Framing the Issue 

The field of early intervention is rapidly growing and changing, making the need for current information and training an
ongoing process. As states develop an effective personnel development system to meet the training needs of entering or
current early intervention personnel, a system that provides a range of training options is essential. Large-scale inservice and
conference formats can be effective approaches for imparting new information and developing knowledge at an awareness
level. Such formats are less effective for imparting how-to skills and achieving competence in service delivery practices.

Historically, mentor programs have been used for a variety of purposes in a variety of environments. Although mentor
programs differ in many ways, they generally agree on the nature of the relationship between mentors and protégés, and on
the qualities ascribed to each role. The mentor does not supervise the protégé, but rather coaches and guides. Mentors are
skilled in their craft, creative in problem solving, able to reflect upon their practice, flexible in relating to other adults, and
receptive to learning new information. Protégés are committed to their own growth and development, and willing to learn new
skills and reflect upon their practice.

Mentoring as a personnel development process is a viable means of providing individualized, targeted skill development for
early intervention providers. Here the term mentoring is used to describe a partnership that fosters reciprocal learning and
sharing for mutual benefits in professional growth and development for both the mentor and protégé. Mentoring is a
one-to-one interactive process of guided learning. Mentors contribute their knowledge, proficiency, and experience to assist
protégés who are working toward the achievement of their own learning objectives. 

Mentoring programs can be structured in a variety of ways, depending on where participants work (centers, family child care
home, etc); at the mentor's or protégé 's place of work, or some combination; and whether an outside mentoring course or
seminar takes place before or during the mentoring experience. Although they may vary in structure, regulation, and sources
of funds, all mentoring programs should be:

         1.responsive to the needs of those they serve, and grounded in research on adult learning; 

         2.supportive in nature, rather than linked to formal evaluation processes;

         3.forums for improving collegial connections between mentors, protégés, employers, and trainers;

         4.learning systems that examine themselves, improve how they function, and contribute to the collective health and
              development of the early intervention service system.

Mentoring as used in four states -- Illinois, Massachusetts, North Carolina, and Utah -- has been examined and is described.
Table 1 summarizes the four states' programs. The strategies and formats used in these fours states may be helpful to other
states as they consider inservice personnel development approaches.

Developed with funding from the Office of Educational Research and
Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, under Contract No. RR93002001.
Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the position or policies of
OERI or the Department. Digests may be freely reproduced.

downloaded at www.schoolhousedoor.com