A Follow-Up Study of an Early Childhood Mentoring Program: Sustaining Impactful Change for Mentors and Mentees

Abstract

Government funded mentoring programs are one strategy to address the supply crisis of early childhood teachers (ECTs) in Australia. There is little or no published research on the long-term impacts of these programs. This paper presents the findings of an evaluation survey completed 18 months after the mentoring program finished, covering the perspectives of experienced ECTs (mentors) and beginning ECTs (mentees). The participants (N = 39) reported personal and professional growth over the period of the program. Subsequently, their enriched knowledge, skills and understanding of mentoring impacted their own, other individuals and wider practices within their workplaces. Enablers to participation were a supportive director and the scheduling of the program out of hours. The predominant challenge for ongoing enactment of learnings was time constraints due to daily demands of early childhood workplaces. Recommendations for sustainability of effective mentoring practices are proffered and warrant the attention of governments, employers and the sector.

1. Introduction

Meaningful career paths and supportive work cultures contribute to building leadership capacity and ensuring quality early childhood education (ECE) provision [1,2,3,4]. Aligned to this is the need to apply a broader and more holistic approach to professionalisation beyond qualifications to build a stable, qualified and integrated ECE workforce that can better respond to the needs of communities, families and children [2,5,6]. Professional learning is key to supporting professionalisation of the ECE workforce as it facilitates educators’ capabilities, well-being and retention [2,6,7,8]. Formal mentoring programs have also become increasingly popular among policymakers and educators as an appropriate form of professional learning used to support beginning early childhood teachers (ECTs) as they navigate their first years of teaching [9,10,11]. While there have been multiple programs implemented in Australia, there is limited or no published research on the longer-term impacts of these programs.

1.1. Understanding the Australian Early Childhood Education Context

It is necessary to have some understanding of the context of this research as approaches to early childhood education (ECE) are diverse globally. This Australian research offers a knowledge transfer opportunity about mentoring activities to the global ECE community. It is well understood that ECE has an established history of sharing ideas and learnings internationally [12]. The ECE sector in Australia is made up of different service providers and provider management types. Provider types include long day care, preschool/kindergarten and outside school hours care [13]. These services can include private for-profit; private not-for-profit community-managed; private not-for-profit other organisations; state/territory government schools; state/territory and local government-managed; and Catholic and independent schools [14]. The ECE workforce in these services includes vocationally qualified staff (Certificate 111 or Diploma—called educators—and a bachelor’s degree (three of four-year qualification) or a master’s degree) who are identified as ECTs [15]. Of these qualifications, ECTs make up 11% of the workforce [16]. They often have the key role of leading the pedagogical decisions in the service and are promoted to leadership roles quickly due to their qualifications [17].

1.2. Early Childhood Teacher Workforce Retention

Multiple stakeholders across the ECE sector recognise the critical importance of effective induction into the teaching profession. Mentorship for beginning ECTs can significantly improve retention rates and offer them a clearer, more defined understanding of their future career paths [11]. New ECTs are often the only degree-qualified staff member in their ECE setting and are required to navigate complex management and leadership matters, including providing pedagogical support to other educators with mostly limited or no direct supervision [16]. Furthermore, ECTs experience limited time to complete these responsibilities and, at times, experience poor relationships with other educators as well as a lack of recognition of their professionalism and expertise among the broader public [6,9,18,19]. Frequently mentioned reasons for turnover include limited work autonomy, low wages and subpar working conditions [20]. It is estimated that one-third of teachers in the Australian ECE sector will leave within 12 months [2]. Statistics from the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) indicate that 67% of ECTs intend to leave prior to retirement age (31%) or reported being unsure on staying in the profession (36%) [21]. One key strategy to support new ECTs is through mentoring. This is now prescribed in policy, with the AGPC recommending that there is a focus to “lift support and mentoring for new ECTs” [22] (p. 239).

Retention of experienced ECTs is crucial too. The AGPC [22] foregrounded the importance of career pathways for experienced ECTs as one mechanism to address workforce shortages in ECE settings in Australia. Thorpe et al. [6] found that ECTs in management roles were more likely to stay in ECE if the role offered improved pay, security, autonomy and career status. The AGPC [21] has also suggested that a key role of experienced ECTs in leadership positions is mentoring. Therefore, if supporting their junior, newer, less experienced colleagues is a key role for experienced ECTs, then supporting and providing professional learning opportunities for experienced ECTs are just as important as they are for beginning teachers. The key to a successful formal mentoring program is appropriately trained, experienced ECTs to enact the role of mentor [23,24].

1.3. Contextualising Mentoring

ECE research internationally has demonstrated the importance of mentor training to prepare experienced ECTs to be skilled facilitators of mentoring with relevant knowledge and skills and to be grounded by shared visions of what good practice means and entails [10,23,24,25,26]. Effective mentoring training has been found to have a direct impact on building collegial and collaborative relationships between mentor and mentee [24], which is critical for changes in practice. Mentor education that builds pedagogical competence and cultivates the professional dispositions of mentors working in very diverse ECE contexts corresponds seamlessly to Australia’s ECE professionalisation agenda [27].

1.4. Mentor and Mentee Roles

Constructive formal mentoring programs need to be systematically coordinated and early childhood context specific [6,10,28]. Stakeholders—both mentors and mentees—should be actively supported to prepare and engage in the program. This is essential as research has shown that experienced ECTs can begin mentoring relationships lacking confidence in their abilities to enact effective mentoring strategies [29] primarily because their mentoring knowledge is self-taught [30]. Challenges are also faced by mentees. Mentees reported reluctance to share concerns [31] or challenge beliefs and practices [4,32] and indicated they experienced stress if they were mentored by someone within their workplace [33]. This is probably because an in-service mentoring model can involve appraisal and feel “hierarchical”, whereby the mentor is seen as the expert in charge whose role is to guide the less experienced mentee [1] (p. 196).

A potential solution is mentoring outside of one’s workplace. Langdon et al. [30] found that ECE educators in New Zealand valued formal mentoring projects outside their workplaces, especially those that focused on reflecting on daily practices and included release time. Waniganayake et al. [17] argue that an organised program whereby the mentors are external to the participants’ workplaces enables mentoring opportunities to be less hierarchical, offering an opportunity for mutuality and reciprocity between mentors and mentees. This approach to mentoring can lead to the development of trust and respect, meeting the individual needs of both the mentor and mentee [31,34].

Mentors and mentees can also have different understandings of mentoring [35,36]. Recent research offers a solution to this. Hobson et al. [23] and Quinones et al. [37] suggest that it is critical for the mentor and mentee roles to be explicitly unpacked in mentor training. Quinones et al. [37] determined that a focus on establishing supportive, equitable and trusting relationships whereby mentors and mentees strengths are highlighted and built upon is critical to successful formal mentoring programs. Adopting this approach moves formal mentoring programs beyond a simple dyadic relationship to one where both mentors and mentees share knowledge, collaborate and respond to the contextual environments that they work in [11]. Further, Hobson et al. [23] highlight the importance of practicing mentoring and networking in mentor training. Their study found that mentor training positively impacts mentors’ and mentees’ knowledge, skills and practices and contributes to retaining staff due to improvements in the learning culture of organisations.

1.5. The Recent Focus on Mentoring in Australia

All levels of Australian government are recognising the importance of mentoring as one of the strategies for retention in ECE as well as ensuring a high quality ECE sector for parents with young children (particularly women) to enter or return to the workforce [38]. The Australian Commonwealth Government has developed The National Children’s Education and Care Workforce Strategy [27], which comprises six interrelated areas. Two of these relate specifically to mentoring—“Attraction and retention” and “Leadership and capability” (p. 9). Recognition of retaining ECTs has led to opportunities for mentoring programs. For example, in one Australian state, Victoria, the Effective Mentoring Program supports experienced ECTs to develop mentoring knowledge and skills. These ECTs then support new graduates and teachers re-entering the sector to achieve full registration (see: https://www.education.vic.gov.au/childhood/professionals/profdev/Pages/practice.aspx, accessed on 30 April 2024). A similar program is offered as part of another Australian state—South Australia’s Early Childhood Workforce Strategy [39]. Given this increased focus on supporting the retention of ECTs through mentoring support, we followed up on the ECTs—both beginning and experienced—who were involved in our mentoring program to ascertain the impact (if any) eighteen months later.

Our mentoring program—Mentoring for new Early Childhood Teachers project—was designed to support experienced ECTs to mentor new ECTs working in ECE settings from anywhere in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. The project comprised two online professional development and learning programs delivered in 2021 for 21 weeks: Phase 1: Mentors Professional Development Program and Phase 2: Mentees Professional Development Program. The programs were originally designed to be conducted in both online and face-to-face formats; however, due to the impact of COVID-19, it was shifted to an entirely online format. In Phase 1, the 49 participating mentors were required to complete a suite of set tasks over six weeks, including attending online lectures and meetings, reading relevant literature, watching and reflecting on videos on mentoring and responding to provocations. The topics covered an introduction to mentoring, strategies for building effective mentoring relationships and methods for maintaining long-term engagement in mentoring. On completion of the six-week course, the mentors completed a 500-word critical reflection demonstrating mentoring preparedness prior to advancing to the course where they were matched with three–four mentees. In Phase 2, framed by the theory of Community of Practice [40], 46 mentors engaged three—four mentees in a mentoring relationship over 15 weeks (20 h) (two withdrew due to time constraints, and the third cited personal reasons). All mentors documented SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-based) goals relevant to their career path and aligned with the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (APST) [41] for the Proficient and Highly Accomplished teacher career stages. Each mentor assisted their mentees to identify personalised, targeted goals that would benefit their practice. Over the 15 weeks, mentees completed a series of tasks, including setting goals, establishing a learning contract with their mentor, completing readings, watching mentoring-related videos, reflecting on provocations, maintaining an online journal and delivering a Viva Voce. Applying a Community of Practice model (CoP) [40], mentors met virtually with mentees five times over the 15 weeks to guide their progress through the course and meet their goals. The CoPs utilised various methods, such as the online learning management system (ProLearn), WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger, to communicate, provide mutual support and maintain safety and confidentiality among the participants. Mentors also participated in their own CoP sessions with other mentors in their group as well as with their academic mentor. The program included the analyses of the pre- and post-survey on perceptions of mentoring, the APST, and the online reflections based on program content and tasks, for example, readings, watching videos and reading and responding to provocations.

The aim of this study was to follow-up with the participants from a mentoring program offered to new and experienced ECTs across NSW, Australia, eighteen months prior. The research questions were the following:

What enablers to participation in the mentoring program were encountered by mentors and mentees?

Were mentors and mentees able to sustain effective mentoring practices within the daily demands of early childhood settings over time?

Did mentors’ and mentees’ enriched knowledge, skills and understanding impact other individuals and setting-based practice?

2. Method

To answer our research questions, we used a mixed-methods explanatory design [42]. We gathered both quantitative and qualitative data via an online survey. Quantitative data were collected to ascertain demographic characteristics of both mentor and mentee participants and to provide descriptive information about enablers to participation in the program, information on the extent to which the mentoring program provided learnings and information on mentoring practices. Qualitative data were sourced via participants’ open and extended responses on their learnings from the program, the sustained impact (if any) in their workplaces and whether mentors’ and mentees’ enriched knowledge, skills and understanding impacted individuals and setting-based practice. The data were then used to further explain the quantitative data [42].

2.1. Participants

Thirty-nine participants completed the 18-month follow-up survey: a total of 18 mentors and 21 mentees. Indicative of the broader Australian ECE sector, all participants were female. We note that two other mentees commenced the survey but did not complete any questions beyond the initial question asking them to identify as mentor or mentee. These were discounted from the data. All mentors held either a bachelor’s or post-graduate degree qualification, and all mentees held a bachelor’s degree qualification. The mentors were very experienced in ECE, with all having greater than ten years of experience, including 50% of the cohort who reported more than 20 years of experience. The mentees also included participants with greater than ten years of experience (42%) and those with six to ten years of experience (48%). These participants identified as having worked as Certificate III level and/or Diploma level educators before attaining their bachelor’s degree. Two (10%) mentees, who did not have prior qualifications, had less than five years of experience. Half of the mentors currently worked in long day care settings, a third worked in preschools, and one worked in a blended setting. Most of the mentees (86%) worked in long day care settings, and three (14%) worked in preschools. The mentors were evenly split between working in ECE settings in Metropolitan Sydney (50%) or in a regional or rural area (50%). The mentees were also closely divided between working in ECE settings in Metropolitan Sydney (48%) or in a regional or rural area (52%). Two mentors and no mentees identified as being of First Nations heritage.

2.2. Survey and Procedure

This paper is based on survey findings evaluating the impact of a government funded, purpose-built, structured mentoring program for ECTs in NSW, Australia. In the program, we utilised two surveys: Survey 1 required mentors and mentees to answer questions assessing their initial understanding of mentoring, and Survey 2 required mentors and mentees to reflect on what they had learned about mentoring and provide feedback on their involvement in the project. The survey design was informed by the literature on mentoring and leadership [17,43]. We also implemented the Basic Psychological Needs Satisfaction and Needs Frustration: Training Scale (Training Scale) [44] to measure perceived satisfaction and frustration of three basic psychological needs, autonomy, relatedness and competence, as related to the project. The full findings from these are reported elsewhere [45,46]. To evaluate the participants’ experience and the long-term impact of the program, the mentors and mentees were invited via email to provide feedback through an online survey—Survey 3—18 months after the program ended. Survey 3 was informed by Survey 2 and was implemented through the Lime survey platform. It comprised multiple choice, four-point Likert scale questions and open-ended questions. A four-point Likert scale was used to ensure the participants made a value choice rather than checking a neutral response [42]. The survey was estimated as taking approximately 20 min to complete.

2.3. Analyses

Descriptive statistics were obtained for demographic data and for the responses to the questions on enablers to participation in the program, information on the extent to which the mentoring program provided learnings and information on mentoring practices. For the qualitative responses, the participants were invited to share their thoughts, reflections and experiences through descriptive sections of the online survey. The qualitative responses to the questions were collected and categorised under participant grouping, i.e., mentor and mentee responses. This approach allowed for comparing and contrasting the experiences of both cohorts. This was achieved through coding recuring themes and patterns, which were used to perform a thematic analysis of the combined individual responses [47]. Key themes emerged from the analysis and were amalgamated to create a descriptive narrative outlining the mentee and mentor collective experiences of the program.

2.4. Limitations of This Study

Completed surveys were received from 39 participants (18 mentors and 21 mentees) of the 196 participants invited to respond to the evaluation survey, yielding a response rate of 20%. The participants were sent two follow-up reminders to complete the survey (three weeks apart), and as the survey was anonymous (as per ethics requirements), we could not follow up with the participants who had not completed the survey. The low response rate is likely related to the fact that the participants completed the course 18 months ago, and communication with them was through the online learning management system—they rarely received emails from the researchers. The lack of responses could also indicate mentors and mentees having left the sector or be related to the current sector workforce shortages impacting time or capacity to complete the survey.

2.5. Ethics

Participation in the survey was voluntary and anonymous. Any features associated with individual participants were deidentified in all publications and presentations arising through this study, and the analysis represents both individualistic and cohort-wide shared experiences. These aspects were part of the human research ethics protocols of our university, and approval was obtained prior to launching this study (Macquarie University Ethics Approval Reference no: 52020922924020 and the New South Wales State Education Department Research Applications Process Reference No. 2020442).

3. Results

To determine the enablers to participation in the mentoring program encountered by the mentors and mentees, we present the quantitative data from our survey. Next, to explain how the mentors and mentees were able to sustain effective mentoring practices within the daily demands of early childhood settings and if their enriched knowledge, skills and understanding impacted individuals and setting-based practice, we present data from participants’ responses to the open-ended questions. Due to low response rates, the quantitative data are limited in terms of identifying statistically significant patterns; thus, we only report basic descriptives. However, the qualitative data give strong voice to ECT perspectives.

3.1. Enablers to Participation in the Program

The participants were asked to indicate as many of the following enablers that contributed to their ability to participate in the program: time release from setting management, a director who was supportive of the program, the setting prioritising professional development and the program was run out of hours. For both the mentors and mentees, the program was run out of hours facilitated greater participation, and for the mentees, a supportive director was also an important factor to enable their participation. Three mentors and five mentees indicated that they had no external support to enable participation in the mentoring program (see Figure 1). These findings are similar to the evaluation of the program immediately after it was completed [45,46].

3.2. Learnings and Information on Mentoring Practices

The mentors and mentees also indicated the extent to which the program assisted them in learning about mentoring practices using a four-point Likert scale: learned a lot, learned some good practices, learned a little and learned nothing at all. Most of the mentors (78%) indicated that they learned a lot about mentoring practices, and the remaining 22% indicated that they learned some good practices. At the completion of the program, the mentors’ evaluation also noted growth and development—including a better understanding of what mentoring entails and an increased ability to support colleagues by transferring their knowledge and skills into their workplaces [46]. The mentees were more evenly divided: a total of 52% indicated that they learned a lot about mentoring practices, and the remaining 48% indicated that they learned some good practices. This finding supports the post-evaluation of the program, where the mentees noted the importance of mentoring. For instance, the mentees rated highly the item “overall quality of this mentoring experience” (M = 3.22, SD = 0.79) [45].

The mentors and mentees were also asked to rate, on a Likert scale from fair, good, very good and excellent, their long-term learning from participating in the program. There were five elements (questions): (1) My understanding of the APST guidelines is at the appropriate career stage (APST knowledge), (2) My knowledge and skills of mentoring as a leadership strategy (Mentoring Leadership), (3) My understanding about establishing and participating in a Community of Practice as a means to informing and improving professional practice (Community of Practice), (4) My ability to support colleagues by assisting them to identify and achieve professional development goals (Professional Goals) and (5) My ability to support EC colleagues in identifying strengths and weaknesses in their practice (Strengths/Weaknesses). The mentors and mentees overwhelmingly indicated (82% for each group) that their knowledge of participating in a Community of Practice to inform and improve professional practice was either very good or excellent. The mentors (84%) also indicated that their ability to support colleagues by assisting them to identify and achieve professional development goals was either very good or excellent. Understandably, 84% of the mentors indicated their long-term learning at very good or excellent for being able to support EC colleagues in identifying strengths and weaknesses in their practice. The mentees (72%) indicated very good or excellent understanding of the APST guidelines at the appropriate career stage, and 83% indicated their knowledge of mentoring as a leadership strategy was very good (61%) or excellent (22%). The mentors were more cautious in their rating of their knowledge; only 33% indicated very good or excellent understanding of the APST guidelines at the appropriate career stage, and 66% indicated that their knowledge of mentoring as a leadership strategy was very good (58%) or excellent (8%) (see

Table 1. Long-term learning from mentoring program.

	APST Knowledge	Mentoring Leadership	Community of Practice	Professional Goals	Strengths/ Weaknesses
			Mentors
Fair	8%	8%	0%	17%	17%
Good	58%	25%	17%	0%	0%
Very Good	25%	58%	75%	67%	67%
Excellent	8%	8%	8%	17%	17%
			Mentees
Fair	11%	0%	0%	0%	0%
Good	17%	17%	17%	22%	33%
Very Good	61%	61%	61%	44%	33%
Excellent	11%	22%	22%	33%	33%

).

The participants were also asked about the extent their participation in the program resulted in any changes in their practices. They were required to respond using a four-point Likert scale indicating either lots of changes, some changes, a few changes or no changes at all. Most of the mentors (67%) indicated that their participation in the program resulted in some changes, with 20% indicating lots of changes and 13% indicating a few changes. The mentees (73%) also indicated that their participation in the program resulted in some changes, with 20% indicating lots of changes and 6% indicating a few changes. Finally, the participants were also asked if the knowledge and skills they gained contributed to improving support for the early childhood staff at their setting. They used a different four-point Likert scale indicating either contributed a great deal, contributed some good practices, contributed a little or contributed nothing at all. The mentors and mentees (both groups 67%) equally indicated that the knowledge and skills they gained contributed some good practices to improving support for the early childhood staff at their setting. The mentors noted that the knowledge and skills they gained contributed a great deal (20%) to improving support for the early childhood staff at their setting, and the mentees also noted that the knowledge and skills they gained contributed a great deal (27%) to improving support for the early childhood staff at their setting. Pleasingly, only 13% of the mentors and 6% of the mentees stated that the knowledge and skills they gained contributed little to improving support for the early childhood staff at their setting. No participants indicated contributed nothing at all.

3.3. Applying Learning About Effective Mentoring Practices

There were common themes across both the mentors’ and mentees’ qualitative responses to the open-ended questions. These included understanding the role of mentoring and coaching in the profession; improving practice; reflecting on practice; and networking and shared learning. The mentors viewed their participation in the mentoring program as a priority and indicated that the program content aligned with their values of commitment and responsibility to the sector. They wrote about how the program assisted them in their personal and professional growth as a leader. The mentors also reported that the program assisted their learning about mentoring practices by shifting their perspective of the role of mentor, and they indicated that they could clearly identify the key skills required to be an effective mentor. These findings replicated the post-evaluations of the mentors, where growth in skills and knowledge about mentoring were also noted [46]:

“I most definitely built personal and pedagogical skills to become a supportive mentor. I now use the term ‘mentoring’ more openly and with confidence. Furthermore, I encourage staff to do the same when mentoring with their peers, and we unintentionally model these skills to children”.

(Mentor 5)

They regarded professional collaborations and improved mentoring techniques as central aspects that enhanced their leadership skills overall. One mentor reported the following:

“Strengthened my mentoring skills for sure! Particularly active listening and asking open questions rather than diving straight in and providing ideas and solutions—empowering the mentee! Great community of practice”.

(Mentor 7)

Turning to our mentee participants, the factors that made it possible for participation in the mentoring program from the mentee perspective were a personal interest to improve their practices and their knowledge as educators. This was also found in the original project, where the mentees expressed that they had gained significant insight into the concept of mentoring [45]. The mentees reported that the program assisted their learning about mentoring practices and provided them information on how to practically apply this new knowledge within their workplace. They mentioned that the learning from the program and new skills acquisition plus networking interactions impacted positively on their own practices. The mentees highlighted these aspects as important learnings from the program related to the development of personal and professional confidence. They also highlighted the importance of goal setting, similar to the original project post-evaluations [45], and that they appreciated the benefits of collaboration and teamwork.

3.4. Impact on Workplace Practice

It was evident from the responses that both the mentors and mentees could observe the direct impact of their learning from the program on other individuals and more widely in their workplace. The mentors reported that they had developed skills and confidence in mentoring, leading and empowering others and self-reflection. Empowering was also a key skill noted by the mentors in the original project post-evaluations [46], whereas the mentees reported that they had developed skills in communication, collaboration, reflection and leadership.

The mentors frequently reported that they could see how to apply their learnings to their workplace. This building of leadership capacity was also a finding in the evaluation of the original project post-evaluations [46]. The mentors felt that being involved in the program enhanced their mentoring strategies and skills, leading to greater confidence in mentoring their colleagues in their settings. They reflected on how important quality mentoring is for staff and saw it as a key factor in supporting new ECTs to remain in the sector. They also mentioned being able to share new knowledge with staff in their settings as well as empowering their staff to be more reflective about their own practices. The mentors further highlighted their learning in terms of being accountable for staff development. For example, they commented on how the goals format used in the program, when applied in their setting, allowed for their staff to develop realistic, manageable and achievable goals:

“I think it has improved my leadership, bravery, confidence, and ability to reflect back to staff and empower them to contribute ideas and be more actively involved in solutions and quality improvements. We also introduced the goal setting strategy used in the project into our own Individual professional development plans. This has been really useful and targeted. It has improved accountability al little too”.

(Mentor 7)

“I have been able to use the knowledge and skills learned in this course to mentor educators in my staff team. I have used the SMART goal format to assist educators in goal setting”.

(Mentor 18)

The mentees also reported that the program learnings have directly impacted their work in the ECE sector and viewed their new skills as supporting them in becoming better leaders, resulting in an increased capacity to support others in their ECE settings, a finding that aligns with the post-evaluations of the original project [45]. They highlighted how they became more reflective about their practices. The mentees spoke about increased motivation and open communication and that they understood the importance of professional collaboration because of their involvement in the program. Most importantly, the mentees indicated that they felt more confident in their practice and were able to set realistic and achievable goals for themselves. For example, one mentee stated the following:

“This course allowed me to interact with other educators through networking in which was valuable information that allowed me to take on board through my own work practices. Giving me ideas and support throughout the course”.

(Mentee 5)

Finally, both groups of participants wondered about opportunities to continue the CoP they had established. Some of the mentees noted that they had kept in contact with their mentor, and some of the mentors had maintained communication contact since the program had finished. The CoP was consistently found to be a key strength of the program [45,46].

3.5. Strengths of the Program

The mentors believed that the key strength of the program was that it was well-structured and organised with clear expectations, with opportunities to connect both online and offline. They also commented on the quality of the resources, support and guidance of the academic mentors. The following are some examples:

“Having the support of the Academic Mentor. The resources provided still are being used”.

(Mentor 3)

“Hear from other colleagues within the profession and have the university lecturers as mentors”.

(Mentor 11)

The mentors highlighted that the training they received made them effective mentors. They commented on the diversity of ECTs in the groups, which stretched their understandings of the sector, and the opportunity to collaborate and connect with other colleagues through a CoP. For instance, one mentor noted the following:

“I really liked that we had such a diverse group and that it wasn’t all major city ECT’s. The program was very interactive, weekly tasks were clear and kept you engaged.”.

(Mentor 12)

They believed that they developed personally and professionally over the period of the program. Collectively, both the mentees and mentors valued research informing their practice, the importance of support and guidance of mentors and the professional collaboration within the CoP approach. The following are some examples of the mentees’ comments:

“Key strengths include having the chance to work in collaboration with other teachers and educators, learn from their experiences in the process”.

(Mentee 1)

“Having real life people to talk to”. (Mentee 7) and “Learning with experienced teachers in the profession”.

(Mentee 21)

The mentors also noted that they were feeling more confident in the next generation of ECTs and saw the program as being timely for the sector in building capacity of the future workforce.

The mentees reported that the program’s key strengths included the opportunities to work in collaboration with others and to learn and reflect from their experiences in the process. They valued the opportunity to think about sector issues collectively within a community of learners as part of a broader CoP with other teachers. Support from the mentors was viewed as important by the mentees. For instance, these comments by the mentees were common responses:

“The time, flexibility and understanding from mentors. Great support and because my mentor was so flexible and understanding with me, she gained so much respect from me which allowed me then to reciprocate the same back”.

(Mentee 15)

“The program has given me the motivation to know myself better as an educator to reflect on my practices, how to improve and realised how important it is to get into the habit of reflecting about our practices, what to do to improve them, where to find out more information through research, find people or experts to let ourselves to be guided. And I feel like this is contagious, this enthusiasm to improve helps us to reach other people to get involved and team with them”.

(Mentee 20)

The mentees felt that participation in the program was useful for developing their leadership skills, and they reported making connections with other ECTs and mentors in a supportive, non-judgmental space. They felt that learning with experienced ECTs, that is, the mentors, was a real strength of the program. Some continue to meet in their CoP:

“I have a good group wherein we still communicate. I am not sure if it also happened with other groups. I felt that this is the most important aspect of the course”.

(Mentee 17)

They mentioned the importance of research informing their approaches and practices. One mentee indicated the following:

“I have found in my two years since graduating that my focus has shifted to the team. I have always had strong relationships with children and continue to do so but I am more and more thinking about my colleagues and making a more concerted effort on building relationships with them”.

(Mentee 3)

3.6. Suggested Improvements

Suggestions for improvement related to the time commitment needed to undertake the program, requests for financial support, suggestions for additional content and ideas regarding administration of the program were provided by the participants. Overall, a common suggestion for inclusion into the program was the need for more time to complete tasks, as the balancing of work and study was difficult to manage. The mentors reported feeling appreciated for the support and guidance they provided to the mentees; however, they often were faced with mentee frustrations about being time poor and not being able to complete tasks. It was suggested that more time should be provided for one-on-one sessions with mentees. However, the mentors were conflicted about making sessions mandatory. Some of the mentors felt that activities should be made mandatory to attend, while others suggested that there was a need to consider academic demand when people are time poor due to work and personal commitments. The mentors felt that more time was needed to build connections and relationships in the groups.

The mentors also discussed the importance of financial reimbursement to settings for staff involved as mentors. The following was stated by one mentor:

“It would have been great for my service to receive some sort of financial support so I could have been relieved from some duties to attend mentoring meeting etc. I completed the whole program in my own time after work or on my day off. This worked but only because I currently work part time. I could not have completed the program if I worked full time”.

(Mentor 3)

The mentees also discussed the need for time to complete the program as well as more time with their mentors. The following is an example of a mentee comment:

“I think the program might benefit educators more if there was more time allocated to complete it. During COVID-19, we were restricted with programming times and staff attendance also affected this from becoming a consistent practice for the program to be interacted with/completed/reflected in properly”.

(Mentee 18)

One mentee also noted the following:

“It would be great if it could be offered to all new Early Childhood Teachers as it is daunting to start work in a new centre with more responsibilities and not a lot of practical experience”.

(Mentee 12)

Some of the mentors experienced technology issues with the online learning platform and felt that the mentees did not really engage with the resources. It was suggested that more guidance on how to use the platform would be useful. The mentors also suggested that they should have received mentees’ direct contact details (phone numbers) sooner to assist in better communication and support higher levels of engagement rather than just using the online teaching platform.

The mentees felt that the program could be improved by incorporating more practical examples for classroom settings and requested information on how to navigate personal and professional issues in the workplace. The mentors agreed and suggested the program could provide greater opportunities for both mentors and mentees to discuss and reflect on programming as well as reading materials about leadership from outside of ECE to provide other perspectives.

4. Discussion

In this discussion, we highlight the key findings in the current study. These include the enablers to participation in the mentoring program encountered by the mentors and mentees and whether the mentors and mentees were able to sustain effective mentoring practices in their ECE settings. We also address if the mentors’ and mentees’ enriched knowledge, skills and understanding impacted individuals and setting-based practice.

4.1. Enablers: Program Scheduling, Supportive Leaders and Personal Motivation

There were several key enablers to participation in the mentoring program for both the mentors and mentees: scheduling, supportive leaders and personal motivation but a desire for financial support. One significant enabler identified by both the mentors and mentees was the scheduling of the program to occur outside of regular working hours. This flexibility allowed for the participants to engage in the program without conflicting with their teaching or director role responsibilities. While this finding underscores the importance of considering the participants’ professional obligations when designing such programs, this also meant that the participants had to commit their personal time to participate in the program. Participation in mentoring programs should not come at the expense of the educators’ work–life balance, personal time and well-being [30,48,49]. This finding highlights the need for mentoring activities to be integrated into work hours with appropriate supports, such as relief staff and designated time away from regular duties, which is common in Australian primary and secondary school contexts.

The mentees reported that supportive leadership, that is, the presence of a supportive director was another key enabler for their participation in the program. This underscores the role of organisational leadership in fostering professional development opportunities and creating an environment where staff feel supported in their growth and learning endeavours [50]. For the mentors, they predominantly viewed their personal commitment as a key enabler. Professional values of commitment and a sense of responsibility towards the sector were evident. Such intrinsic motivation likely sustained the mentors’ engagement and their provision of high-quality mentoring. This alignment between personal values and professional responsibilities is noteworthy and aligns with both ECE and broader research. For example, Staniece et al. [51] analysed the experiences of 12 mentors involved in the Early Educator Support Program and found that the mentors’ previous experiences were a key motivator for being involved, as they wanted to contribute to change by working directly with teachers. Similarly, yet considering a broader context, Matota’s [52] Polish study, which investigated the motivational factors of 166 managers in business organisations involved in a formal mentoring program, determined that intrinsic motivation was a key factor for being involved, and this both benefited their own professional learning and contributed to others’ growth.

4.2. Sustaining Changes in Practice

Almost all the mentors and mentees indicated that their participation in the program resulted in a change in their practices. Researchers have previously established that involvement in mentoring and professional learning can have an impact on practice [1,53], and our research corroborated this. Over two-thirds of our mentors and mentees indicated that the knowledge and skills they gained contributed some good practices for improving support for the early childhood staff at their setting. As there are often high expectations from providers for beginning ECTs to ‘hit the ground running’ [27] (p. 17), this coincidental support was a positive benefit from the project.

The mentees indicated that they learnt about mentoring practices because of participating in the program. The mentees also reported that they utilised personal goals to improve their practices and knowledge as educators. The use of goal setting and action plans enabled the mentees to focus on the key things they wanted to improve in and provided a focus for the mentors. This was evident in this project and aligns with other research, which also reports the benefits from setting professional learning goals, such as leading to changes in practice [10].

Both the mentors and mentees reported that their networking interactions impacted positively on their own practices. Participating in a CoP to inform and improve professional practice is well researched [40]. Wells and De Nobile [54] add support for a theoretical framework, noting that theory should inform the conceptualisation of mentor preparation, including the skills and capabilities required. The CoP approach utilised in this program provided opportunities for non-hierarchical collaborations, emphasising the importance of relational connections between mentors and mentees.

4.3. Professional Growth and Leadership Skills

Both the mentees and mentors reported that they experienced professional growth, which in turn was integrated into their daily practices and that in turn impacted others. For example, the mentors and mentees reported that there was an increase in the level of feedback exchanged among staff in their workplaces, contributing to a more supportive and collaborative work environment. Engaging in collaborative dialogue and feedback ensures positive benefits and an increased likelihood of sustaining change in practices [24,55,56,57].

The mentors also reported personal and professional growth and contextualised this as development of their leadership capacities. Developing leadership capacity by being involved in mentoring programs has been reported in some of the literature. For instance, Nolan and Molla [10] and Wong and Waniganayake [58] found that experienced ECTs (mentors) built their leadership skills and capacity through involvement in mentoring. The mentors also reported that the program shifted their perspective of the role of mentor and the key skills required to be an effective mentor. This notion of a reciprocal bi-directional mentoring relationship is critical [37] as it ensures both mentors and mentees can use their strengths to collaborate and share knowledge in relation to their context [11,56]. By approaching mentoring from this stance of contextual relevance, the goals set can be applicable and timely. The mentors expressed knowledge of the importance of identifying professional development goals and maintaining records of achievements towards these goals as motivation and evidence of impact for mentees. A key component of the training of the mentors for the program was on engaging their mentees to set specific and achievable goals and for the mentors to provide timely and constructive feedback to the mentees own self-reflections on success or otherwise. Furthermore, as this program focused on mentoring outside individual workplaces, some of the mentors explained that they utilised the skills learned in the program to mentor their own staff. While excited by our findings, we note the relatively small number of respondents to our survey. We advocate that further research is needed to assess the impact external mentoring programs have on individual (both mentors and mentees) practices within their own settings.

The mentees who participated in this program reported that their knowledge of mentoring as a leadership strategy was very good (61%) or excellent (22%) compared to our mentors for whom only one-third in total indicated their knowledge of mentoring as a leadership strategy was very good or excellent. This finding is surprising. One possibility for this is that our mentees reported high levels of experience in the ECE sector—some (42%) with greater than ten years of experience and almost half (48%) with six to ten years of experience. We assume this longevity in the EC sector occurred when the participant mentees were in other roles, for example, employed as diploma-trained educators prior to obtaining an ECT degree. The long years working in ECE could enable our newly graduated ECT mentees to be confident in their leadership. We acknowledge it was a limitation of our survey that we did not distinguish how many years our mentees were in other ECE roles prior to obtaining their ECT degree, but to be eligible for this program, all mentees had to have less than five years’ experience as an ECT.

That most of the mentors were humble in their assessment of their leadership skills is consistent with their reserved approach to self-assessment across the survey items. Indeed, their scores on the quantitative items often seemed lower than what would be expected when reading the thoughtful, insightful reflections entered in the qualitative items. However, in terms of impacting individuals and setting-based practice and policy, the mentors highlighted the importance of professional collaborations and of research informing their approaches and practices. Having the mentors acknowledge the importance of professional collaborations and of research informing their approaches is pleasing as professional collaborations between mentors and mentees [24] and mentors being informed by research evidence [5,11,55] have previously been identified as key factors for enacting change.

4.4. Australian Professional Standards for Teachers

When assessing their knowledge, the mentors tended to offer an altruistic perspective. They noted that their knowledge and skills ensured they were able to support their early childhood colleagues to identify strengths and weaknesses in their practice, whereas they were more cautious when rating their own knowledge of the APST, with only one-third indicating a very good or excellent understanding of the APST guidelines at the appropriate career stage. Perhaps the longevity of experience of the mentors might explain their lack of knowledge of the APST as being accredited as an ECT in NSW was mandated from July 2016: see [59,60]. Interestingly, approximately three-quarters of the mentees indicated very good or excellent understanding of the APST guidelines at the appropriate career stage. This is a significant finding because APST are the foundations for accreditation as a teacher. Strong knowledge of the APST will likely enhance the mentee early career teachers’ ability to apply for and maintain appropriate proficiency in teacher accreditation, also called registration in some states and territories in Australia. Fenech and Watt’s [61] study that surveyed 463 ECTs across Australia on professional accreditation/registration found that participants wanted government funding to access professional learning as well as mentoring to support their progression from provisional to proficient in the accreditation/registration process. The role of mentoring to support new ECTs in this progression is key and should be funded and supported by governments and employers.

5. Conclusions

Australian and international literature [1,4,5,55,62,63,64] highlight that formal mentoring informed by research evidence supports changes in practice. The current study contributes to this body of research and offers ideas for the long-term sustainability of effective mentoring within ECE settings. Enabling mentoring outside of an individuals’ ECE setting with a CoP as a basis for mentoring was highly valued. Provision of adequate resourcing, that is, backfill for participation in, and payment for mentoring services were also requested and seen as desirable in future iterations of the program. The development of these enablers will assist in “attracting, developing and retaining a high-quality children’s education and care workforce” [27] (p. 12). The feedback provided by the beginning and experienced ECTs participating in this research is indicative of the commitment to mentoring and the dedication to the profession. These practitioners are the frontline of quality provision of ECE; governments and employers can benefit from reflecting on the considerations of those who are directly impacted by mentoring availability in both the short- and longer-term.