her mentor reduced as she became more confident with her own expertise in teaching. In addition, she becam e more discriminating about the advice she received. Early in the semester, her tendency wa s to do exactly what her mentor suggested. As the semester progressed, Maria discovered that the mentors suggestions did not always work well with her beliefs and approach. She discove red that her own methods could work, and felt more comfortable and confident. She added, I felt like I could still use him as a resource, but I didnt need the verification that I was on the right path quite as much. Mike had a similar feeling about how the relationship with his mentor had changed: They [interactions with his me ntor] get fewer and fewer. Wh ile I would have to talk to him [almost] after every class period before, it kind of cuts down to once a day. We might not talk to each othe r for a couple of days. He became more comfortable with his teaching and felt that he did not need to seek advice for every problem. Changes in teaching techniques. Corey and Maria both referred to increasing their bag of tricks for use in teaching their ensembles. They were referring to methods they had for teaching or for getting good results from their ensembles. They also believed interactions with their

PAGE 66

66 mentors had added certain tricks to their bag s and allowed them to change some of their teaching techniques. Corey had the advantage of observing his ment or teach and adjusted some of his methods based on the observations: [My mentor] is . probably 8 or 10 years older than I am. And Im trying to establish that kind of [business-like] rapport with him. . It worked wonders for marching band. It is not working for concert band. So I have to take a much more business-like approach. I learned that today with my wi nd ensemble. If I take a much more business-like approach, they respond much better. Mike shared another aspect of his teaching that had changed due to his mentoring. He had noticed that he was not having enough time to c over everything in his rehearsals. His mentor suggested changes in his planning that might hel p. Mike said his pacing of rehearsals changed and improved his coverage of material. Early in the semester, Maria often felt her ensembles were not improving at an acceptable rate. Her mentor helped her deal with those fee lings: [I was] trying to relax myself, [to] have the confidence that kind of comes with more experi ence I think. The mentor helped me to try to acquire some of that prematurely. Maria also leaned on her mentor to find ne w ways to motivate her students. For one marching band contest, Maria wanted her students to appreciate that winning the contest was not the ultimate goal. For the second time in like 10 years the band did not win first place. A series of emails back and forth with her ment or helped Maria communica te the its not about winning message to the students. Eric shared several areas of his teaching where he had trie d new techniques suggested by his mentor: I kind of took snippets of what he does with different long tones or di fferent things and listening for balance and things, changi ng some seating configurations around and doing some things. And it gets a better sound in the band.

PAGE 67

67 Payoffs. Positive results of mentoring were cited by most mentees after a semester of their mentoring programs. During the end-of-the-semes ter interviews, the mentees were asked about successful moments. One mentee commented on the musical improvements that one group demonstrated during rehearsal. However, for mo st of the mentees, success from mentoring was directly connected to a successful performance of an ensemble. For example, Eric described a marching band performance as a culminati ng achievement affected by mentoring: The night of district FBA ma rching festival, when they announced the grades, we got straight superiors . which the band never ha s gotten . We [had] worked really hard during marching band season and they [the mentors] had a lot of help in it. Mike simply stated that his mentor played a role in a concert com [ing] off without some major malfunction. After thinking for a moment he said, I mean, just having my past two concerts [and] just [to] successfully get thr ough them [laughs]. Everyones still in one piece. Mentoring Program Structure While the history and complete structure of their respective mentoring programs were beyond their knowledge, the mentees relayed their perceptions of one st ructural element: the pairing of mentors with mentees. The mentees described one obstacle regarding mentoring high school band directors. The pairing procedure. Most of the mentees shared that the way they were paired with their mentors was informal and dependent upon who was available and volunteered. Coreys situation was a little different because a school district music supervisor assigned his mentor. The other mentors were assigned through FBA. Corey was uncertain about how he was paired with his mentor: I have no idea. I called one day and [the mu sic supervisor] told me [who] my mentoring teacher was going to be. The other four mentees recalled being paired with a mentor at their first FBA meeting. Emily and Eric shared very similar memories of the mentor assignments. Emily stated,

PAGE 68

68 I showed up to the first FBA meeting and they sa id, Hey, weve got a lot of new directors. Who would like to be mentors? A few of the directors, older direct ors, raised their hand and [it was] just [a], Hey, Ill take you ki nd of a thing. [They were] pointing, Ill take you. And since he and I knew we were in the same district, it made sense that we were buddied up together . There was no expl anation. It was just kind of informal. FBA district officers assigned a mentor to Maria. The new teachers within her district met with their mentors immediately prior to the first district meeting. At that point, she became acquainted with her mentor, and the mentor be gan to explain the purpose of the FBA and the responsibilities band directors ha d to the organization. Maria re marked, They basically did a rundown of the year. Mike indicated that hi s FBA district chairperson assigned him his mentor. The program itself wasnt really e xplained. [It was presente d] just as, Heres a mentor teacher for you. If you have any questio ns, concerns, comments, need anything, call him. While the process of how a mentee was paired with a mentor was not always clear, the importance of mentor-mentee observati ons was clear to all five mentees. Time as an obstacle. When asked about such topics as the frequency of contact with their mentors, the context of meetings with their me ntors, or changes in mentoring programs that might be beneficial, the mentees commented about the lack of tim e in their schedules or their mentors schedules. The comments came in both short references and longer explanations. At various times during his first inte rview, Corey made several statem ents: [My mentor] and I have both been extremely busy, Right now were ju st both swamped, and Were both so busy. During the same interview, Corey expressed hope for mentoring time in the future: Once festival is over . I think well have a lot mo re time to devote to fostering that [mentoring] relationship. In his second interview, Corey echoed his ear lier comments about the lack of time for the mentoring. The size of each of the band program s, the performance schedules, and directors

PAGE 69

69 family life left little time outside of the school day for the pair to meet or discuss teaching. Eric added, Theres just not enough time to even do th e paperwork . let alone drive out to where he was. Need for Observation The mentees stressed the importance of twoway observation. The mentees reported the role of observation in their mentor ing relationship in two distinct ways: the role was either a part of the relationship or it was not. Where obser vation had been a part, the mentees expressed extremely positive views of those experiences. In the relationships without observations, mentees articulated a need for those opportunities. In both case s, mentor modeling and mentor feedback were identified as be neficial parts of observation. Benefits. Two of the five mentees, Corey and Ma ria, reported they had opportunities for observation with their mentor within the mentor -mentee relationship. Emily had never observed her mentor. Eric and Mike had not been able to participate in any kind of observation with their mentors since they were paired with them as mentees. However, both of these first-year band directors knew their respective ment ors before they started their ne w jobs. Without being able to observe the mentor, it was difficult for the mentee to develop a high level of respect or a true appreciation for the mentors ab ilities or methods. The mentee could assume the mentor was a good teacher and had quality ensembles, but the mentee had no evidence to support an assumption. Emily stated, I really dont know much about his teaching to be honest, because I havent ever observed him or seen his band. Emily also expressed the difference in being told about a possible method of teaching and actually witnessing the method in practice. Obse rving a mentor teach a class or ensemble was more valuable to the mentees than a mentor explaining his methods over the phone. Emily summarized by saying, Words are [just] words. Mentors were able to model teaching

PAGE 70

70 methods. Corey spoke of the times the mentor came to his to work with the band and the value of the interaction: [My mentor has] been out here a couple ti mes to teach, and Ive watched him teach and gleaned . things that I can us e as examples for articulations a nd all that sort of thing . the way that he approaches the kids is totally different from the way I approach the kids. He . taught wind ensemble, and it was absolu tely wonderful. We basically team taught the class for two hours . and it was really, re ally beneficial for the kids and for me, I think. Even with having these opportunities to observe his mentor, Corey thought more chances would have been beneficial: If I could have go tten him out here a few more times to teach, I think that would have been good. A benefit to mutual observations was the acco mpanying opportunity for feedback from the mentor. Without observing the mentee, the mentor was not able to provide advice based on how the mentee was teaching. The mentor could answer specific questions, but if the mentee was not asking all the questions or the right questions, problems might not be addressed. Mike said, What Im doing in the classroom might be good, [or it] might not be good. And if its not good and I dont know its not good, Im not [able to ask] the mentor and [it cannot] be fixed. Mike believed that observing and meeting in the schoo l setting would allow the mentor to provide feedback on the mentees teaching methods. He th ought that after a semester of feedback in student teaching, the lack of feedback sends th e wrong message to a firs t-year teacher. The message might be that his methods are good, and th ere are no alternative or better methods. Maria provided an example of immediate f eedback when she described the mentor watching her teach: This past Tuesday he came out to our evening rehearsal at the stadium. . While we were watching rehearsal, [we] . bounced stuff back and forth Those mentees who had not participated in any observations were clear about their feelings. Eric stated: I wished he could have come and watched a rehearsal . This is what

PAGE 71

71 you might want to change. So, if I could have me t him in our work environment that would have been good. Finally, Eric provided some thoughts on finding possible observation time: If [the school] would give us a sub day [to] a llow us [or] me to go observe him and/or him [to] come observe here [As] with any new teacher, they want me to do observations, but they always give me an English teacher. A nd, as good a teacher as they are, that doesnt help running a marching band rehearsal. The mentees believed that observation opportunities were or could be a critical component of their mentoring programs. In only their first ye ar of teaching, they were unaware of what policies made observations possibl e or what obstacles might st and in the way. These were details that an experienced educator might know. The Mentors Barry Barry was a 31-year-old director of bands at a metropolitan high school in Florida. His education included a bachelor of music educa tion degree from a univers ity in Florida and a master of music degree in wind conducting from a university outside of Fl orida. The population of Barrys school was approximately 2,300 students and he saw 183 students in five different courses. Those courses included three concer t band ensembles, a percussion class, and an advanced placement music theory course. Barry wa s the only band director at the school; he had 60 minutes of planning time dail y. His marching band was comprised of 150 students. This was Barrys first year serving as a mentor. Tom Tom was 28 years old and dire ctor of bands at a large hi gh school in Florida. His education included a bachelor of music in pe rformance degree from a university outside of Florida. The population of Toms school was ap proximately 3,400 students, and he instructed

PAGE 72

72 206 students in five different cl asses. Those classes included two concert band ensembles, and advanced music class (IB), and an advanced pla cement music theory course. Tom was the only band director at the school; he had 90 minutes of planning time every other day. This was Toms first year serving as a mentor. James James was a 55-year-old director of bands at a high school in Florida. He held a bachelor of music education degree from a university in Florida and a master of music education degree from the same institution. The population of the high school was approximately 1,750 students, and he saw 152 students in six different classe s. The concert band met during a zero hour before school every day. The other classes incl uded jazz band, chorus, instrumental techniques, and two introduction to music performance cour ses. James had one assistant band director working with him and had 55 minutes of planning time daily. James had been serving as a mentor for approximately 15 years. Keith Keith was 31 years old and director of bands at a large high school in a metropolitan area in Florida. He had a bachelor of music educ ation degree from a university in Florida. The population of Keiths school was approximately 3,100 students, and he taught 148 students in five different classes. Those classes included two concert band ensembles, jazz band, beginning band, and advanced placement music theory. Keit h had one assistant band director at the high school; he had approximately 100 minutes of planning time each day. He had been serving as a mentor for a few years. Kelly Kelly was 41 years old and director of bands at a middle school. She had a bachelor of music education degree from a university in Fl orida. The population of Kellys school was

PAGE 73

73 approximately 800 students with 240 students in th e band program. Kelly had one assistant band director. She estimated that she had been mentoring new band directors for 15 years. Through the Eyes of the Mentors Five themes emerged from the data collected from the mentors partic ipating in this study. Each theme and supporting categories present the story of the mentors perceptions of the mentoring relationship. The five themes were: 1. Perceptions of Mentees. The mentors shared views of their mentees and the relationship between them. They discussed mentee strengths in teaching, overall mentee abilities, and perceived relationship depth. Se veral mentors also had unique connections to their mentee in addition to mentoring. 2. Mentee Interaction. In teraction with the mentees came in several forms and included a common approach by the mentors. Several topi cs dominated the conversations between the mentoring pairs. The validation of mentee actio ns and methods was an important part of the interactions, and most of the relationships changed in some way over the course of the semester. 3. Program Structure. Several structural aspe cts of the mentoring programs were a common theme among the mentors. Perceptions of how individuals were selected to become mentors were similar, as were the perceptions of how they were paired with their mentees. An element of training was shared by several me ntors. Mentors belie ved that their school administrators had little knowledge of the mentoring programs, a nd one specific obstacle interfered with the en tire mentoring program. 4. Need for Observation. The mentors spoke about the importance of including observation opportunities in their mentoring programs. They presented the benefits of including such a component even though some me ntors lacked these observati on opportunities. They also described factors that inhibite d mentor and mentee observations. 5. Good Intentions-Questionable Results. The mentors wanted to see their mentees succeed as high school band directors. Th ey also believed they provide important assistance to the mentees. However, a theme of uncertainty c onnected these mentors. In many cases, the mentors were not able to verify that thei r mentoring efforts were helping the mentees. In the sections that follow, these themes ar e discussed and illustra ted through the words of the mentors.

PAGE 74

74 Perceptions of Mentees The mentors held some common views about the mentees. These areas included mentee strengths, strong personal mentee background, unique connections with a mentee, and the depth of the relationships. The combin ation of these areas provided a description of how the mentors perceived the mentees. Strengths. Mentors perceived their mentees to have a generally good rapport with students. Barry said his mentee had a great pe rsonality and was very good with the kids. Tom agreed that his mentee had such a rappor t and was approachable. This kind of relationship that mentees fostered with students translated into motivation and direction for the band programs. According to Barry, it has given them [the students] a direction and a sense of achievement, a sense of feeling good a nd having pride in what they do. In addition to being approachable, the mentees were very receptive to advice and ideas from their mentors. Tom thought his mentee was someone who doesnt have all the answers, but is more than willing to search. James cr edited his mentee as being open-minded to what he had to say. Strong personal background. The mentors thought their mentees overwhelmingly had a strong personal and educational background. Kell y assessed her mentee as really on top of things and a successful music educator. Keith said his mentee was a really good musician. Mentors recalled being enlightened by the mentees at times. Kelly referred to her mentee as having a very solid educational background. Tom believed his mentee was very smart and wants to do well. Unique connections. Three of the mentors pointed out they had a unique connection to their mentees. Kellys was unusual because she wa s the preceding band director at her mentees new high school. She offered this reason for serving as the mentor:

PAGE 75

75 I was very interested in making sure the program stayed on the level that they were used to. And knowing that a new director was going to co me in, that sometimes it takes a dip, and I didnt want to see that happen so I offered [to be the mentor of the new director]. Kelly was aware of the possible difficulties that this situation presented. The mentee might think Kelly would become jealous if he had immediate success. Kellys presence around the students could also interfere w ith the mentee establishing owners hip of the band program. She tried to avoid these potential problems by carefu lly explaining her advice and by staying away from band performances. She also realized some possible benefits that a mentor without such a connection could not offer: What was unique about being able to help him through that was that I knew the band. I knew the instrumentation. I knew where their weaknesses were. Barrys mentee had worked with his band before being hired as a new di rector in the area. The mentee had worked at Barrys band camp. Ba sed on what he had observed there, Barry believed his mentee was making a difference in his new job. Finally, Tom was his mentees cooperating teacher in his student teaching internship. They developed a close relations hip during the internsh ip, and their mentori ng relationship began there. He was my student teacher last year, so I did have an opportunity to mentor him in that aspect, and I think a lot of that has just carried through to this year. Depth of the relationship. Many mentors felt connected with their mentees in ways that were deeper than just teacher-to-student. Barr y, Tom, and Keith all used the word friend or friendship in describing their respective mentee. Keith said, Its not just a mentor thing. Its . a friendship kind of thing. Tom expanded on how close he and his mentee were: It would be great if he and I could go bowling and fishing. However, not all the relationships were clos e ones. James had not established a close relationship with his mentee. He described hi s mentoring relationship: Im mentoring from afar. Im not giving him [that] slap on the b ack he should be having. Kelly also did not

PAGE 76

76 mention developing a close friendship with her mentee. Lack of time and long distance were often obstacles to forming closer bonds. Mentee Interaction Mentors categorized their interaction with mentees in terms of their approach, the frequency and context of contact, topics of disc ussion, and changes that occurred within these interactions as the semester pr ogressed. They also pointed to one particular mentoring action that was important to the mentee. Mentoring technique. Ive always made it very clear fr om the very beginning that this is his program, not my program. I can only offer to hi m things that worked a nd things that didnt. This quote from Kelly illustrates the belief held by all the mentors that th eir job was not to tell their mentees how to teach or run their programs They believed their job was to offer advice and relate stories from their own experiences. Then mentees could decide the course of action that best worked for them. The mentors understood that different methods work for different people. When talking about his teaching methods, James said he trie d to remind his mentee of alternative methods without imposing too much of what I think is right and wrong. He also stated, What they want to accomplish may be different than what I think is important. Keith remarked, You dont want the [mentor] to say Dont do that because some . things [you] are going to have to figure out on your own. As a ment or, you can [just] guide them. Frequency and context. The mentors stated that most of the contact between mentors and mentees was on an as necessary basis. Tom said his role was best described as Im here if you need me. Additionally, he did not play an acti ve part in calling his mentee to see if anything was needed. He left the initiation of contact up to his mentee. Barry said contact was as needed but was initiated by either party. James said he expected his mentee to just call or

PAGE 77

77 email me and vice versa if ther e were any grinding questions. Keith and Kelly expressed the same view. Phone and email were the main modes of co mmunication. The frequency of the calls and emails varied among the mentors. Face-to-f ace meetings between mentors and mentees were much less frequent, and they usually occurred if they were attending the same meeting, football game, performance, or social function. James sai d, Its just a matter of whenever we have some free time at meetings or games for us to share ideas in what works and what doesnt work. One-on-one meetings occurred from three to five times during the fall semester. Some mentors favored the social functions as meeting places. Barry said, Most of the mentoring process has been over a dinner or an a dult beverage. Keith had gone to dinner with his mentee, and these kind of social settings he lped him in getting to know [his mentee] on a less professional level. This social occasion he lped each person feel more comfortable sharing problems and experiences. Mentoring topics. The mentors and mentees had talked about a variety of subjects over the course of the semester. Two t opics dominated the perceptions of the mentors: deadlines (or paperwork) and music literature selection. The topic of administrative paperwork and the meeting of deadlines for this paperwork was discussed throughout each of the mentor interviews. Tom talked about some activities requiring paperwork: I think most of his questions have been geared towa rds those administrative things. How do I order stands . get instruments . ge t my schedule to do this . get kids here? However, James and Kelly mentioned the completion of paperwork strictly in terms of FBA accomplishing a purpose through mentoring. James stated,

PAGE 78

78 [FBA has] asked for someone who could serve as a mentor to a new band director to remind them about forms (James). [Mentoring began] so we could help [new directors] through the paperwork (Kelly). James thought his responsibility was to remind hi s mentee to get forms in and of deadlines approaching. Tom echoed this type of interaction: I . make sure he doesnt miss deadlines. The mentors indicated they often spoke with their mentees about sel ecting music for their ensembles. Barry thought that this was one of th e most important tasks w ith which he could help his mentee: [For his mentees program], picking the right literature that f its the program help[s] them be as successful as possible, and thats very hard to do. Tom recalled his mentee calling him to ask about a piece of music he was planni ng to perform with an ensemble. Tom talked about the skill level required of certain player s for that music, and his mentee decided, Oh, okay, [we] cant do that. Keith a nd Kelly related almost the same story of interaction with their mentees. Networking. Although networking in this context referred to a mentees contact with people other than his assigned ment or, it was still a type of mentor interaction. The mentors in this study were aware that their mentees re ceived mentoring from others. The mentors acknowledged that their mentees had been assi gned mentor teachers from within their own schools, and that these mentors provided help to address school-specific issues. Aside from school mentors, participating me ntors said their mentees should be contacting other people for ideas and assistance. Tom stated, I encourage him to call other people . since hes already had experience with me and has gained insight as far as how I do things. James reflected on the advantages of his ment ee contacting other teachers in the district: He probably has other . friends that he talks to . It appears that the younger band directors email and call each other a lot more than I do. They help each other . through this.

PAGE 79

79 Relationship changes. Most of the mentors perceived a change in their respective mentees comfort level and confidence as the semester moved along. Ke llys purpose was to helpnot monitor or judge her mentee. Upon realizing Ke llys goal, the mentee was more open in their interactions. James thought his mentee seemed pretty nervous coming into the job. He had a panicked look on his face, [but] he looks more c onfident now. Several possible reasons for the increased confidence included mentor interacti on, experience at thei r new job, or positive feedback from administration, parent s, or students. Tom believed this to be the case with his mentor: He's starting to feel more comfortable . and more confid ent in his role . with the positive feedback he's getting from the parents and students and I think his principal. Validation. The mentors believed that valida ting mentee teaching methods was also important to convey. Tom had provided some dir ection to his mentee regarding the music for his marching band show. Then the mentee was able to resolve the problem. Tom reflected on his next interaction with hi s mentee: I'm not really sure he had any real questions for me other than just hoping for me to say Oh, you did it right . And I did because he handled it pretty well. Kelly agreed that the mentee sometimes needs just someone to talk to and make sure youre doing things right. Kelly had the opportunity to team teach with her mentee. This was another chance for her mentee to feel a sense of validation because the mentee could see the mentor using some of the same techniques he wa s using. The team-teaching interaction was also a signal to the mentee that he was us ing good methods in her instruction.

PAGE 80

80 Keith was also able to validate the progress of his mentee during an observation. He said his mentees students werent even playing that great, but they be haved so well. I said, Man, thats good. Youre on the right track. Program Structure The manner in which the mentoring programs were set up was another theme. Mentors described the selection process and the process of pairing. They discussed common aspects in training and an obstacle to program structure. Selection as a mentor. The majority of mentors simply volunteered. Barry recalled that his FBA district sent out an ema il asking for directors who might be interested in being mentors. Because he already knew one of the first-year directors in the distri ct, he volunteered to help that specific person. Tom was also able to select his mentee whom he already knew. Kellys FBA district asked her if she would serve as a ment or since she was familiar with the band program that had the open job. The pairing procedure. The pairing procedure was differe nt for each mentor-mentee pair. For Tom, his FBA district did not actually do the pairing: I know that th ere was an initiative to meet monthly at a central location for groups [o f mentees and experienced directors] to get together, but as far as person by person, one-on-one basis, I don't think our district really pushed that. James discovered there was going to be a new band director at the school where his wife worked, so he volunteered to mentor that person. He also believed that the first-year director requested him as a mentor. Kelly was paired with her mentee because of her firsthand knowledge of the mentees school and band program. State training. None of the mentors received training to serve as mentors to first-year band directors. However, for other purposes, state or district personnel had trained several of the

PAGE 81

81 directors. Keith and Tom were trained in progr ams that required faculty to serve as cooperating teachers. Both felt that this training was valuable to working with mentees. Training to become a mentor was a requirement for Keith. Kelly participated in a school district sponsored program that was designed to train teachers who would serve as mentors within thei r schools. The training consisted of workshops at the county office for a beginning teacher program. Administrative awareness. The school of individual mentors played no role in the structure of any of the mentoring programs. The administration of the ment ors schools had little or no knowledge of the ongoing mentoring programs for first-year high sc hool band directors. When asked if the administration was aware of th e help the mentors were providing to first-year teachers in their district, the response was largely negative. Kelly said, No . Its really a band director to band director thing. Barry stated, No, not that I know of anyway. Tom pointed out, I dont think our school is aware of this program. James commented, I may have mentioned it to my principal that I serve as a mentor. Keith said, M y administration probably doesnt even know that I do it. Time as an obstacle. The mentors made it clear that a high school band directors schedule is very full. Time--or the lack of it--wa s a major hurdle for the mentoring programs and mentoring relationships. The word busy was prevalent among the directors. Tom remarked, Hes busy; were all busy; everyon es busy. Ive got a family, and hes got [a] new job--so that would be it. James expressed, I know hes ve ry busy, and Im very busy. Barry did not have the time to travel the long distance between his school and his mentees school. He said he would be able to visit his mentee during his plan ning period, but the distan ce was too far to cover in his planning time.

PAGE 82

82 The lack of time was frustrati ng to the mentors. Barry was not able to help much with his mentees marching band because I was doing my ow n marching band. James simply said, If we had more time together, we could share more things. Need for Observation The mentors believed observation had its be nefits. Those mentors who had observation opportunities valued them. Thos e mentors who did not have obs ervation opportunities wanted them. Unfortunately, obstacles we re in the path of observation. Benefits. Mentors who had observed their ment ees or who had been observed by their mentees described the benefits. Keith expe rienced two-way observations. His mentee had visited him for an entire school day, and Keith had done some team teaching at his mentees school. During the first visit, they had the chance to sit down and talk for two hours. That amount of time with a mentee was rare among the mentors. His mentee was also able to compare the sound of his ensemble to Keiths ensemble. Th e mentee left realizing how much his ensembles could still improve. During the seco nd visit, Keith was able to watc h and listen to rehearsal, give immediate and relevant feedback, and demonstrat e methods with his mentees own students. He stated, I watched them rehearse and helped out a little bit. Kelly attended two of her mentees marching ba nd rehearsals. As a mentor, Kelly was able to see her mentees strengths and weaknesses in person instead of guessing what they might be, based on questions through email or phone. She commented, Im looking at the marching band, and were going through the motions [together]. Providing sincere and immediate feedback validated the mentees methods and was another obser vation benefit. Kelly recalled, I was able to [say], Great job picking that out [and] things like that.

PAGE 83

83 Observation obstacles. Mentors who did not have opportu nities to observe their mentees described the obstacles. For Ba rry, distance and similar schedule s were reasons he could not exchange observations with his mentee: We've never met in the classroom because his school and my school are about an hour apart . and we have the same exact schedule, so it's kind of hard to make that happen. Distance was a factor for James as well. His mentee was a good half hour drive away. Keith and Kelly shared some of the challeng es they faced in conducting observations. Keith saw the performance demands on high scho ol bands as a large obstacle for observation opportunities. The first-year high school director was expected to present a quality performance a month after being hired. Keith asked, How is he supposed to go out and observe on any kind of regular basis? Kelly agreed : In the high school band director s world, were so pushed for time and performance pressure every week that [the mentees] are going to be reluctant to . be out of the classroom. As mentioned earlier in this chapter, tim e was an obstacle for all components of the mentoring programs, and it impacted observations as well. The mentors believed that time might be available for observation if s ubstitute teachers were available. This is another obstacle to overcome. Barry said, In a dream world, it would be great if the mu sic supervisor could supply the mentor with a sub to [allow the mentor to] go out [and obs erve] at least once a semester, maybe twice a semester . but funding for subs is rare. Good Intentions-Questionable Results Desire for mentee success. The mentors wanted to see their mentees succeed as high school band directors, but were they succeeding? Were the mentors having an impact on their mentees? The mentors answers to these questions cast some doubts.

PAGE 84

84 The mentors intentions were unquestionable. They wanted to provide anything they could to ensure their mentees were successful. Keith sa id, I like to go in and see a concert and hear them do a great job. The picture of success was larger for James and Barry. Barry said, We need more successful people and we need higher quality people. There [are] so many bands and band directors that just dont ca re, dont do the right things, and the kids suffer . I just want . young people to be successful and give their kids the best education. Jame said, I just want to make sure that everybody . does what theyre supposed to do. [Then] we [music educators] are all going to look better. Uncertainty. These mentors might have been a tr emendous help to their mentees. Their mentees might have been failing without them. Ho wever, the mentors lack of certainty about making a difference for their respective mentees was evident. The mentors were asked to discuss any changes in their mentees teach ing strategies due to mentoring. Two mentors responde d positively. Keith said his mentees classroom management had improved. The students were also more r eceptive to his mentee, but Keith said, Im not really sure if all that we ever talked about has helped. I think he said it has. Kelly remarked that she thought her mentee was receptive to some suggestions she had made regarding the pacing of rehearsals and [ had] made some changes. Barry responded that he had not observed hi s mentee teaching, so he did not know of any changes. James sensed that his mentee had grasped the importance of an upcoming performance. Tom had heard from parents that they were pleased with his mentees work. However, he said, Whether or not I had anything to do with it, it would be nice to think that I did, but I really cant say. The mentors did not have many opportunities to receive feedback from their mentees regarding the mentoring process. Kelly spoke ab out the lack of feedback from her mentee: You

PAGE 85

85 dont get that feedback from your mentee: Oh great that was a big help. Barry felt that the school district supervisor should hold a meeting with mentors and mentees maybe three times a year so that the music supervis or can hear pros and cons. Finally, when asked to share a successful mome nt with their mentee, most of the mentors did not have one to share. Barry said, Nothing major yet; hopefully next semester will be it. James shared, Just that hes shown up at everyt hing that hes supposed to. Keith said, If theyre still teaching, I think thats pretty successful. The mentors were only able to provide a fe w specific examples of how mentoring had helped their mentees. Those examples came from the mentors who had observed their mentees. Summary of Results The Mentees An analysis of data from the mentees show ed that they: (a) work long hours required as high school band directors; (b) felt self-confident; (c) had some signi ficant interactions with their mentors; (d) held particular perceptions about th e structure of their mentoring programs; and (e) expressed the need for observation to be part of the mentoring process. Directing a marching band, completing admini strative paperwork, and choosing musical literature for performing ensemble s contributed to their long hours. The mentees feelings of confidence came as a result of: (a) their undergraduate experiences; (b) ne tworking with other band directors; (c) their musical skills and ab ilities; (d) successful classroom management results; (e) good rapport with stude nts; and (f) validation of thei r methods by students, parents, and others. The mentees reported that the relationship that they cultivated with their mentor was an important component of their cha nge and growth as firs t-year band directors. Other aspects of their relationships that were cited included: a) help with deadlines; b) frequency and context of

PAGE 86

86 mentor contact; c) informal meetings; d) relatio nship changes over the semester; e) changes in mentee teaching techniques; and f) payoffs from mentoring, such as a successful performance. Mentees thought the procedure fo r mentor pairing lacked struct ure, and they shared how time limited the effectiveness of mentoring in some cases. Both mentees, who had opportunities for obser vation and those who had not, described the important role that observation plays, the per ceived benefits availabl e through observation, and ways to provide opportunities. The Mentors An analysis of data from the mentors showed : (a) their perceptions of the mentees; (b) how particular aspects of their interaction with the mentees were helpful; (c) descriptions of the structure of the mentoring programs; (d) the n eed for observation; and (e) their good intentions as mentors and concern about yielding s ubstantial outcomes through their efforts. The mentors described the mentees rapport wi th students and receptiveness to advice. They felt that their mentees had strong persona l backgrounds. Some of the mentors expressed their connections to their mentees, and the quality of their relationships. The mentors frequent mentee contact was importa nt during their first year. However, they also encouraged mentees to network with othe r band directors. They described how their relationships with mentees evol ved, and expressed the importance of validating their mentees pedagogical strategies. Mentors discussed the processes of mentor selection and mentee pairing, and how their training for other state or distri ct programs influenced their mentoring skills. They suggested that the school administrators lack of knowledge of the band director mentoring program and time were obstacles to mentoring.

PAGE 87

87 The mentors emphasized the importance of obser vation in the mentoring programs. They described the benefits of two-way observations, as well as obstacles that inhibited observations. Mentors also expressed their desire for mentees to succeed, but they were typically unable to provide examples of how ment oring led to mentee success. The Mentors and The Mentees Both the mentees and mentors emphasized the importance of mentee/me ntor interactions, program structure, and observation. The mentor s did not share the ment ees discussion of long hours or self-confidence. The mentees did not share the mentor themes of perceptions of mentees or good intentions-questionable results. Because the analysis of data was conducted separately for each group, some identical categor ies of data supported different themes across groups. Mentors and mentees shared themes, and many categories were also shared (see Figure 4-1). Only one theme contradicted thematic elemen ts of the other group. The mentees did not describe the mentors stated goal of success fo r mentees. However, the mentees did discuss positive results from mentoring. The mentees c ited changes in their teaching techniques and payoffs from mentoring in the form of succe ssful performances. Conversely, each mentor was not able to identify changes in his mentees te aching techniques or a ny significantly successful moments with his mentee.

PAGE 88

88 Mentee Themes Mentee Categories Mentor Categories Mentor Themes Mentor Interaction Mentoring Technique Survival & Deadlines Frequency & Context Relationship Changes Changes in Teaching Payoffs Mentoring Technique Frequency & Context Mentoring Topics: (Deadlines & Admin. Work) (Music Selection) Networking Relationship Changes Validation Mentee Interaction Program Structure Pairing Procedure Time Obstacle Comparable Themes Mentor Interaction-Mentee Interaction Program Structure Need for Observation Self-confidence-Perception of Mentee Selection as Mentor Pairing Procedure State Training Administrative Awareness Time Obstacle Program Structure Need for Observation Benefits Modeling Feedback Benefits: (Feedback) (Validation) Obstacles Need for Observation Self-confidence Undergraduate Experience Networking Musical Ability Classroom Management Rapport Validation Strengths: (Rapport) (Open-minded) Strong Personal Background Unique Connections Depth of Relationship Perception of Mentees Long Hours Marching Band Admin. Work Music Selection Comparable Categories Mentoring Technique Deadlines Frequency & Contact Relationship Changes Pairing Procedure Time Obstacle Observation Benefits Networking Rapport Validation Admin. Work Music Selection Desire for Mentee Success Uncertainty: (Changes in Teaching) (Successful Moments) IntentionsResults Figure 4-1. Interrelationships of themes and categories.

PAGE 89

89 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION Introduction The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of first-year high school band directors and their mentors regard ing their mentor-mentee relations hips. The role of mentoring within the unique context of the new high school band director was the focu s of this study. This study also provided an insiders perspective of the mentoring pr ocess experienced by these music educators. The situational contexts of the me ntoring pairs were described in detail. The participants shared the roles they played in the mentoring process, and discussed how their relationships changed over time. The effect of mentoring on the instru ctional capacity of the mentees was investigated, and the participants presented their view s on the effectiveness of their relationships. The mentees were in their initial semester of teaching and were h ead band directors at their respective schools. The mentors in this study were provided through mentoring programs implemented by an individual school district or by individual dist ricts of the Florida Bandmasters Association. Although the perceptions of the 10 partic ipants cannot be generalized to all first-year high school band directors and their mentors, the results should be of particular interest to music teacher educators, mentor t eachers, preservice teachers, administrators, and professional music education organi zations. The findings from this study could be used to create new mentoring programs for music educat ors or to refine existing programs. In this chapter, a summary of the data coll ection procedure is presented and followed by a discussion of the findings. Finally, implications for theory, issues regarding mentoring, and implications for music education are discussed.

PAGE 90

90 Data Collection Five first-year high school ba nd directors in the state of Fl orida were interviewed twice during their first semester of teaching: once early in the semester and once near the end of the semester. Each of the corresponding mentors was interviewed one time near the end of the semester to provide his thoughts on the mentoring process. Each semi-structured interview was conducted at the participants school and recorded. The first set of interviews with the mentees focused on biographical data, e xpectations of teaching, and presumptions of the mentoring experience (see Appendix C). The second set of interviews focused on teaching experiences, mentoring experiences, and other to pics emergent from the previ ous interview (see Appendix C). Each participant also completed a demographic questionnaire to provide additional contextual information (see Appendix B). The research timeline had a possible impact on the results of the study. Presidents of FBA districts and county music supervisors were c ontacted in early August 2006 to locate possible participants. Next, permission to get in touch with them and to conduct the research had to be obtained from the individual school districts. Potential participants were first notified in late August. Mentors were then contacted to ensure that both members of th e mentoring relationship were willing to participate. This timeline pushed the first interview back into late September. The researcher intended to interview the mentees in late August. Results of the study might have been different if the initial ment ee interviews were held at the beginning of the school year. At that time, mentee recollection of early experiences may have been clearer, and perceptions of the programs may have been based more on their expectations of mentoring.

PAGE 91

91 Findings Five themes emerged from the mentee data and five themes emerged from the mentor data during the constructivist c ontent analysis. Of the 10 total th emes, three were shared and four were exclusive (see Figure 5-1). The mentee themes were: 1. Mentor Interaction: The mentees had various perceptions regarding contact time with mentors, but several similar pe rceptions were shared. These included topics discussed with mentors, such as mentoring methods, the purpos e of mentoring, and the frequency or context of contact. 2. Program Structure: From the mentor-to-mentee pairing proc edure to the enormous time obstacle involved, these five mentees frequently offered perceptions of the way the programs were structured. 3. The Need for Observation: All the mentees incl uded the opportunity for observation as part of their conversation. They shar ed or anticipated the benefits of observing their mentors. 4. Extra Hours: The fall semester was filled with after-school rehearsals, administrative paperwork, supervision, and performances. The five mentees clearly expressed the lack of free time available for mentoring activities. 5. Self-confidence: The first-year teachers expre ssed confidence in their abilities as music educators. This confidence was attribut ed to good undergraduate preparation and networking, and it was evident in a number of teaching-related areas. The mentor themes included: 6. Mentee Interaction: Interacti on with the mentees came in several forms and included a common approach by the mentors. The validat ion of mentee actions and methods was an important part of the interact ions, and most of the relations hips changed in some way over the course of the semester. 7. Program Structure: Mentors held common view s of the selection process for becoming a mentor and the mentee pairing process. Ment ors believed that their school administrators had little knowledge of the mentoring programs, and the lack of time interfered with the entire mentoring program. 8. The Need for Observation: The mentors spoke out on the importance of including observation opportunities in their mentoring prog rams. The difficulties inhibiting mentor and mentee observations were also presented. 9. Good Intentions-Questionable Results: Despite wa nting to see their mentees succeed as high school band directors and the pe rceived benefits to the ment ees from the program, many of the mentors were not able to verify that th eir mentoring efforts were helping the mentees.

PAGE 92

92 10. Perceptions of Mentees: The mentors shared views of their respective mentees and the relationship between them. They discusse d strengths in teaching, overall ability, and perceived relationship depth. The situational context of the mentees is clea r within the mentee them es of extra hours and self-confidence. The mentees describe d long hours spent working outside the regular school day. Those hours included conducti ng marching band rehearsals, completing administrative paperwork, and choosing music for th eir ensembles. The time and effort involved with administrative duties matched one of the themes found by Conw ay (2003a). Conway stated, [These duties] take sophisticated skill in time manageme nt and administrative organization. All of the beginni ng teachers suggested that they we re unprepared for these tasks. By including these administrative tasks as a pr imary reason for their long hours, the mentees in the present study suggested they, too, were unprepared. The mentees were very confident in their ab ilities. This confidence resulted from the combination of many factors, which included positive undergraduate ex periences, successful classroom management, and the validation of th eir methods, among other factors. Confidence, based on positive undergraduate experiences, was also a strong theme in the Conway et al. (2004) study. One contributing author from th at study stated, Coming out of college, I felt confident that I could take whatever the prof essional teaching world c ould dish out (p. 47). Similarly, that level of confidence was evid ent from the mentees in the present study. The mentors had positive opinions of their mentees. The mentor perceptions of the mentees included strengths of rapport and recepti veness to advice. The mentors also felt the mentees had strong personal backgrounds, expressed some unique connections to their mentees, and communicated the depth of their relations hips. The mentors had good intentions in mentoring the first-year band di rectors, but could not confirm many positive results from their mentoring. This was the only theme in the study contradicted by percepti ons of the other group

PAGE 93

93 of participants. The mentees pe rceptions contradicted this ment or perception. Mentees did not cite a desire for their success coming from their mentors, although it might have been implied. More importantly, the mentees attributed posi tive changes in their te aching and successful performances to mentoring. The mentees and mentors held similar views of th eir interactions and of the structure of the mentoring programs in which they were participa ting. The need for observation was the most prevalent theme from both the mentees and the me ntors. Whether participants had experienced some observation opportunities or no such opportun ities, they were clear in expressing their beliefs that observation should play a prominent role in a mentoring program. This theme was also supported in Conways (2003a) study of 13 beginning music teachers. Based on comments from participants, she included Scheduling So Mentors Can Observe (p. 19) as one of her suggestions for music mentor practices. The Research Questions The findings of this study provided the followi ng answers to the five research questions: 1. What are the situational contex ts of the mentor/mentee pairs? The FBA districts operated four of the ment oring programs, and a school district music supervisor operated the fifth. The school distri ct mentoring program diffe red in structure from FBA mentoring programs, and the district FBA mentoring programs differed among each other. The differences included methods of mentor se lection, mentor-mentee pairing, and allocated resources. This finding supports the lack of consistency in me ntoring programs cited by Conway (2003a). With the school district program and the FBA programs, the administration at every participants school had little to no awareness of the mentoring pr ogram. The participant schools varied in student population, location, and size of the band program. Desp ite this wide variety,

PAGE 94

94 the context of the mentor/mentee pairs included very busy schedules. The responsibilities to their own band programs interfered with interactions with their me ntoring partner. The mentees spent numerous hours completing ad ministrative paperwork, choosing music for their ensembles, and rehearsing with their marching bands. The me ntees were confident in their abilities, and they had a positive view of their underg raduate experience in music education. The traveling time between mentor and me ntee schools was anywhere from 15 to 45 minutes. All the mentors had very positive opinions of their mentees. Several of them had unique connections to their mentees. One mentee ha d served as an instructor at the mentors school before graduating from college. Anothe r mentee had been a student teacher with the mentor during the final semester of college. Finally, one mentor had been the mentees immediate predecessor at the same school. 2. What are the mentees and mentors perceptions of their respective roles? The mentees believed their role was simply to ask the mentors questions through phone or email. The mentors perceived their role to be maintaining availability to answer the mentees questions on an as-needed basis. Mentors believed they should answer mentee que stions by providing advice, stories, or examples to the mentees. They did not want to tell the mentees exactly wh at to do or how to do it. The mentees should be allowed to make thei r own decisions and determine the direction of their band programs. The mentors also felt that the development of a closer relationship or friendship with their mentees was important. They thought that informal meetings over dinner or drinks were a good way to achieve this relationship and to get to know their mentees on a more personal level.

PAGE 95

95 The single biggest role perceived by the me ntors was their responsibility to remind mentees of approaching deadlines and to get form s in. Some even suggested the purpose of the FBA mentoring program was to ensure that new band directors accomplished the required paperwork in a timely fashion. 3. How do mentees perceptions of their relationsh ips with mentors change during the semester? The mentees became more comfortable interacti ng with their mentors over the course of the semester. The types of questions asked of the mentors became more specific in nature, dealing more with pedagogical issues and less with management or rehearsal technique. The contact between the mentoring pairs became less frequent, and the mentees felt less need for verification that they were on the right path. 4. What mentee or mentor-perceived changes occur in the instructional te chniques of the mentee as a result of the me ntoring relationships? All the changes in mentee teaching techniques were perceived by the mentees. Mentees referred to increasing their bag of tricks for use in teaching their ensembles. Some of the changes included: (a) the use of different demea nors with students; (b) th e pacing of rehearsals; (c) the motivation of students; and (d) the use of different warm-up techniques. 5. What are the mentees and mentors perception s of the effectiveness of their relationships? The mentors and mentees believed their relations hip to be most effective in ensuring that the mentees met deadlines for the submittal of paperwork and fees to the FBA. This was especially evident in the mentees perception that their mentors role was largely viewed as providing reminders of deadlines and assistance in completing forms. The mentees believed that the mentoring rela tionship was effective in assisting them during their first semester. They saw the successf ul performances of their ensembles as evidence

PAGE 96

96 of this effectiveness, but they were not specific with what mentoring moments contributed to the success. The mentors did not have a perception of how effective their relationship had been. They did not say their relationships were ineffect ive, but they also could not confirm that the relationships were effective. They had not witnessed enough--or any--of their mentees teaching or performances of their ensembles to evaluate the effects of the relationship. Implications for Theory The theory in action for mentoring suggest s that the positive at titudes and teaching improvements of these first-year high school band directors should ha ve been a result of mentoring. A positive mentee attitude was displaye d through the theme of self-confidence, but the researcher could not conclude this attitude was a result of mentoring. The categories behind the mentees self-confidence suggest that certain f actors, such as solid undergraduate experience and personal musical ability, contri buted more to their positive at titude than did the mentors. However, the mentees attributed a limited number of changes in their teaching and successful performances of their ensembles to thei r mentors. Despite the contributions of these two examples to positive attitudes, the mentors were not able to say the success or attitudes of their mentees were a result of mentoring. The mentors hoped they had helped but had no way to be certain. With such a large degree of ambi guity regarding the source of mentee success, the researcher can include the theory in action as only one possible explanation of mentee perceptions. The theoretical framework in Chapter 2 indi cated that three additional components should be evident in mentoring. Firs t, conversations involving constr uctive criticism by the mentor should have occurred. These conversations were extremely rare or non-exi stent due to the lack of time available and few faceto-face meetings. Second, mentors should be available and supportive of the mentees. This was the case in th is study. The mentors indicated their role was

PAGE 97

97 to answer questions that the mentees posed to them, and the mentees indicated their mentors answered their questions. Thir d, as suggested by theory, mentors should allow mentees to make their own decisions by providing advice, as oppos ed to mandating methods. Both the mentees and mentors affirmed this to be the approach used in their relationships. Theories regarding mentoring were not comp letely supported by this study. Reasons for the lack of support are open to interpretation. One in terpretation could be that the theories regarding mentoring are incorrect. However, th e researcher believes the theories regarding mentoring rely strongly on the structure and compone nts of the mentoring program. It is logical to assume that incomplete mentoring programs would not achieve the levels of success necessary to support the theories. With adjustments in st ructure and procedure, these mentoring programs would support the theories. Issues This study prompts several issues that should be considered by school districts and state music organizations. Some of the issues are di rectly related to the FBA mentoring programs, and some are common with both the FBA programs and the school district program involved in the study. Purpose of the Programs The timely completion of forms and submittal of fees and forms to the FBA are important responsibilities of every high school band director in Florida. W ithout the orderly completion of forms and submittal of fees, fines are imposed and/or students are not able to participate in important FBA-sponsored events. The participants in this study frequently stated that the timely submittal of forms and fees was the primary purpose of the mentoring programs. These statements suggest that the full potential of the mentoring programs is not realized.

PAGE 98

98 The FBA personnel have taken an important step in providing mentoring to young band directors, but the FBA should re alize and emphasize to their ment ors all the bene fits mentoring can and should provide. The improvement of teacher effectiveness through modeling, constructive criticism, and feedback is one possible and important benefit. Pairing Procedures The administrators of mentoring programs shoul d consider unique relationships that exist prior to, or may arise from, the pairing of mentors and mentees. Two of the mentoring pairs in this study had worked closely together prior to being paired as mentor-mentee. While the established familiarity might eliminate the need for a lengthy period of getting acquainted, the mentee loses the opportunity to learn from someone new. The same possibility of advantages and disa dvantages existed with one other mentoring pair in the study. The mentor who was the imme diate predecessor of his mentee at the mentees new school acknowledged the advantages and di sadvantages of that unique situation. The mentor had an advantage toward helping the mentee because he intimately knew the mentees new program and students. However, this fa miliarity did not prevent an obvious sense of uneasiness that was evident to the researcher duri ng the interviews. The presence of the mentor around his former program and students, and the mentees unavoidable questioning of his mentors motives may not have allowed this pairing to reach optimal effectiveness. The haphazard method of pairing mentors and mentees used by many of the FBA districts can lead to less than ideal pairings. Several of the districts asked for volunteer mentors and matched them with mentees closest to them. Personalities were not always a good match, and not all the mentoring relationships were successful in the eyes of the mentees. One pairing had little to no interaction and left the mentee wishing the mentor would take more initiative in his role. With the lack of opport unities for reflection or evaluation of the pairing, the FBA districts

PAGE 99

99 will likely never know the level of success of th eir programs beyond the demonstrated success of the mentee ensembles. Observation First-year high school band directors were paired with mentor teachers through the mentoring programs encountered in this study. Little structure existed beyond this pairing. There was no mentor training, prot ocol for mentors to follow, or prescribed number or types of contact to be completed. Many of the mentors said they did not want this type of structure, but both the mentees and mentors wanted opportunities for observation. One of the mentoring pairs had observed each other in their respec tive classrooms. They said that period of time was not enough. The other mentoring pairs had not experienced mutual observations. They said they wanted to have su ch observation opportunities but the lack of free time in their schedules would not permit them. The prevailing methods of contact between th e mentoring pairs--phone calls and emails-severely limited the amount and specificity of advice the mentor was able to give. The chance for a mentee to observe a mentor would allow the mentee to increas e his repertoire of classroom teaching methods based on the successful methods of the mentor. The chance for a mentor to observe a mentee would allow the mentor to w itness the mentees classroom teaching methods and provide immediate feedback and constructive criticism. Administrative Awareness The lack of awareness of these mentoring pr ograms on the part of the individual school administrations is surprising. If the school admi nistrators were familiar with the programs and were aware of the benefits provi ded by the programs, perhaps they could assist in providing the best resources and opportunities to the mentors and mentees involved.

PAGE 100

100 The participants in this study mentioned that the availability of substitute teachers would make observations of each other much easier or even simply possible. School administrators might be able to make this possible, therefor e limiting the obstacle crea ted by the lack of time available to their high school band directors. A partnership betw een the administrators of the mentoring programs and school administrators coul d greatly improve the e ffectiveness of music educator mentoring. Implications for Music Education All the mentees schools had individual me ntoring programs. Most of the mentors assigned through those programs were considered ineffective for helping the mentees with music-related issues. Despite shortcomings id entified by participants, the mentoring programs that provided an experienced high school band direct or as a mentor were deemed valuable by the participants. Therefore, music education or ganizations should encourage the creation or continuation of such music educator-specific pr ograms and participation in them. School districts with music supervisors could administer these mentoring programs, as was the case with one of the pairs in this study. The FBA could fulfill this role in the rural di stricts where a district music supervisor is not employed. Communication between music edu cators and school, district a nd state administrators is essential. If administrators are not aware of the programs and accompanying benefits provided to their students, they cannot capably fulfill this role. This important role consists of providing the release time that is esse ntial to effective mentoring pr ograms (Conway et al., 2002). The findings of this study suggest that more structured mentoring pr ograms might increase benefits experienced by mentees. Mentors were enthusiastic about suppo rting their mentees, but most waited by the phone or computer for the me ntees to contact them with questions. The simplest document could provide suggestions for successful mentoring to mentors. A few short

PAGE 101

101 training sessions at regular FBA district meetings could provid e structure without requiring a specific number of contact hour s or lengthy training sessions. The administrators in FBA districts should include open di scussions and evaluations of th eir mentoring programs at their regular meetings. Mentors and mentees should be encouraged to share their thoughts, feelings, and suggestions. As one mentee suggested, FBA district administrators should solicit the opinions and evaluations from me ntoring participants as part of a yearly evaluation. This procedure would benefit the pr ograms administered by county music supervisors as well. Future research should include a similar study over one or two academic years. Studying the participants longitudinally would provide more developed pe rspectives from participants, which could change considerably over time. Additionally, the inclusion of participants from a wider variety of positions might further illumina te the mentoring programs. School principals, FBA district officers, and distri ct music supervisors could provi de informative perspectives on the history and progress of the me ntoring programs. Expansion of the research to regional and national levels and encompassing multiple states with varying mentoring constructs would provide further information and the opportunity for comparison. Similar qualitative studies of middle school band directors are needed in order to increase the understanding of the mentoring pr ocess at that level. The s ituational contexts, needs, and perceptions of middle school band directors may be very differe nt from those of high school band directors. Since increasing numbers of first-year band directors are particip ating in mentoring programs, studies are needed that compare band directors who have experienced positive mentoring experiences with those who have experienced negative mentoring experiences.

PAGE 102

102 Exploring the similarities and di fferences of these band direct ors mentoring programs might identify the most important componen ts necessary for effective mentoring. Conclusions High school band directors are extremely busy people with multifaceted responsibilities required for building or maintaining a successful school band program. This context makes the additional contacts between mentees and mentors in these jobs even more difficult, no matter how beneficial those contacts may be. Additiona lly, the mentoring programs offer no guidelines or structure. Therefore, the people in these posi tions tend to perceive their mentoring roles in the simplest, non-time-consuming terms. A mentee may say, I will call when I have a question. A mentor may state, I will provi de answers as the questions are asked, and provide reminders of paperwork and deadlines when they approach. The mentees perceived few changes in this c onvenient relationship w ith their mentors over their first semester of teaching. The mentees sa w changes in their teaching techniques based on the questions they asked their mentors. With little experience in the profession, mentees might not ask all the right questions. The mentors can answer only the questions they are asked because they are not able to actually observe their mentees teaching in the classroom. The mentees receive no feedback from their mentor s regarding their teaching techniques, and the mentors receive no feedback from the mentees regarding the advice they have given. The mentors are left to hope they are making a difference in the success of their mentees. Music education is moving in a positive dir ection with mentoring first-year high school band directors. The present res earch suggests that some mentor ing from experienced high school band directors is better than no mentoring or mentoring from only non-music teachers. With continued creation and development of these mentoring programs, future high school band directors will increasingly benefit from participation in mentoring.

PAGE 103

103 Extra Hours Mentee/Mentor Interaction Program Structure Need for Observation Self Confidence Perceptions of Mentees Intentions Results Mentees Mentors Figure 5-1. Common and exclusive themes.

PAGE 104

104 APPENDIX A LETTER OF CONSENT Dear Participant, I am Jay Jacobs, a graduate student at the Univer sity of Florida in the School of Music. My research involves the explora tion of the relationship between mentoring programs and new high school band directors. If you choose to participate, you will be asked to complete a brief demographic survey, and you will be interviewed privately tw o times (new teachers) or one time (mentors) for approximately 60 minutes. The first interview will be early in the school year, and the second will be near the end of the fall semester. The interviews will be audio taped and subsequently transcribed. You can refuse to answer any questi on you find objectionable or ask that the tape recorder be turned off at any time. You can withdr aw your consent and participation in the interview at any time. Your participation is voluntar y and without compensation. Y our confidentiality will be protected to the extent provided by law, and you will not be identified by name. Interviews will be conducted at your school at tim es most convenient for you. There are no anticipated risks a ssociated with participation in this project. There are several possible benefits. Participants will have the oppor tunity to reflect on thei r role in mentoring and its personal and professiona l effects. It is possi ble that the findings of the study could provide a basis for the creation or rest ructuring of specific mentori ng programs for high school band directors. Principal Investigator: Jay N. Jacobs, 1215 NW 55th St. #7, Gainesville, FL 32605; Tel: (352) 514-8181; Email: jacobs02@ufl.edu Supervisor: Timothy S. Brophy, Ph.D Professor of Music Education, University of Florida, 358 Music Building, Gainesville, FL 32611; Tel: (3 52) 392-0223 x222; Email: Tbrophy@arts.ufl.edu If you have any questions, you may contact Jay Ja cobs at the phone number listed above or his supervisor. Questions or concerns about participants rights can be directed to the UFIRB office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Ga inesville, FL 32611; Tel: (352) 392-0433. I have read and understand the procedure described above. I agree to participate in this project and I have received a copy of this description. Printed Name ___________________________________ Signature _______________________________________ Date___________________

PAGE 105

105 APPENDIX B DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE 1. Name: _______________________________________________ 2. Age: __________ 3. Gender: Male / Female 4. Undergraduate Degree: __________________________________ 5. Undergraduate Institution: ________________________________ 6. Graduate Degree: _______________________________________ 7. Graduate Degree Institution: ______________________________ 8. Teaching Position: ______________________________________ 9. School(s): _____________________________________________ 10. District: _______________________________________________ 11. Student Population of School: _____________________________ 12. If you are the Head Band Director, do you have any assistant band directors? Yes / No If yes, how many? _________ 13. Do you have a marching band? Yes / No 14. If yes, how many students partic ipate in the marching band? ___________ 15. Please list the courses you teach during the sc hool day and the number of students in each class: Course # of Students _________________________________ ___________ _________________________________ ___________ _________________________________ ___________ _________________________________ ___________ _________________________________ ___________ _________________________________ ___________ _________________________________ ___________ _________________________________ ___________ _________________________________ ___________ 16. How many minutes of planning time do you have each day? __________ 17. Please indicate the grade level ra nge of students that you teach: K-5 6-8 9-12

PAGE 106

106 APPENDIX C INTERVIEW PROTOCOL Mentee Interview 1 In this interview I want to gain a perspec tive of your views of teaching and the mentoring process early in your first semester of teachi ng. As you know, your responses in this interview are confidential. Your answers will be coded so that no one will know from whom or where they originated. This interview is not intended to evaluate you, yo ur mentor, or this school. 1. How was this mentoring program explained to you? 2. How much did you know about the mentor program before you were hired? 3. How were you paired with your mentor? 4. Could you describe how often you will meet w ith your mentor and in what context(s)? 5. Describe your school-related work th at occurs outside the school day. 6. How would you describe your undergraduate e xperience in preparing you for teaching? 7. How would you describe your role as mentee? 8. How would you describe your mentors role? 9. Describe your feelings about teaching this semester. a. Classroom management b. Curriculum c. Parent Communication d. Performances 10. Describe your stre ngths in teaching. 11. Describe your weaknesses in teaching. 12. Have you experienced any difficult situations in your teaching to this point? Did your mentoring help in that situation, or coul d it help for similar future situations? 13. Describe your first meeting with your mentor. 14. Could you describe your last meeting or enc ounter with your mentor and describe what occurred? 15. At this point, what do you see as the strengths and weakne sses of your mentor? 16. From your perspective, what is the purpose of this mentoring program? 17. How long will this mentor program last? 18. How long would you like it to last? 19. What do you expect from mentoring? 20. Now that you know the direction of the resear ch, is there anything you would like to add? 21. Is there anything you would like to ask me?

PAGE 107

107 Mentee Interview 2 In this interview I want to gain a detailed pi cture of your total mentor ing experience during your first semester of teaching. As you know, your respons es in this interview are confidential. Your answers will be coded so that no one will know fr om whom or where they originated. This interview is not intended to evalua te you, your mentor, or this school. 1. Could you describe your school-related work that occurs outside the school day? 2. In your opinion, what evidence of support for the mentor program is there within the school? Within the district? Within the state? 3. How would you describe your role as mentee? 4. How would you describe your mentors role? 5. Have your classroom teaching techniques or st rategies changed over the semester due to mentoring? If so, could you provide some examples? 6. Describe your stre ngths in teaching. 7. Describe your weaknesses in teaching. 8. Could you describe how often you met with your mentor and in what contexts? 9. In what other ways did you communicate wi th your mentor? How often did these communications occur? 10. Could you describe your last meeting or enc ounter with your mentor and describe what occurred? 11. What would you say was most helpful in di scovering the strengths and weaknesses of your mentor? What hindered the most? 12. Can you compare some of your early mentor ing experiences with more recent ones? 13. Were there specific aspects of band directing that most benef ited from your interactions with your mentor? 14. Please share one or some of your most succe ssful moments with your mentor or moments that were a result of mentoring. 15. What kind of things faci litated these moments? 16. Has any specific activity proved especially meaningful in he lping you adjust to full-time band directing? 17. Have you faced any challenges or difficulties as a mentee? If so, would you describe some? If not, to what would you attribute the lack of challenges and difficulties? 18. In what areas would you have liked more a ssistance from your me ntor? What changes would have allowed for more assistance? 19. From your perspective, what is the purpose of this mentoring program? 20. What do you expect from your ment oring program in the future? 21. If you were able to design the ideal me ntoring program for new high school band directors, what would be the essential components of the program? 22. Is there anything you would like to add? 23. Is there anything you would like to ask me?

PAGE 108

108 Mentor Interview In this interview I want to gain a detailed pict ure of your experience as a mentor. As you know, your responses in this interview are confidential. Your answers will be coded so that no one will know from whom or where they or iginated. This inte rview is not intended to evaluate you, your mentor, or this school. 1. Can you provide some background on the mentoring program? 2. How were you selected to be a mentor? 3. Did you participate in any kind of formal ment or training? If so, please describe what was involved. 4. How long have you mentored new teachers? 5. How were you paired with your mentee? 6. In your opinion, what evidence of support for the mentor program is there within the school? Within the district? Within the state? 7. Can you tell me about your mentoring responsibilities? 8. How would you describe your role as mentor? 9. How would you describe your mentees role? 10. What do you expect from mentoring for the mentee and for you? 11. What were some things you felt this beginning teacher ne eded to know in order to become a successful music educator? 12. Do you think mentoring has provi ded help in these areas? 13. Have you noticed any changes in your me ntees classroom teaching techniques or strategies over the semester due to mentorin g? If so, could you provide some examples? 14. At this point, what do you see as the strengths and weakne sses of your mentee? 15. Could you describe how often you meet with your mentee and in what context(s)? 16. Describe your first meeting with your mentee. 17. Could you describe your last meeting or enc ounter with your mentee and describe what occurred? 18. Can you compare some of your early mentori ng experiences with more recent ones? 19. Please share one or some of your most succe ssful moments with your mentee or moments that were a result of mentoring. 20. What kind of things faci litated these moments? 21. Has any specific activity prove d especially meaningful in working with your mentee? 22. Was there anything that seemed to hinder the mentees learning? 23. From your perspective, what is the purpose of this mentoring program? 24. How long will this mentor program last? 25. How long would you like it to last? 26. What do you expect from your ment oring program in the future? 27. If you were able to design the ideal me ntoring program for new high school band directors, what would be the essential components of the program? 28. Is there anything you would like to add? 29. Is there anything you would like to ask me?

PAGE 109

109 APPENDIX D SAMPLE TEXT CODING REPORT Node Name: Music Ability Description: Ways in which mentees described their musical ability level. 1 reference coded [0.12% Coverage] Reference 1 0.12% Coverage I have a good memory for music and for scores. 1 reference coded [0.74% Coverage] Reference 1 0.74% Coverage But I feel that what is definitel y my strength is the conducting side of things. And I feel like I have, you know, a pretty good head on my shoul ders for how to run a rehearsal and that sort of thing. 2 references coded [1.68% Coverage] Reference 1 0.87% Coverage My strengths, especially in the band world, is that I can play every one of the instruments so I can immediately respond to, you know, its this fingering, this position, this . whatever it is. Reference 2 0.81% Coverage The amount of music that Ive played in college as a performer has really helped me in the, you know, knowing the music, being able to relate teaching to that as pect of the playing. 1 reference coded [0.46% Coverage] Reference 1 0.46% Coverage I feel like I usually have correctly identified problems and given if not the best way, a decent way to try to correct it and to be diverse in my method of trying to correct problems. 2 references coded [0.47% Coverage] Reference 1 0.31% Coverage We made leaps and bounds the second performance and I see . they see an improvement. I see an improvement.

PAGE 110

110 APPENDIX E SAMPLE NODE SUMMARY REPORT Tree Node\Hierarchy Coding Information Self-confidence Words Coded 0 Paragraphs Coded 0 Coding References 0 Sources Coded 0 Cases Coded 0 Self-confidence\Classroom ManagementWords Coded 349 Paragraphs Coded 7 Coding References 10 Sources Coded 4 Cases Coded 3 Self-confidence\Music Ability Words Coded 317 Paragraphs Coded 9 Coding References 12 Sources Coded 8 Cases Coded 5 Self-confidence\Networking Words Coded 376 Paragraphs Coded 8 Coding References 10 Sources Coded 6 Cases Coded 4 Self-confidence\Rapport with Students Words Coded 216 Paragraphs Coded 5 Coding References 5 Sources Coded 5 Cases Coded 3 Self-confidence\Undergrad Expe rience Words Coded 326 Paragraphs Coded 9 Coding References 11 Sources Coded 6 Cases Coded 5

PAGE 111

111 APPENDIX F SAMPLE OF MENTEE TREE NODES Node Name Node Name Node Name Sources References Mentor Interaction Changes in Teaching 5 12 Frequency and Context 1 1 Email or Phone 10 20 In Person 4 6 Limited 2 3 Multiple per Week 6 7 Informal Meetings 8 16 Mentee Role Expectations 1 2 Gaining Knowledge 3 5 Questions and Advice 8 12 Mentor Role Give Advice 5 10 Policy Help 5 11 Proactive 3 5 Mentoring Technique 6 9 Perception of Mentor Ability / Results of Mentor 8 13 Friend 3 4 Mentor Reputation 3 3 Mentor Weakness 8 15 Relationship Changes 5 9 Successful Moments 5 7 Survival and Deadlines 8 12 Long Hours Administrative Work 6 7 Extra Hours Total 4 4 Marching Band Hours 5 10 Music Selection 3 5

PAGE 112

112 APPENDIX G SAMPLE OF MENTOR TREE NODES Node Name Node Name Node Name Sources References Program Purpose Avoid Deadlines and Fines 2 5 Help New Directors 3 3 Isolation 2 2 Preventing Problems 2 3 Quality Teaching 1 1 Retention 2 5 Supplement to College 1 2 Mentor's Role Benefits to the mentee Directions to Find Answers 1 2 Increased Confidence 1 1 Perception of Mentees Depth of Relationship 4 5 I Have Been Successful 1 1 Lack of Knowing the Mentee 1 2 Mentee Comfortable with Mentor 2 3 Mentee NOT Comfortable with Mentor 1 1 Mentor Expertise 2 2 Sensitivity 1 1 Special Connection 3 6 Strengths Mentee Classroom Management 1 1 Hard Worker 1 1 Personality 1 1 Receptive to Ideas 3 4 Student Rapport 2 3 Strong Personal Background 4 8 Time in Mentoring 5 5 Weaknesses Mentee 3 9 Deadlines and Paperwork1 2 Knowledge of Literature 1 1 Knowledge of Students 1 1 Please Everyone 1 2 Miscellaneous Compensation 2 3 FBA District Support 3 8

PAGE 113

113 LIST OF REFERENCES Argyris, C. (1976). Increasing leadership effectiveness New York: John Wiley & Sons. Asbill, M., & Scott, J. (1997). Top ten tips for new directors. The Instrumentalist, 52 (2), 12-17. Boreen, J., Johnson, M. K., Niday, D., & Potts, J. (2000). Mentoring beginning teachers: Guiding, reflecting, coaching. York, ME: Stenhouse Publishers. Casey, J., & Claunch, A. (2005). The stages of mentor development. In H. Portner (Ed.), Teacher mentoring and induction (pp. 95-108). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Conway, C. M. (2003a). An examination of di strict-sponsored beginning music teacher mentor practices. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51 (1), 6-23. Conway, C. M. (2003b). Great beginnings for music teachers Reston, VA: MENC: The National Association for Music Education. Conway, C. M. (2006). Navigating through induction: How a mentor can help. Music Educators Journal, 92 (5), 56-60. Conway, C. M., Hansen, E., Schulz, A., Stims on, J., & Wozniak-Reese, J. (2004). Becoming a teacher: Stories of the first few years. Music Educators Journal, 91 (1), 45-50. Conway, C. M., Krueger, P., Robinson, M., Haac k, P., & Smith, M. V. (2002). Beginning music teacher induction and mentor policies: A cr oss-state perspective [Electronic version]. Arts Education Policy Review 104 (2). Conway, C. M., & Zerman, T. E. H. (2003). Perceptions of an instrumental music teacher regarding mentoring, induction, and the first year of teaching (Report No. SP-041-613). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED477811) Cooper, L. G. (2004). Teaching band and orchestra Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc. Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. Daresh, J. C. (2003). Teachers mentoring teachers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. DeLorenzo, L. (1992). Perceived prob lems of beginning music teachers. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 113 9-25. Dewald, B. (1998). Surviving the aval anche of deadlines and details. The Instrumentalist, 53 (1), 91-92.

PAGE 114

114 Downes, P. (1998). Reston welcome wagon. In S. Holcomb, & M. Green (Eds.), Peer support: Teachers mentoring teachers (pp. 39-52). Annapolis Junctio n, MD: National Education Association. Dunnigan, P. (1998). Marching band techniques. Northfield, IL: The Instrumentalist Publishing Co. Elliott, D. J. (1995). Music matters. New York: Oxford University Press. Ely, M. (1991). Doing qualitative research: Circles within circles. New York: Falmer Press. Fibkins, W. L. (2002). An administrators guide to better teacher mentoring. Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press, Inc. Fletcher, S. (2000). Mentoring in schools Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, Inc. Ganser, T. (2005). Learning from the past-bu ilding for the future. In H. Portner (Ed.), Teacher mentoring and induction (pp. 3-20). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Haack, P. A. (2003). Challenges faced by begi nning music teachers. In C. Conway (Ed.), Great Beginnings for Music Teachers (pp. 9-24). Reston, VA: MENC: The National Association for Music Educators. Haack, P. A. (2006a). Mentoring and professi onal development programs: Possibilities and pitfalls. Music Educators Journal, 92 (4), 60-64. Haack, P. A. (2006b). Music mentoring in Minnesota: An elegant experiment. Interval: The Journal of the Minnesota Music Educators Association 62 (4), 26-30. Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Hicks, C. D., Glasgow, N. A., & McNary, S. J. (2005). What successful mentors do. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Ingersoll, R. M. (2003). Is there really a teacher shortage? University of Pennsylvania, The Consortium for Policy Research in Education and The Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy. Ingersoll, R. M., & Kralik, J. M. (2004). The impact of mentoring on te acher retention: What the research says Retrieved November 5, 2005, from Univer sity of Pennsylvania, College of Education Web site: http://www.gs e.upenn.edu/faculty/ingersoll.html Ingersoll, R. M., & Smith, T. M. (2003). The wrong solution to the teacher shortage. Educational Leadership, 60 (8), 30-33.

PAGE 115

115 Ingersoll, R. M., & Smith, T. M. (2004). Do t eacher induction and mentor ing matter? [Electronic version]. National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin 88 (688). Johnson, K. F. (2002). Being an effective mentor Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. Kimpton, J. (2003). Foreword. In C. M. Conway (Ed.), Great beginnings for music teachers: Mentoring and supporting new teachers (pp. vii-xi). Reston, VA: MENC: The National Association for Music Educators. Krueger, P. J. (1999). New musi c teachers speak out on mentoring. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 8 (2), 7-13. Krueger, P. J. (2000). Beginning music teachers: Will they leave the pr ofession? [Electronic Version]. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 19 (1). Krueger, P. J. (2001). Reflectio ns of beginning music teachers. Music Educators Journal, 88 (3), 51-54. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Lindeman, C. A. (2004). Ten strategies for higher education and the k-12 music teacher shortage [Electronic version]. Music Educators Journal, 90 (3). Ling, S. (1999). Teaching with enthusiasm at large and small schools. The Instrumentalist 53 (7), 12-15. Madsen, C. K., & Hancock, C. B. (2002). Support for music education: A case study of issues concerning teacher retention and attrition. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50 (1), 6-19. McKee, M. M. (1996). Foreword. In P. C. Wise, So-you're the new band director, now what? (pp. 13-14). Needham Heights, MA: Simon & Schuster. Montague, M. G. (2000). Processes and situatedness: A coll ective case study of selected mentored music teachers. Unpublished doctoral disserta tion, University of Oregon. Nicholls, G. (2002). Mentoring: The art of teaching and learning. In P. Jarvis (Ed.), The theory & practice of teaching (pp. 132-142). Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, Inc. Odell, S. J. (1992). Teacher mentoring and teacher retention. Journal of Teacher Education, 43 (1), 26-29. Patten, M. L. (2005). Understanding research methods (5th ed.). Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing.

PAGE 116

116 Podsen, I. J., & Denmark, V. M. (2000). Coaching and mentoring first-year & student teachers. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education, Inc. Portner, H. (2002). Being mentored: A guide for protgs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. Reiman, A. J., & Thies-Sprinthall, L. (1998). Mentoring and supervision for teacher development New York: Longman. Robinson, M., & Krueger, P. J. (2003). State-sp onsored induction programs. In C. M. Conway (Ed.), Great beginnings for music teachers: Mentoring and supporting new teachers (pp. 41-55). Reston, VA: MENC: The National Association for Music Educators. Rodwell, M. K. (1998). Social work constructivist research New York: Garland Publishing. Smith, M. V. (1994). The mentoring and professional develo pment of new music educators: A descriptive study of a pilot program. Unpublished doctoral dissert ation, University of Minnesota. Smith, M. V. (2003). Making mentoring work. In C. M. Conway (Ed.), Great beginnings for music teachers: Mentoring and supporting new teachers (pp. 105-126). Reston, VA: MENC: The National Association for Music Educators. Smith, M. V. (2005). Modern mentoring: Ancient lessons for today. Music Educators Journal, 92 (2), 62-67. Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.) (pp. 443-466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Strauss, A. S., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Strong, M. (2006). Does new teacher support affect student achievement? Research Brief January. New Teacher Center, UCSC. Ulrich, J. (1993). Conductors gui de to successful rehearsals. Music Educators Journal, 79 (7), 34-35. Wanzare, Z. O. (2007). The transition process: The early years of being a teacher. In T. Townsend, & R. Bates (Eds.), Handbook of teacher education (pp. 343-364). The Netherlands: Springer. Wells, G. (2002). A theoretical rationale for mentoring as a mode of teacher professional development Presented at AERA, New Orleans.

PAGE 117

117 Wong, H. K. (2005). New teacher induction: The foundation for comprehensive, coherent, and sustained professional development. In H. Portner (Ed.), Teacher mentoring and induction (pp. 41-58). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

PAGE 118

118 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Jay N. Jacobs was born in Morgantown, West Virginia. He received his Bachelor of Music degree in music education from West Virg inia University in 1993, and served as band director for the Hiawatha Elementary, Junior and Senior High Schools in Kirkland, Illinois from 1994 to 2002. Instructing elementary beginners through seniors in high school allowed him to experience every level of band in the public schoo ls: from elementary winter concerts, to high school musicals, to Friday night marching band performances. Under his leadership, the high school band membership doubled to more than 25 % of the student body. The band ranked in the top 15 Class A state schools in solo and ense mble participation, and traveled to numerous festivals around the United States. In 2004, Mr. Jacobs received his Master of Music degree in wind conducting from the University of Florida. In the fall semester of 2004, he began coursework at the University of Florida for his doctorate degree in music e ducation with an emphasis in wind conducting. During his time at the university, Mr. Jacobs was a graduate assistant wi th the Florida Bands, where he was conductor of one of the Concert Bands and graduate conductor of the Symphonic Band and Wind Symphony. He was the instructor for the Instru mental Materials and Methods course for two terms, observed student teacher s, and mentored undergraduate conductors. Mr. Jacobs also worked with the marching band a nd was a graduate conductor of the Basketball Bands. He was a performing member of the Un iversity of Florida Wind Symphony. At Florida he studied conducting with Dr. David Waybright and trumpet with Dr. Joyce Davis. Mr. Jacobs is active as an adjudicator and has arranged drill for high school bands in Florida and Georgia, as well as for the University of Florida and University of Northern Iowa marching bands. He is a former member and bra ss instructor of The Cavaliers Drum and Bugle Corps from Rosemont, Illinois. He is a memb er of the Music Educators National Conference,

PAGE 119

119 College Band Directors National Association, and the College Mu sic Society, and is an honorary member of both Kappa Kappa Psi Honorary Band Fraternity and Tau Beta Sigma Honorary Band Sorority.