Conference Agenda

Mentoring trainee teachers is a complex, relational practice that draws on a repertoire of knowledge, skills and dispositions that are distinct from classroom teaching (Gardiner & Weisling, 2018). In England, the mentoring role has been part of teacher education since the early 1990s (Hobson et al., 2009), although recent government reforms (Department for Education, 2022), implemented from September 2024, have intensified its prominence. These reforms place renewed emphasis on the responsibilities, training, and leadership of school-based mentors, highlighting their central role in high quality teacher development and retention. These reforms make timely a closer examination of how mentoring is enacted at the point where trainees and school mentors first come together, their initial meeting, and how trainees experience the structures intended to support it.

At a European level, the European Commission’s report Supporting Teacher Educators for Better Learning Outcomes (2013) argued that mentoring and teacher‑educator work are a specialised professional practice. The report notes that rather than being treated as an extension of teaching, mentoring trainee teachers requires explicit competency frameworks, coherent preparation and continuous development. More recently, the Eurydice report Teaching Careers in Europe: Access, Progression and Support (2018) shows that across many European systems, mentoring and induction are regulated features of teacher training and early‑career support, with increasing clarity around mentor roles and the structure of mentor–mentee conversations. Framing the English reforms against this European backdrop positions them as part of a broader trend towards the professionalisation and standardisation of mentoring.

From a broader international perspective, the OECD’s TALIS survey (2024) found that mentoring of trainee and new teachers is expanding, is better recognised, and is increasingly embedded in policy frameworks. There appears to be a shift towards mentoring as an integrated, systemic support mechanism.

This study builds on previous work by the co-investigators (Connolly, Bates & Shea, 2022), which developed a set of questions to guide the mentor–trainee “initial encounter” on a postgraduate programme. Extending that work, the present research explores the use of the same questions in an undergraduate initial teacher training context at ARU, shifting the analytic lens to the perspectives of trainee teachers. By focusing on trainees’ experiences of their first meeting with school mentors, the study addresses a notable gap in the literature, which more commonly focuses on the mentor’s practice and programme design rather than trainees’ perspectives.

The contribution is twofold. Firstly, it examines whether a structured conversational tool helps trainees to articulate goals, negotiate roles and establish productive routines with their mentor. Secondly, considering the global emphasis on teacher retention and wellbeing (OECD, 2024), it investigates whether early, structured mentor–trainee dialogue can enhance trainees’ sense of support and professional agency at a formative moment in their preparation.

The study pursues two objectives:

1. to examine trainee teacher perspectives on their initial meeting with school mentors; and
2. to explore the use of a structured set of questions to support the initial meeting between trainee teachers and their mentors.

Reflection is widely recognized as a key component of teacher development and professional growth in higher education (Gast et al., 2022; Krapivnyk et al., 2021). Reflective teachers often critically evaluate both traditional disciplinary approaches and their personal teaching practices, aiming to enhance them through pedagogical theories (Nevgi & Löfström, 2015). In teacher education, reflection is typically integrated into teaching practicum, yet it frequently remains at a descriptive level, lacking theoretical depth or critical analysis (El-Dib, 2007; Korthagen & Vasalos, 2005).

Despite the acknowledged importance of reflection, concrete and systematic methods for fostering deep pedagogical reflection remain scarce in university pedagogy. Research shows that reflective practice requires conscious effort and structured support, particularly in connecting reflection to one’s own teaching (Nguyen et al., 2014). Schön’s (1983) concepts of reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action further highlight that reflection may occur both during and after pedagogical experiences.

To address this gap, we have developed the PAKER method (Pedagogisen Ajattelun KEhittymisen Reflektio), a structured model for supporting Reflection on the Development of Pedagogical Thinking during teaching practice (Lähdesmäki et al., 2025). This study investigates how university teachers describe the development of their pedagogical thinking as they engage in the guided phases of the PAKER method.

The theoretical foundation of PAKER combines perspectives from authentic learning (Lähdesmäki, 2021) and a four-level reflection model (Kostiainen et al., 2023). Authentic learning emphasizes real-life contexts, disciplinary relevance, social interaction, cognitive engagement, and pedagogical coherence. Within the practicum, the aim is to create a reflective space where the teacher’s own practice serves as the basis for learning, shifting the focus from task completion to learning as a process (Harris & Salinas, 2009; Herrington & Herrington, 2008).

Kostiainen et al. (2023) model outlines reflection as a process progressing through four phases: descriptive, relational, conceptual and meaningful, and critical reflection. PAKER integrates this model into a three-phase structure: orienting, active, and synthesising reflection (Lähdesmäki et al., 2025). These phases guide teacher students in deepening their reflective skills and awareness throughout the practicum experience.

Although teachers’ reflective attitudes often develop during pedagogical studies, prior research suggests that reflection tends to focus on external factors and remains surface-level (El-Dib, 2007; Korthagen, 2004). In contrast, deeper reflection supports the recognition of both strengths and developmental needs in teaching (Gast et al., 2022) and contributes to the growth of pedagogical thinking as a form of professional expertise (Segal, 2023; Postareff et al., 2008).

In the university context, pedagogical thinking becomes visible in various professional tasks, including course design, facilitation of learning, assessment, and curriculum-level development (Van Dijk et al., 2020). It also extends to pedagogical leadership and programme planning. Thus, supporting teachers in articulating and developing their pedagogical thinking is essential for enhancing their professional practice holistically.

This study investigates how university teachers articulate the development of their pedagogical thinking across the three reflective phases of the PAKER method: orienting, active, and synthesising. Specifically, the study seeks to answer the following questions:

1. How do teachers describe the development of their pedagogical thinking during each phase of the PAKER reflection process?
2. What levels of reflection:descriptive, relational, conceptual and meaningful, or critical (Kostiainen et al., 2023), are present in their written reflections, and how are these demonstrated in practicum documentation?

By addressing these questions, the study aims to provide deeper insight into the progression of pedagogical thinking and the diversity and depth of reflective skills among university teachers in authentic learning environments.

This study explores how participation in a guided action research process can support teachers’ professional development and strengthen their reflective and pedagogical capacities. While action research has long been recognised as a promising approach for fostering teacher agency, inquiry‑orientation, and practice‑based learning, less is known about how teachers experience such processes when they are intentionally scaffolded by a researcher and embedded in their everyday school context. This study contributes to this discussion by examining teachers’ reflections on their learning and professional growth during a structured, collaborative action research project.

The research was carried out with Romanian teachers (N=15) who engaged in an action research cycle focusing on pedagogical challenges identified in their own classrooms. The process included joint planning, classroom experimentation, reflective dialogue, and iterative refinement of teaching practices. Continuing support was offered during the process by a university lecturer. Data consist of written reflections and recorded discussions. A qualitative thematic analysis was used to identify how teachers described changes in their thinking, practices, and sense of professional agency.

Preliminary findings suggest that guided action research can function as a meaningful and empowering form of professional development. Teachers reported gaining greater confidence in analysing their own practice, a clearer understanding of how theory can inform everyday pedagogical decisions, and an increased willingness to experiment with new approaches. The structured support (the combination of collaborative reflection and external guidance) was experienced as both motivating and professionally safe, enabling teachers to engage deeply with their own learning.

The study argues that guided action research holds considerable potential as a professional development method, especially in contexts where teachers may have limited opportunities for collaborative inquiry or structured reflection. The findings indicate that when appropriately supported, action research can foster practice‑embedded learning, strengthen professional identity, and promote a culture of inquiry within schools. The paper concludes by discussing the conditions under which this method may be recommended as a scalable and sustainable approach to teacher development.

Mentoring and professional collaboration are widely recognised as essential components of teacher induction, particularly for Newly Qualified Teachers (NQTs) who lack classroom experience or are new to a school system (Ganser et al., 1998; Sundli, 2007). The first year of teaching is often described as the most demanding stage of a teacher’s career, as NQTs commonly encounter challenges in lesson planning, classroom management, differentiation, and assessment (Kadyrova, 2017). When such challenges are not addressed through structured professional support, early-career teachers may experience stress, psychological strain, and emotional exhaustion, which can contribute to reduced self-efficacy and even teacher attrition (Sanders, 2005).

In Kazakhstan, mentoring programmes are formally implemented across public schools, and newly appointed or newly hired teachers are typically assigned an experienced mentor through administrative procedures (Koroleva, 2017). Mentors are expected to support NQTs’ adaptation, methodological development, and professional growth. However, mentoring is not always implemented systematically or consistently across school contexts. In some cases, mentoring remains largely a formal requirement rather than a sustained learning partnership, which may limit its effectiveness as a mechanism for professional development (Levterova, 2017). This gap highlights the need to conceptualise mentoring not only as practical guidance but as a structured developmental process that empowers NQTs to learn through inquiry and reflection.

A structured school-based mentoring model can support NQTs by providing purposeful professional dialogue, regular observation and feedback, and collaborative planning opportunities. Research suggests that mentoring contributes most effectively to induction outcomes when it is embedded within a supportive school culture and implemented through clear structures that promote collaboration and mutual learning (Shanks, 2005). Importantly, mentoring is not only a national priority in Kazakhstan but also part of broader international educational trends aimed at strengthening teacher retention, professional learning, and instructional quality. European approaches increasingly promote “educative mentoring,” where mentoring is grounded in reflective practice, professional dialogue, and early-career teachers’ personal and professional development (Da Rocha, 2014).

Against this background, the present study addresses two research questions: 1) How can a school-based mentoring system improve NQTs’ practitioner research skills? 2) How can creating a mentoring environment enhance the professional development of newly qualified secondary school teachers? The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of implementing a school-based mentoring system and developing a supportive mentoring environment in enhancing the teaching practice of newly qualified secondary school teachers. More specifically, the study investigates whether these mentoring approaches can significantly strengthen NQTs’ practitioner research skills and thereby contribute to their sustained professional development.

Within this framework, mentoring can serve as a foundation for developing NQTs’ practitioner research competence, including identifying classroom problems, collecting evidence from practice, engaging in systematic reflection, and applying findings to improve teaching. The theoretical framing of this study draws on scaffolding, which conceptualises mentoring as structured support enabling novice teachers to accomplish professional tasks beyond their independent capacity, and andragogy, which emphasises that adult learning is self-directed, experience-based, and problem-oriented.

Overall, mentoring is positioned as a key mechanism for strengthening NQTs’ inquiry-oriented professionalism, resilience, and long-term commitment to the teaching profession.