Presentation at Solent Learning and Teaching Community Conference

1. Click to edit Master title style
By M. Johnson, E. Budzynski-Seymour,
F. Gwynne, D. Cunliffe and P. Davies
Solent Learning and Teaching Conference (24th June 2016)
Mentoring in Sport

2. Click to edit Master title style
The Problem
• Coach Education = Increased Knowledge. But no change in Ability.
• Service learning
• Compulsory volunteering
• Mentoring
• Consistency / Inconsistency
KPIs
• Performance
• Recruitment
• Experience
• Progression
• Attendance
• Retention
• Employment

3. Click to edit Master title style
What is Mentoring?
• “Mentoring means different things with different people at different times”. (Jones et
al. 2009, 268)
Sculptor Gardener Guide Teacher
• “Mentoring is a process of guiding and leading an inexperienced individual by giving
him/her advice and explanations”. Majerič et al. (2010, 17)
• “A development tool to connect theory and practice”. McQuade and Colleagues (2015,
317)

4. Click to edit Master title style
Types of Mentor
Led by the mentor,
prescriptive in nature
and often set up by
academic staff
FORMAL /
directive / supervisory
INFORMAL / responsive
FACILITATED /
interactive
E.g. You are put on a
placement with a
mentor
Casual relaxed
relationship which
happens naturally when
mentee seeks help
E.g. You ask someone
who you respect for
help
Emerges from informal
as a structure and
agreement is added.
E.g. You ask to get
regular advice from
informal mentor
Watson, et al.(2009), Jones, et al. (2009) & Marshall, (2001)

5. Click to edit Master title style
Rationale and Aim
• Nash (2003) Yr 1 unclear mentor roles = inconsistent experiences
Yr 2 role clarity and mentor training = improved experience
• Robertson and Hubball (2005) “Mentoring was personally and professionally fulfilling and developed a
community of practice through critical discussion, collaboration, and the transfer of ideas”
• Jones, et al.(2009) “Tentative model of good practice”. But there is a need for more empirical
research
• Griffiths and Armour (2012) “Although the coach mentoring program was built on much goodwill and
enthusiasm, its design, organisation and delivery were based on little more than intuition and
anecdotal evidence”.
• McQuade et al. (2015) mentoring in sport still remains an “ill-defined activity”.
“unsatisfying, unfulfilling and unsustainable” (p.168)
Aim - To gain a deeper understanding of the mentor characteristics, qualities, roles, functions, and
practices that differentiate successful and unsuccessful; informal, facilitated and formal mentoring.

6. Click to edit Master title style
Method
• Ethical considerations
• SSU HESS ethics committee approval
• All participants were over 18 and gave informed consent
• Participants
• Convenience sampling - 39 third year University Students on coaching related courses
• 30 had had at least one mentor
• 10 participants volunteered to be interviewed (4 formal, 4 informal, 2 facilitated)
• Protocol
• Mixed method design
• Part 1a – Demographic data
• Part 1b – 7 point Likert scale to measure the success of the mentoring relationship
• Part 2 – interview (characteristics, roles, functions, practices)
• Treatment of data
• Mean scores calculated for formal, informal and facilitated mentoring relationships
• Kruskal – Wallis test for non normally distributed data and 3 x Mann Whitney Tests
• Thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006)

7. Click to edit Master title style
Quantitative Results
• A total of 61 mentor-mentee relationships
• Formal (n=28) mean success = 4.14/6 (SD 1.46)
• Informal (n=16) mean success = 5.38/6 (SD 0.72)
• Facilitated (n=17) mean success = 4.94/6 (SD (0.75)
• Kruskal-Wallis test for significant difference p = 0.006 (< 0.05)
• 3 x Mann Whitney tests
Formal Informal Facilitated
Formal
Informal P = .003
Facilitated P = .079 P = .096

8. Click to edit Master title style
Qualitative results

9. Click to edit Master title style
Conclusions
• Most successful mentor type is informal
• Mentor chosen by student
• Regular casual meetings
• Often practical and solution focused
• Least successful mentor type is formal
• A facilitated mentor may be the best solution to maximising students perception of success and
challenging growth
• Successful relationships are built on good communication, good knowledge and understanding,
supportive behaviour, desirable personality characteristics and a close relationship between mentor and
mentee.

10. Click to edit Master title style
References
• Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2). pp. 77-101.
• GRIFFITHS, M. & ARMOUR, K. (2012) Mentoring as a Formalized Learning Strategy with Community Sports Volunteers, Mentoring & Tutoring:
Partnership in Learning, 20:1, 151-173
• JONES R. L., HARRIS, R. & MILES, A. (2009) Mentoring in sports coaching: a review of the literature, Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy,
14:3, 267-284
• MAJERIČ, M., STREL, J., & KOVAČ, M. (2010). Analysis Of Motives For Mentoring Students In Practical Pedagogical Training. Gymnica, 40(2),
17-25.
• MARSHALL, D. (2001) Mentoring as a developmental tool for women coaches. Canadian Journal for Women in Coaching 2, no. 2: 1– 10.
• MCQUADE, S., DAVIS, L., & NASH, C. (2015). Positioning Mentoring as a Coach Development Tool: Recommendations for Future Practice and
Research. Quest (00336297), 67(3), 317-329.
• NASH, C. (2003) Development of a Mentoring System within Coaching Practice. Journal Of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education
2(2), 39-47.
• NASH, C., & MCQUADE, S. (2014) Mentoring as a coach development tool (pp. 206–222). In Practical sport coaching. Edinburgh, England:
Routledge.
• ROBERTSON, S. & HUBBALL, H. (2005) Coach-to-Coach Mentoring: Raising The Bar, Strategies, 18:5, 6-10
• WATSON, J. C., CLEMENT, D., BLOM, L. C., & GRINDLEY, E. (2009). Mentoring: Processes and Perceptions of Sport and Exercise Psychology
Graduate Students. Journal Of Applied Sport Psychology, 21(2), 231-246.