Towards a Model of Mentoring (2004) Kenneth E Jennings, D Litt et Phil*

The need to formalise a model of mentoring was activated by a number of conversations that unfolded at a recent workshop that was conducted in London for a group of learning mentors. Theoretical and philosophical considerations regarding collaboration, narrative, interpersonal space, reflection and empowerment are reviewed and utilised in the model of mentoring. On a fundamental level, the mentoring process requires that the mentor embrace the values of respect, curiosity, non-judgement and reflection to help facilitate the change process.

Feeling the pressure to resolve the problem During a recent workshop (January, 2004) with a group of learning mentors I came to understand that the role of the learning mentor in the school system is not easily defined or quantified. The problems being encountered by the learning mentors were usually those of students who had difficulty in fitting into the school system in one way or another. The problems varied in severity and included such problems as school absenteeism, disruption in class, learning difficulties and social difficulties (to mention a few). In talking about their work, the learning mentors indicated that they felt a lot of pressure in their work. In particular, they felt pressure to ‘resolve the problem as quickly as possible’ that was being presented to them. During the workshop I became aware of the dynamic tension that seemed to exist between what the school administration expected of the mentor and the mentor’s own understanding of his/her role when trying to help any student in distress. As the workshop unfolded, I sensed that the nature of the mentoring process needed to be examined in more detail. The intention of this paper is to share a model of mentoring that is based on the philosophy of collaborative and narrative therapy. The mentoring process is one that facilitates and embraces the ‘story’ of the student in distress. As the ‘story’ is being voiced (by the student) and being heard (by the mentor), the possibilities of change emerge. But this process does not occur in a vacuum. It is embedded in a trusting and respectful relationship without which no possibilities of change would be possible. Looking at the theory In order to provide the philosophical foundation, it is necessary to examine the narrative and collaborative therapeutic model that forms the basis of my work and which can also be applied during the mentoring process (Jennings, 1997). Collaboration (co-creation), conversation, reflective listening and unconditional positive regard (respect) are the main cornerstones of the model.

In order to get more understanding of the collaborative model of consultation, it is necessary to review some of my assumptions and premises regarding therapy. While these are forwarded as separate entities, it is the inter-connecting parts that form the whole and make up the therapeutic process: · · · · · · ·

·

·

·

It is my responsibility to provide the interpersonal space for my client to share his/her ‘life story’ in the therapeutic context (Anderson, 1997). During the therapeutic conversational process, I adopt a watchful, reflective, non-action position to facilitate the space for my client to reveal his/her story (Andersen, 1992; Hoffman, 1991). I carefully listen to the experiences of my client without making any judgement or assuming that I know what the client is thinking, feeling or talking about (Anderson & Goolishian, 1992; Rogers, 1967). Posing some tentative, yet curious questions about the personal experiences of my client helps awaken more self-awareness (Cecchin, 1987). This creates the opportunity for my client to reflect on his/her personal assumptions and perceptions about ‘the workings of life’. Each person is an autonomous, self-determined and self-organising energy system. This energy system will determine the meaning of any information that it assimilates in its own unique way (Dell, 1985). Each person is a product of a dynamic family system. This family passes on an ‘ecology of ideas’ to its members about life, which I am keen to understand (Anderson, 1997). The uniqueness of a person is determined by the integration of three interacting energy sources; namely physical, mental and spiritual energy (Jennings, 1993). These energy dimensions function according to three different paradigms. Physical activity operates according to the laws of Newtonian physics; mental activity operates according to concepts in quantum physics; and spiritual energy responds to the gentleness of love and a sense of belonging to a vision greater than self. A psychological difficulty can be thought of as: (a) being a rigid, repetitive ‘life story’ that limits and restricts possibilities for the client (Anderson, 1997, White, 1989), and/or (b) a resistant obstacle that may be inadvertently sustained by the ‘world-view’, tacit assumptions or behaviour patterns of the client (Dreher, 1990, Lash, 1989; Watzlawick, Weakland & Fisch, 1974). The obstacle feels like an invisible wall that prevents the client from progressing. The obstacle begins to dissolve during the therapeutic conversational process when the client adopts a reflective observational stance with regards the problem being experienced (Anderson & Goolishian, 1992, Jennings, 1997). I do not increase the internal resistance of my client by confronting any world-view or perceptions (since this will further reinforce the obstacle). Instead, I show total respect for the views, perceptions, realities and experiences of the client (no judgement). An old Chinese proverb states that ‘the only constant in life is change itself’ (Liao, 1990). Change unfolds naturally from the co-operative therapeutic process. However, due to the nature of the collaborative process the nature and/or direction of the change can never be predicted. Strategic interventions are not necessary to try and provoke change. These types of interventions or techniques may inadvertently activate resistance in the client and prevent the necessary interpersonal intimacy from developing in the therapeutic context (Jennings, 1997). Resistance in learning

In school many students feel ‘forced’ to learn about things that have no meaning for them. This results in them approaching the learning context with a ‘defensive’, ‘negative’ state-of-being which in turn destroys the possibility of acquiring new information about self or the task that is being encountered.

2

Unfortunately in the learning process, a 1-up position (teacher) and 1-down position (student) usually unfolds, based on who has acquired more knowledge (due to age, experience, formal qualifications). The nature of this relationship usually leads to a power struggle between teacher and student when learning becomes institutionalised. Central to the power struggle and the rebellious reactions of the student in the teacher/student relationship is (a) who determines what to learn? (b) how should this learning unfold? and (c) when should this learning occur? Mentoring – Nurturing a respectful, reflective relationship Mentoring is one of those interpersonal processes that will have as many definitions as there are observers trying to define or explain the concept. The reason for this is that the mentoring process is nothing more than a ‘helping process’ and ‘how one goes about trying to help another person in distress’ is largely determined by the philosophy and tacit assumptions that one has about ‘what constitutes help’. Students in distress are involved in power struggles in the school system and in their relationships with significant adults or authority figures. I believe that it is vital that the mentoring relationship does not mirror these types of relationships and escalate the power struggle. The mentoring process should offer the student a ‘different’ experience with a significant adult. The mentoring relationship should be co-operative and help open up space for the student to explore his/her problem. On a metaphorical level, a mentor is ‘an anchor to a boat that is having to endure a severe storm’ or is ‘an oasis in a desert where a weary traveller can stop to drink water and nourish himself’. Mentoring that is embedded in a collaborative and respectful relationship can be defined as a supportive interpersonal process that provides the space for the student to tell his/her story. While this may sound rather simple, there are a number of elements in the process that need to be highlighted in order for the full complexity of the mentoring process to be understood: · · · · · ·

The life story is the entry point Offer space to hear the student’s voice Adopt a ‘non-expert’, ‘not-knowing’ stance – listen without judgement Be reflective and ask some curious questions about the problem Empower the student to become the ‘researcher of self’ Helping involves co-creating possibilities for the student

The life story is the entry point The life story of the student is not simply ‘the label that he/she has been given’. The life story is the richness of experiences that have occurred in the student’s life. The life story is ‘more than’ what the school sees – it includes the aspirations, interests, dislikes and perceptions of the student. As you carefully listen to the life story, you will begin to build trust in your relationship with the student. Without trust, your relationship will not have the expansive quality that is needed to help resolve the difficulty being encountered. Offer space to hear the student’s voice Interpersonal space requires invitation and non-intrusion from the mentor. It conveys the message of ‘I am interested in you’, ‘I want to listen to you’. The mentoring process begins when you offer the student the time and space to ‘tell his/her story’. This is a respectful invitation for the student to voice his/her voice in his/her own unique way.

3

Adopt a ‘non-expert’, ‘not-knowing’ stance – listen without judgement As you listen to the story, listen to it from a non-expert, ‘not-knowing’ perspective (Anderson & Goolishian, 1992). This means that you should suspend your views and ideas. Just listen carefully, without trying to suggest any course of action or to help solve the problem. Your intention is to really understand and ‘get into the story’ that is being voiced by the student. Be reflective and ask some curious questions about the problem The mentoring process requires a reflective, respectful and watchful role by a facilitator who is not prescriptive or judgmental. The mentor’s most powerful tool in his/her relationship with the student is his/her ability to reflect on the unfolding process. The mentor should be curious and always pose curious questions (as opposed to giving prescriptive advice). These questions need to be asked in an open-ended, tentative way. The question should offer the student the space and freedom to explore any aspect of the question that he/she may find to be meaningful. ‘Every question asked by the therapist (mentor) may be seen to embody some intent and to arise from certain assumptions’ (Tomm, 1988, p.1). Tomm (1988) contends that questions are usually driven by one of four intentions; namely (a) corrective intent, (b) investigative intent, (c) exploratory intent and (d) facilitative intent. Tomm (1988) points out that the intent behind the question has an effect on both the client (student) and the therapist (mentor). In particular, questions that are driven by corrective and investigative intent usually closes down the interpersonal space in the relationship. If the question is driven by corrective intent it has the effect of trying to constrain the student (client). Further, it has the effect of making the therapist (mentor) seem more oppositional. Questions driven by an investigative intent tend to have the effect of making the therapist (mentor) seem more judgemental. Tomm (1988) states that questions that are driven by exploratory and facilitative intent have a liberating and generative effect on the client (student). These type of questions help create more possibilities in how to deal with the problem being encountered. Empower the student to become the ‘researcher of self’ As the mentoring process unfolds, the student will become more aware of: · · ·

The need to examine his/her personal assumptions and perceptions that are being made in the problem situation that is being encountered. This is an internal perspective in which the student is given space to explore his/her part in the problem being encountered. The need to take on his/her own responsibility for the solutions that are derived for the problems that are being encountered. That there are no quick fixes. The unfolding solution to the problem gets co-created by the mentor and the student. The student is encouraged to become the ‘researcher of self’ and to try out possible actions that contribute to resolving the difficulty.

Helping involves co-creating possibilities for the student One can use the Jennings Learning Loop (Reflective Interactive Exploration – see Jennings, 1997) in the mentoring process to help resolve the problem being encountered. I have written the ‘steps’ below as if I am the facilitator (or mentor), and the reader the student/learner. ·

What do you want to learn or resolve? Reflect on this and see if you can verbally state what you want to get more understanding/knowledge about (or what skill you wish to improve).

4

·

· · · · ·

Now ‘tell’ me (your mentor) what you want to learn and achieve. The mentor just listens and ‘watches’. Repeat this three times with a minute’s silence in between the statements – this helps to activate more thinking by the student and also prevents the mentor from jumping in too quickly to rescue the student. What are you most aware of now (internally and externally)? Try and identify this and verbally mention what you are feeling or thinking to the mentor. The mentor listens without judgement. Try out what you want to do. Engage the process and carry out purposeful action (e.g. trying out maths problems, being ‘nicer’ to the teacher, stop disrupting the class, etc). After some time in the mentoring process (maybe at the next meeting) it may be time to reflect. What were you most aware of while you were trying to resolve the difficulty? What obstacles did you experience? Encourage the student to formally reflect on his/her experience and attempted solution; (a) this can be done verbally, and/or (b) if one has enough time a formal written reflection can be done. What do you want to do now? What do you need to accept? What have you learnt? What is your next step?

The above process is expansive and opens up possibilities for the student. The process is embedded in a trusting relationship and involves language and a conversational stance that facilitates an ‘internal orientation’. There may be times when the mentoring process may feel as if it hits a wall or feels stuck. This feeling may be a reflection of how the process is responding to your (the mentor’s) ‘intentionality’ or tacit assumptions in the situation. The process may be saying to you (the mentor): ‘re-look at how you are going about this’, ‘examine your intentionality more closely’, ‘you may be misinterpreting the situation’. A story of the unfolding process The ideas in Let’s talk sport…and life point to the necessity to awaken to the spirituality of life (Jennings, 2000). In the book I attempt to share some of my fundamental ideas and philosophies about life and how learning and personal knowledge and awareness evolves over time. The ideas are briefly outlined below. The integration of these concepts forms the holistic model on which one can base the mentoring process. · ·

· · ·

The awakening: The awakening points to a change in consciousness. An expansion in consciousness occurs as one becomes more aware of the internal and external processes that envelop one. Gaining more knowledge: Part of the awakening process is the need to gain more information or knowledge, about self and the ‘nature of life’. There is an abundance of information that is available. Why do we gravitate to certain literature or ideas? What is it that attracts us to read what we are reading? What questions do we want answered? Waiting: In any life process, there is a period of consolidation or waiting. Questions that we want answered may not have an immediate solution. Patience and a ‘non-action’ attitude are necessary when we attempt to understand the complexity of life. Sensing the complexity: As we engage the life process, we begin to examine our actions or feelings in more detail. As we enter the subterranean levels of an experience, we begin to encounter the complexity of the moment. The meeting: There are no chance encounters in the inter-connected fabric of life. In our meetings with others, we have the opportunity to pick up valuable information and to learn more about ourselves. Some meetings change the direction of our lives.

5

· · ·

·

·

· ·

Unique personal energy: The sense of self and the expression of self are the result of the integrated sum of our experiences in our lives. We need to think of ourselves as ‘bundles of energy’. We are continually defining who we are by the way we utilise our energy. It goes beyond techniques: There are no techniques or 10-point plans when tackling life’s demands. Be suspicious of anyone that provides a ‘proven’ recipe to ensure success. Seeking the success formula: There are certain parts of yourself that may ‘block’ you from moving effortlessly in life. As you tackle life’s demands, you will become more and more aware of your unique idiosyncratic interactional style. Finding your success formula largely depends on how you integrate ‘in-coming’ information into your existing knowledge structures. This integration requires you to be open and to get in touch with your inner self, especially uncovering the assumptions you may be making about yourself and the ‘workings of life’. This process heightens your internal awareness. Reflective conversation: In conversation with others, we are continually developing new narratives about various aspects of ourselves. If respect and gentleness are wrapped up in the conversational context, an intimacy occurs allowing ideas to flow in an open way. It is intimate relationships that spiritual energy becomes most prevalent. The learning loop: When we sit down and formally reflect on any experience (through reflective writing), we create the context for ourselves to take stock of the unfolding process. This heightens our awareness and opens up new possibilities for us. The learning loop awakens aspects of ourselves that may have been lying dormant. On another level, the learning loop frees us from some of the restrictions that we may have placed on ourselves. Conversing with your hero: We are continually being confronted by difficult situations that require us to make a conscious decision about how we will respond. This action becomes the ‘building block’ to your definition of self. Healing power: One enters the spiritual domain through the ‘personal struggle’. Yet this only becomes possible if you unconditionally accept those parts of yourself that you perceive as being ‘bad’ or ‘wrong’. This usually presents a major dilemma for one – how can you love the part of yourself that you hate? However, this is what it requires for you to tap into your spiritual energy – to love all the complexity that exists within you. Unconditional love and non-judgement are powerful healing tools. As you let go of your disappointments, you create space for yourself to expand in new directions.

With reference to the mentoring process, the ideas above suggest that the mentor can play a significant part in the life of the student. The mere fact that the paths of the mentor and student have crossed (the meeting) is a significant experience. The mentoring process needs to awaken the student to aspects of life and to qualities within him/herself that have never had expression. The mentoring process can help the student gain more knowledge about him/herself and the ‘workings of life’. Further, by offering an adult perspective, the mentor shows the student that there is a complexity to life. While the student may be looking for a recipe to solve the problem (seeking the success formula), the mentoring process will reveal that there are no quick fixes in life. Life goes beyond techniques. In the mentoring process the student will begin to embrace his/her own uniqueness. Utilising reflective conversation the mentor will provide a ‘mirror’ for the student to explore his/her unique personal energy. By engaging in the learning loop, the student will become a ‘researcher of self’ and develop his/her own unique solutions to the problem being encountered. The solution is not unilaterally prescribed or suggested by the mentor, but rather is a creative co-creation that emerges in the mentoring relationship.

6

It is important for a student in distress to have a significant adult they can trust. If the mentoring relationship has created the necessary trust, it will feel as if the student will be conversing with his/her hero. While each student has the capacity to heal his/her pain and resolve his/her difficulty, a respectful interpersonal context is required for this to unfold. There needs to be a watchful, trusting observer (mentor) in the healing process. The mentoring context offers the student the opportunity to unleash his/her healing power. Obstacles and problems in life usually make one feel disconnected and isolated. The healing process is one that re-connects you to ‘who you are’ and provides you with the opportunity to expand yourself to become the ‘best you can be’. Concluding Remarks One needs to approach the mentoring process with a certain attitude – an attitude that embraces the values of non-judgement, curiosity, reflection and respect. Everything that is created in life is a process. Working out a mathematical problem, working on a golf swing, planning to buy a motor-car, how we deal with relationships, are all examples of processes. Fundamental to the mentoring process is the necessity for the student to examine personal perspectives about the process being encountered (i.e. to examine one’s part in the process). This requires the student to be reflective about his/her actions that may have contributed to the problem. In essence, mentoring asks the student to adopt an internal perspective and to ‘see his/her part in the problem/obstacle that is being encountered’. This may activate an inner fear, since the student will be required to look at him/herself in more detail. (this usually activates the most primary of fears the fear of looking at one’s fears). The mentoring relationship provides a safe place for the student to examine his/her problem. Due to the fear of ‘facing one’s fear’, the mentor needs to be supportive and caring in the process (but not condescending, patronising, or pitying). Without this care and love, the mentoring process will not be able to provide the student with the courage to risk changing. The fundamental objective of the mentoring process is to expand the consciousness of the student. The process should open up possibilities and empower the student in his/her decision-making as he/she engages the problem. Mentoring is giving the student the space and opportunity to learn and understand more about the self. In this sense, the mentoring process is similar to a ‘therapeutic process’.

7

References Andersen, T. (1992). Reflections on reflecting with families. In S. McNamee, & K. Gergen (Eds.), Therapy as social construction (pp.54-68). London: Sage. Anderson, H. (1997). Conversation, language and possibilities. New York: Basic Books. Anderson, H., & Goolishian, H.A. (1992). The client is expert: A not-knowing approach to therapy. In S. McNamee, & K. Gergen (Eds.), Therapy as social construction (pp.25-39). London: Sage. Cecchin, G. (1987). Hypothesizing, circularity, and neutrality revisted: An invitation to curiosity. Family Process, 26, 405-413. Dell, P.F. (1985). Understanding Bateson and Maturana: Towards a biological foundation for the social sciences. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 11, 1-20. Dreher, D. (1990). The tao of peace: A modern guide to the ancient way of peace and harmony. London: Mandala. Hoffman, L. (1991). A reflexive stance for family therapy. Journal of Strategic and Systemic Therapies, 10(3), 4-17. Jennings, K.E. (1993). Mind in sport: Directing energy flow into success. Kenwyn: Juta. Jennings, K.E. (1997). Towards a model of mental preparation in elite sport. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of South Africa, Pretoria. Jennings, K.E. (2000). Let’s talk sport…and life. Halfway House: Interdoc Consultants. Lash, J. (1989). The tai chi journey. Shaftsbury: Element. Liao, W. (1990). Tai chi classics. Boston: Shambhala. Rogers, C. (1967). A therapist’s view of psychotherapy: On becoming a person. London: Constable. Tomm, K. (1988). Interventive interviewing: Part III. Intending to ask circular, strategic or reflexive questions? Family Process, 27, 1-15. Watzlawick, P., Weakland, J.H., & Fisch, R. (1974), Change: Principles of problem formation and problem resolution. New York: Norton. White, M. (1989). The externalizing of the problem and the re-authoring of lives and relationships. Selected papers, Adelaide: Dulwich Centre Publication.

*Correspondence to: Dr K E Jennings, Psychologist in Private Practice, P O Box 651564, Benmore, 2010. South Africa. E-Mail: [email protected]

8