Table of Content
Contents
ABSTRACT ... I
PREFACE ... II
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... III
TABLE OF CONTENT ... IV
LIST OF TABLES ... VII
LIST OF FIGURES ... VIII
CHAPTER1INTRODUCTION ... 1
1.1. BACKGROUND ... 1
1.2. RESEARCH QUESTIONS ... 4
1.3. PURPOSES OF THE STUDY ... 4
1.4. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDIES ... 4
1.5. SCOPE OF THE STUDY ... 5
1.6. ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS ... 6
2.2 MENTORING STAGES... 11
2.2.1. Student Teachers’ Readiness ... 14
2.2.2. Mentors’ Situational Leadership ... 16
2.3 BASIC TEACHING SKILLS ... 19
2.3.1. Gaining Attention ... 20
2.3.2. Informing the Objectives ... 21
2.3.3. Stimulating Recall of Prerequisite Learning ... 21
2.3.4. Presenting Stimulus Material ... 22
2.3.5. Providing Learning Guidance ... 22
2.3.6. Eliciting Performance ... 23
2.3.7. Providing Feedback ... 24
2.3.8. Assessing Performance ... 25
2.3.9. Enhancing Retention and Transfer ... 25
CHAPTER3RESEARCHMETHODOLOGY ... 28
3.1. RESEARCH QUESTION ... 28
3.3. RESEARCH DESIGN ... 28
3.4. SITE ... 29
3.5. PARTICIPANTS ... 29
3.6. DATA COLLECTION TECHNIQUE ... 30
3.6.1. Observation ... 30
3.6.2. Interview ... 34
3.7. DATA ANALYSIS ... 35
3.7.1. Data from Observation ... 35
3.7.2. Data from Interview ... 36
CHAPTER4FINDINGSANDDISCUSSION ... 38
4.1 MENTORING PROCESS ... 38
4.1.1. Pre-observation Conference ... 41
4.1.2. Observation ... 45
4.1.3. Feedback Session ... 50
4.2STUDENT TEACHERS’BASIC TEACHING SKILLS DEVELOPMENT ... 56
4.2.4. Presenting Stimuli with Distinctive Feature... 64
4.2.5. Providing Learning Guidance ... 69
4.2.6. Eliciting Performance ... 72
4.2.7. Providing Feedback ... 75
4.2.8. Assessing Performance ... 77
4.2.9. Enhancing Retention and Transfer ... 80
CHAPTER5CONCLUSION ... 92
5.1 CONCLUSION ... 92
5.2 RECOMMENDATION ... 94
5.3 LIMITATION OF STUDY ... 95
5.4 SUGGESTION FOR FURTHER STUDY ... 96
REFERENCES ... 97
List of Tables
Table 2.1 Connecting readiness and style using the situational leadership ... 18
Table 3.1 Classroom Observation Schedule ... 32
Table 4. 1 Mentoring Stages Observation Check List ... 55
Table 4.2 Progress in Gaining Attention ... 57
Table 4.3 Progress in Informing Objective ... 61
Table 4.4 Progress in Stimulating Recall ... 63
Table 4.5 Progress in Presenting Stimuli ... 65
Table 4.6 Progress in Providing Learning ... 69
Table 4.7 Progress in Eliciting Performance ... 73
Table 4.8 Progress in Providing Feedback ... 75
Table 4.9 Progress in Assessing Performance ... 77
Table 4.10 Progress in Enhancing Retention and Transfer... 81
Figure 2.1 Mentoring Stage Scheme ... 12
Figure 2.2 Continua of Student Teachers' Readiness Level ... 15
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
This chapter sets out the background of the study, the research questions, and
the purpose of the study as well as the significance and the scope of it. The
clarification of the term used and the outline for the organization of this thesis are
also highlighted.
1.1. Background
Mentoring has been used in most of teacher education programs especially
when students are having teaching practice in real schools (Roberts, 1998;
Darling-Hammond, 1998; Richards, 1998; Musthafa, 1995; Randall and Thornton, 2001;
Bailey, 2006; Blasé, 2009; Malderez, 2009; Gebhart, 2009). Literatures reflect
various responses of how mentoring process can help student teachers adjust their life
as teachers and gradually develop their teaching skills. Some studies have been
conducted which either finds that mentoring process is not influential to student
teachers’ teaching skills (see Andersen, 2009; Carpenter, 2009; and Egal, 2006;) or
very important to student teachers’ teaching skills development (see Tudge, 1990;
Some authors stress how influential mentoring process to student teachers’
teaching skills development is depends on what mentor teachers and student teacher
do in the process and in what circumstances mentoring process is conducted (Bailey,
2006, Randall and Thornton, 2001; Tudge, 1990; and Malderez, 2007). Randall and
Thornton (2006) say that there are three steps that mentor teachers and student
teachers should do in mentoring process, namely pre-observation conference,
observation, and feedback session. They believe that if mentor teachers and student
teachers do the steps frequently during teaching practice, student teachers’ basic
teaching skills will be developed. However, Malderez (2007) proposed that to make
mentoring process effective is not only depend on the how often it is conducted but
also in what circumstances that it is conducted. He emphasizes effective mentoring
process should be conducted in a supportive condition. He defines supportive is not
only the matter of the situation but also the mentors themselves; only teachers who
are willing to spend their time to mentor should be chosen to be mentor teachers.
The problem with mentor teachers is that they don’t always have time to
mentor. Some mentor teachers are very busy so that they do not have enough time to
conduct mentoring process as Randall and Thornton (2001) have proposed (Bailey,
2006). Another problem with mentoring process is that teachers who are chosen as
mentors do not always capable to mentor. In constructivist perspective, Vygotsky in
Tudge (1992) states that mentoring process is effective only if a less capable person is
happen and the result most likely will be a drawback (Tudge, 1992; Hadegaard, 1992;
Gagne, 1992)
In Indonesian context, where teacher as profession is being developed,
teaching practice is consider important especially to develop student teachers’
teaching skills so that they are ready to be professional teachers. However, based on
researcher’s observation, not all teachers have ability and capability to conduct
effective mentoring. As a consequence, not all student teachers are able to develop
their teaching skills even though they have been through teaching practice.
Some studies indicate that mentoring process can help student teachers
develop their teaching skills as long as it is conducted frequently and mentors are
capable to guide student teachers (Tudge, 1992; Bailey, 2006; Malderez, 2009; Blasé,
2009). Mentoring is also an important process to help student teachers grow as
teachers, adjust the school context, and learn how to improve their teaching skills
from the feedback from their mentor teachers.
Even though experts sets various condition to make effective mentoring,
research about mentoring process and its connection to student teachers’ basic
teaching skills still doesn’t get enough attention. Thus, the present study focuses on
investigating what happens in mentoring process and how this process can help
contribution to enlighten how mentoring to conduct effective mentoring process so it
can help student teachers’ basic teaching skils.
1.2. Research Questions
In relation to above background, this study attempted to address the following
questions:
1. What do mentor teachers and student teachers do on mentoring process?
2. How can mentoring process help develop student teachers’ basic teaching skill?
1. 3. Purposes of the Study
Referring to the questions formulated above, the investigation was intended to
meet the following purposes:
1. To find out what mentor teachers and student teacher do in mentoring process.
2. To investigate how the mentoring process can help develop student teachers’
basic teaching skill.
1. 4. Significance of the Studies
The result of this study will be of great contributions to three crucial aspects:
results of the study are hoped to enrich the literature of mentoring process and its later
to give perspective about effective mentoring process so it can help student teachers
develop their teaching skills especially in Indonesian context where professional
teachers are being developed. Second, from the practical aspects, the result of finding
out what happened in mentoring process can also provide some information regarding
actual condition of how it can help student teachers develop their teaching skills.
Last, from professional aspects, the result of this study are expectedly beneficial for
mentor teachers and student teachers who are directly involved in mentoring process.
The information can be used by mentor teachers as basic for guiding student teachers
effectively so they can help student teachers teaching skills as well as by student
teacher as basic for improving their teaching skills through mentoring process that
has been conducted with their mentor teachers.
1. 5. Scope of the Study
This study, is like any other case studies, is concerned with a certain case that
happens in certain context. The study dealt with the investigation of what mentor
teachers and student teachers do in mentoring process and how this process can help
1. 6. Organization of the Thesis
This thesis is divided into five chapters. Chapter one is an introductory one
giving the background discussion and overview of the study. It also introduces the
research questions and considers the significance of the particular research.
Meanwhile the literature review to understanding perceptions and the use of Bahasa
Indonesia is presented in chapter two. Chapter three describes the research
methodology and research design used in this study. In chapter four, data presentation
and discussion are presented based on the research questions outlined in chapter 1.
This thesis is concluded in chapter five in which it provides the conclusion of the
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Some aspects of research methodology that are going to be discussed in this
section are site and participants, research design, data collection methods, and data
analysis methods.
3.1.Research Question
1. What do mentor teachers and student teachers do in mentoring process?
2. How can mentoring process help to develop student teachers’ basic teaching
skills?
3.2.Purpose of the Study
1. Investigating what mentor teachers and student teachers do in mentoring
process.
2. Finding out how mentoring process can help to develop student teachers’
basic teaching skills.
3.3.Research Design
This study is qualitative because it was aimed to dig deeper mentoring process and how this process developed student teachers’ basic teaching skills. This research
teacher’s teaching skill development), therefore it was consistent with the case study
characteristic that Merriam (1991) proposed. Another characteristic that this study
had in common with case study was the result of this study was only interpreted at the
school where this study was conducted not for the purpose of generalizing.
3.4. Site
This study was conducted in one high school in Cirebon. This high school is
chosen purposively because in terms of passing grade, it is included as one of favorite
schools in Cirebon. Therefore, the researcher assumed that student teachers who
were placed in this school faced a lot of challenges. They needed to have high
pedagogical knowledge. Another reason why this school was chosen was because of
its accessibility.
3.5.Participants
There were two kinds of participants in this research. The first group of
participants was cooperating teachers—two females and one male—who were assigned to become mentors for student teachers. The second group of participants
was four student teachers—all females—from one of university in Cirebon who were practicing teaching at this school. Each female cooperating teacher handled one
student teacher and the male student teacher handled two student teachers. Mentor
teachers were chosen by the school and student teachers were assigned by the
3.6.Data Collection Technique
In order to avoid information bias during the research, triangulation was used
in this study. Triangulation is basically the use of two or more data collection
techniques (Wiersema, 1991; Cohen and Manion, 1994). The data collection
techniques used in this study were observation and interview.
3.6.1. Observation
The observation that was conducted in this study was non-participant observation since the researcher’s rule was purely as an observer; she did not involve
directly to the event that was being observed (Thomas, 2003).
The observation was focused on student teachers’ basic teaching skills. The instrument used to investigate student teachers’ basic teaching skills were based on
Gagne’s (1992) nine events classroom instructions. These classroom instructions are
the teaching phases where student teachers give different activities. They were used
as instrument because it can be compatible with standard process. In standard
process, teaching phases are divided into three major parts which are beginning,
middle, and end. Each of the parts has its own activities.
Some of the activities in each standard process teaching phase are similar to Gagne’s nine classroom instruction. In opening phase, teacher’s task is to get
recall of previous learning, and informing the objective. The second part of teaching
event in standard process is the middle phase or main activity. In the main activities, teachers’ tasks are to deliver materials to students, facilitate students’ learning, and give students chance to demonstrate their learning. In Gagne’s events, these events
are called presenting material, guiding learning, and eliciting performance. The last
part is ending part. In ending part, teachers assess students, give feedback, and give independent assignments. In Gagne’s events they were called providing informative
feedback, assessing performance, and enhancing retention and transfer.
Another reason why Gagne’s classroom instruction event was used was
because it is the most equivalent classroom instructions with Vygotsky’s constructivism. The first reason why Gagne’s nine events is more relevant is because it has the characteristics of constructivism theory. In constructivism theory that
Vygotsky has proposed, teachers need to guide students learning by giving concrete
examples which are close to students’ daily life (Hadegaard, 1990). By giving
students concrete examples and evaluation, Hadegard (ibid.) claimed students will be able to master the material better than when they are left alone. Gagne’s nine
classroom events also use the same principal. Most of Gagne’s events such as
stimulating recall of prerequisite learning, presenting stimulus materials, providing leaning guidance, eliciting performance need teacher’s skill on giving examples and
(2006), Gagne’s nine events of instruction provide a robust and useful conceptual
guide not only to the event of instruction but also as a guide to planning the lesson.
The observations were conducted in a classroom where student teachers were teaching. To avoid biases and gain reliability of the research, each student teacher’s
mentor was involved. Therefore, both researcher and mentor sat down together to
observe the student teacher in the classroom and then compared the observation
notes.
The observation was conducted as long as the student teachers practicing in
the school for two months. However, because there were some school agendas, such
as Ramadhan school and school camping, and Ied day holiday, the teaching and
learning process was only effective for the last one month after student teachers were placed at the school. As a result, the observation for student teacher’s basic teaching
skills development was conducted around sixteen times, four times for each
participant. Below is the classroom observation schedule.
Table 3.1 Classroom Observation Schedule
No. Name Place of observation Time and date of
observation
1. Student teacher
A-Mentor teacher 1
Class 1.5 September 14, 2011 at
07.00 a.m.
2. Student teacher
B-mentor teacher 2
Class 1.2 September 16, 2011 at
3. Student teacher
C-Class 1.6 September 30, 2011 at
3.6.2. Interview
The interview was conducted to fill the lack of data in mentoring process. The
interview was conducted two times. The first interview was conducted right after
teaching practice was over. The second interview was conducted some times after
teaching practice was over. The second interview was conducted to check mentor teachers and student teachers’ consistencies of what they said about mentoring
process in their first interview and probe mentor teacher and student teachers memory
about mentoring process.
Mentor teachers were interviewed to find out how they conducted the
mentoring process such as, what they were talking about in pre-observe conference,
what aspects of teaching they observed from student teachers, and what feedback they
gave to their student teachers. From three cooperating teachers, only two were
interviewed. Since one mentor teacher was failed to be interviewed, data for the third
mentor teacher is gained through interviewing their student teachers. Student teacher
C and student teacher D were interviewed about how they and their mentor teacher
conducted mentoring process, what they talked about in pre-observation conference,
how mentor teacher 3 observed them, and what suggestions that he gave in feedback
session. To avoid biases, student teacher C and student teacher D were interviewed
in a separated room. Student teacher A and student teacher B were interviewed to
3.7. Data Analysis
3.7.1. Data from Observation
Since there are two observations, the data analysis in this study was analyzed
by using two frameworks. Data from observing mentoring was analyzed under the
framework of Randall and Thornon (2001) model of mentoring. The data obtained
by using this frameworks was around how mentors provided scaffolding to student
teachers during mentoring process and whether student teachers developed their own
knowledge during this process from time to time. The data from observation were
categorized then interpreted (see appendix).
Data from observing student teachers’ basic teaching skills in the classroom
were analyzed under the framework of Gagne’s nine events of instruction. Categorization in this observation is on how student teachers gain attention; inform
the objective(s); stimulate recall of prerequisite learning; present stimulus materials;
provide leaning guidance; elicit performance; and enhance retention and transfer.
The development of basic teaching skill were observed from time to time. Excerpts from the transcribed data were matched with Gagne’s nine classroom
instructions. It was analyzed whether student teachers conducted the events or not. If
they conducted the events, the way they conducted the events was analyzed to find
out how close they did to the events. If the missed the events, the probable cause was
3.7.2. Data from Interview
The data from the interview were recorded. After recording the interview, the
data were transcribed, coded, and categorized. The coding and categorizing were
based on the criteria of mentoring process under Randal and Thornton (2001)
framework of mentoring process (see appendix).
The instrument used to categorize the transcription was check lists. The
indicators of the check list is based on Randall and Thornton’s (2001) adaptation of Kolb’s experiential learning. This instrument was used because it is consistent with
constructivist framework.
The indicators used on observation checklist are how mentor teachers
conducted pre-observation conference; observation, and feedback session. Based on
Randall and Thornton (2001), in observation stage, mentor teachers have to discuss
the use of principles to decide how principles may be applied in a situation, what
targets are to be set for the lesson and what evidence of the student teachers would
like the mentor to bring from the lesson. In the observation stage, mentor teachers
should observe student teachers in terms of the way that student teachers have met the
pre-agreed targets for the lesson and aspects the lesson which exemplify new areas of
techniques/understanding which need to be addressed. In feedback session, mentor
teachers have to guide the student teacher to reflect on the process using the evidence
improved and classroom happenings which lead to establishment of new way of
thinking.
This chapter has presented research methodology that had been used in this
research. The methodology includes research questions, purpose of the study,
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION
This chapter presents conclusion of the study. It consists of conclusion,
recommendation, limitation of the study, and suggestion for further study
5.1Conclusion
This study has investigated what happened during mentoring process and how this process can help student teachers’ basic teaching skills. This study found that
mentoring process in this study has big influence for student teachers’ development.
Student teachers who underwent routine mentoring stages from the beginning until
the end of teaching practice had positive outcome. Their teaching skills and
competences got better in every performance. On the other side, student teachers who
did not undergo routine mentoring stages from the beginning until the end of teaching
practice did not have positive outcome. They tend to have inconsistent performance.
In one performance they seemed better than the first time they taught but in the other
time, their teaching performance was worse than the previous performance.
Therefore, it can be said that student teachers who did not have frequent mentoring
The major obstacle whether or not mentoring process is conducted comes
from mentor teachers. Mentor teachers need to know how to conduct appropriate
mentoring process from discussing planning with student teachers in pre-observation
conference, observing mentor teachers in the classroom, until giving feedback after
student teachers teaching in the classroom. In this study, mentor teachers who knew
how to conduct mentoring process brought a positive outcome to the student teachers.
Not only did student teachers develop their teaching skill but also these mentor
teachers became the ideal mentor teachers for student teachers. What student
teachers expected from their mentors in this study was that a mentor teacher who was
able to guide them during teaching practice. They expected their mentor teachers to
give suggestion on what they were going to do in the classroom and feedback after
they finished teaching.
What mentor teachers expected from their student teachers was also
important. Mentor teachers in this study expected their student teachers to be skillful
and competence. A skillful and competence student teacher will be able to keep up with mentor teachers’ demand, for instance one mentor teacher wanted her student
teachers designed a simple lesson for the students so that the students were able to
comprehend the lesson easily. Sometimes student teachers had difficulties in
fulfilling what mentor teachers wanted. Therefore, student teachers should be skillful
Mentor teacher-student teacher compatibility in this study also has influence
in determining the effectiveness of mentoring process. Mentor teacher and student
teacher who have good relationship will have a frequent mentoring process. It is
because they understand each other. Mentor teachers understand their responsibility
and run their role as mentor teachers. Student teachers know their responsibility as
learners who are learning to teach from more experience teachers.
In this study, student teachers who did not fit to their mentor teachers were
stagnant in term of teaching skill and competence. The primary cause of this
incompatibility by a less responsible mentor teacher even though the student teachers’
competence and skill were also lacked. He skipped most of mentoring stages such as
pre-observation conference and feedback session. Therefore student teacher who lack
of teaching skill and competence could not learn from their mentor teacher.
5.2Recommendation
To bring mentoring process into a positive outcome, mentoring process
should be conducted in a supportive system. Malderez (2009) noted that a conducive
system is where mentors are given time to mentor and willing to spend some of their
time to guide student teachers. Therefore, it is recommended for partner school (a
school that is willing to be the place where student teacher from a university conduct
teaching practice) to choose teachers who are willing to guide the student teachers
Since mentoring process involves both mentor teachers and student teachers, student teachers’ competency should also be a consideration. It is highly
recommended for university to reconsider what student teachers should learn in the
university so that they are ready to face the real teaching situation. It is also
recommended for university to conduct a mentoring training for mentor teachers. It
is because this study found that not all mentor teachers knew how to conduct
mentoring process.
5.3Limitation of Study
Observation time was the primary limitation of this study. Teaching practice
was conducted for around two and a half month. However in half of teaching
practice period, teaching and learning process was not effective because of fasting
month and Ied holiday. As a result time for observation was only around one month.
Therefore, researchers who are interested in conducting this type or research should
allocate and arrange the time better.
Classroom observation was conducted when student teachers performed in the
classroom. The observation for one student teacher was always conducted in the
same classroom so that the result was less varied. It is better for future research to
observe different classroom for each student teachers.
The participants of this study consist of mentor teachers from one school and
generalized in a wider scope. To make a generalization in a wider scope, it is better if
the next study take participants from different schools and universities.
5.4Suggestion for Further Study
Further study concerns in what student teachers should be able to do is still needed. In this study, student teachers’ preparation is not included in this study.
What students learned during their study at the university and how their learning
make them ready to face the real teaching situation is also needed because it relates to
student teachers skills and competence.
This study did not see how successful student teachers’ performances were from their students’ perspective; therefore, it is suggested that for further research the
researcher need to see how successful student teachers’ performances were from
students’ point of view.
This chapter has presented the conclusion of the study. The conclusion also
References
Abdulwahed, Mahmoud and Zoltan K. Nancy. (2009). Applying Kolb’s Experiential
Learning Cycle for Laboratory Education. Retrieved April 4 from the
Wide World Web http://www.jee.org.
Andersen, Nancy A, Marry Alice Barksdale, and Clare E. Hite. (2009). Preservice
Teacher' Observation of Cooperating Teachers and Peers While Participating in an Early Field Experience. Retrieved May 12, 2011
from world wide web http://www.teqjournal.org
Bailey, Kathleen. (2006). Language Teacher Supervision: A Case-Based Approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Blasé, Jo. (2009). The role of Mentors of Pre-Service and In-Service Teachers. In Lawrence J. Saha and A. Gary Dworkin (Eds), Inernational Handbook
of Research on Teachers and Teaching (pp 171-182). New York:
Springer.
Brooks, Margaret. (2002). A Vygotskian Social Constructionist Perspective. Retrieved June 10, 2011 from the Wide World Werb http://www.une.au.
Carpenter, Bryce. (2009). Co-Teaching in Teaching Practicum and Student Teaching.
Retrieved July 11, 2011 from the Wide World Web
http://www.montana.edu.
Celik, Mehmet. (2008). Pre-Service EFL Reported Concerns and Stress for
Practicum in Turkey. Retreived December 11, 2011 from the world wide
web http://www.journalofeducationandscience.com.
Cheng, Eric. (2011). How Lesson Study Develops Pre-Service Teachers' Instructuonal Design Competency. Retrieved July 11, 2011 from the
world wide web
http://www.journalofresearchandreview.books.officelive.com.
Dallmer, Denise and Cynthia Baker. (2011). Collaborative Co-Teaching as Professional Development. Retrived July 11, 2011 from the world wide web http://www.americanreadingforum.com
Darling-Hammond, Linda,. (2005). Preparing Teachers for a Changing World. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.
Darling-Hammond, Linda and Gary Sykes. (1999) Teaching as the learning
profession. San Fransisco: Josey Bass.
Doval, Fatima and Montserrat Rial. (2002). EFL Initial Teacher Education for
Primary and Secondary Schools in Spain. Retrieved May 25, 2011 from
the World Wide Web http://cvc.cervantes.es.
Duke, Laura, Adam Karson, and Justin Wheeler. (2010). Do Mentoring and Induction
Programs Have Greater Benefits for Teacher who Lack Preservice Training?. Retrieved February 7, 2010 from the world wide web
http://www.princeton,edu.
Fan, Si and Thao Le. (2007). ESL Pre-Service Tachers: What do They Need?.
Retreived February 4, 2011 from the Wide World Web
http://www.aare.edu.au.
Egal, Sylvia. (2006). Preservice Teacher Mentoring and Teacher Retention.
Retreieved June 1, 2011 from the world wide web
http://www.sylviaegal.com
Fetherston, Tony. (2007). Becoming an Effective Teacher. South Melbourne: Nelson Australia Pty Unlimited.
Gagne, Robert. (1992). Principles of Instructional Design. Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jobanovich Publisher.
Gebhard, Jerry. (2009). The Practicum. In Anne Burns and Jack Richards (Eds.), The
Cambridge Guide to Second Language Teacher Education. (pp 250-258).
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gupta, Anoop (2007). Constructivism and peer collaboration in elementary
mathematics education: the connection to epistemology in Eurasia
Journal of Mathrmatics and technology Education volume 4 2008 3edition.
Implication and Applications of Sociohistorical Psychology (Pp.
349-371). Melbourne: Cambridge University Press
Hansford, Brian c., Lisa L. Ehrich, and Lee Tennent. (2004). Outcomes and
Parennial Issues in Preservice Teacher Education Mentoring Programs.
Retrieved December 1, 2010 from the world wide web
http://eprints.qut.edu.au.
Hellsten, Laurie-ann. (2009). Teacher Induction: Exploring Beginning Teacher
Mentorship. Retreieved December 10, 2010 from the world wide web
http://www.csse-scee.ca.
Hudson, Peter. (2005). Identifying Mentoring Practices for Developing Effective
Mathematics Teaching. Retrieved July 20, 2011 from the Wide World
Web http://math.unipa.it.
Hudson, Peter and Hoa Thi Mai Nguyen. (2005). What do Pre-Service Teachers
Expect from Their Mentors?. Retrieved December 6, 2010 from the Wide
World Web http://www.aare.edu.au.
Ladson-Billings, Gloria. (1999). Preparing Teachers fo Diversity: Historical
perspectives, Current Trends, and Future Direction, in "Teaching as the
Learning Profession" edt. Linda Darling-Hamond and Gary Sykes. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lang, Hellmut R. and David N. Evans. (2006). Models, Strategies, and Methods for
Effective Teaching. Boston: Pearson Education Inc.
Malderez, Anggi. (2009). Mentoring. In Anne Burns and Jack Richards (Eds.), The
Cambridge Guide to Second Language Teacher Education. (pp 259-268).
New York: Cambridge University press.
Merriam, Sharan. (1991). Case Study Research in Education. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Merrill, David M. (1992) Constructivism and instructional design. In Thomas M. Duffy and David H. Jonassen (eds.), Constructivism and the technology
of instruction (pp. 99-114).
Mousavi, Elham Sadat. (2007). Exploring Teachers Stress in Non Native and Native
Teachers of EFL. Retreived December 11, 2011 fom the world wide web
http://www.pst.mousavi.
Musthafa, Bachrudin. (1995). Asessing and Assisting Novice Teachers: A Framework
for Staff Development. Retrieved February 4, 2011 from the Wide World
Web http:// www.eric.ed.gov
Neo, Tse-Kian. (2010). Assessing the Effect of Using Gagne’s Evants of Instruction
in a Multimedia Student-Centered Environment, in “Turkish Journal of
Distance Education” January 2010 edition.
Randal, Mick and Barbara Thornton. (2001). Advising and Supporting Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richardson, Virginia. (2003). Constructivist pedagogy in Journal of Teachers Record volume 105, December 2003 edition.
Roberts, Jon. (998). Language Teacher Education. London: Arnold.
Roland, Karen and Clinton Beckford (2010). Supporting Associate Teaching and
Mentoring of Teacher Candidates: Building a Community Practice.
Retrieved April 1, 2011 from the world wide web
http://www.infonomics-society.org.
Smith, Dough. (2004). Staff-Wide Mentoring of Pre-service Teachers: Benefits and
Barriers. Retreived December 1, 2010 from the world wide web
http://www.ed.brocku.ca.
Theng, Leouw Fui. (2010). Designing a Multimedia-mediated Student-centered Learning Environment with Gagne’s Nine Events: Students’ Perception. Retrieved June 30, 2012 from the Wide World Web http://wwwirma-international.org.
Thomas, Murray. (2003). Blending Qualitative and Quantitative Research in Theses
and Dissertations. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press Inc.
Tudge, Jonathan. (1990). Vygotsky, the Zone of Proximal Development, and Peer Colaboration: Implications for Classroom Practice. In Luis Moll (Ed.),
Vygotsky and Education: Instructional Implication and Applications of Sociohistorical Psychology (Pp. 155-156). Melbourne: Cambridge
Vrasidas, Caralambos. (2000). Constructivism vs objectivism: implications for
interaction, course design, and evaluation dictance education in Journal
of Educational Telecommunications volume 6.