Supporting early-career teachers with external mentoring: a scoping review

ABSTRACT

This article presents a scoping review addressing the pressing issue of high attrition rates among early-areer teachers (ECTs), which poses a significant challenge to the development of a robust teacher workforce and student outcomes. Focusing on the role of external mentoring programmes, our study explores their potential in retaining ECTs within the teaching profession. Through a scoping review of the literature, we identified three central themes: (a) defining the role of external mentors, (b) elucidating the benefits of external mentoring and (c) examining the impact of external mentoring on ECT identity development. Our analysis revealed a scarcity of programmes emphasising university–school partnerships. Consequently, we propose the implementation of an ECT mentoring initiative involving university mentors collaborating with ECTs in their respective school environments. This study contributes significantly to the field of teacher education by shedding light on effective strategies for ECT induction and the transformative role of mentoring in cultivating ECTs as proficient educators capable of autonomous decision-making, networking, and enhancing overall teaching quality within schools.

KEYWORDS:

• External mentoring
• early career teachers
• university mentoring
• scoping review

Introduction

This article examines external mentoring programmes between schools and universities as a strategy for inducting, supporting, and retaining early-career teachers (ECTs) in the teaching profession. External mentoring refers to supports provided by mentors who are not working at the school and it can be formal or informal (Lynn & Nguyen, 2020). Policy makers in Australia and internationally are focussed on seeking to support the retention of ECTs in the profession in the context of world-wide teacher shortages (Mayer et al., 2017; Van den Borre et al., 2021). In this context, there has been renewed interest in the design and effectiveness of external mentoring programmes (Wyatt-Smith et al., 2022). The impetus for this investigation arose within a partnership between a university in New South Wales, Australia and a local secondary school. Our partner school identified the need to provide support for graduates from our university who are employed in their first teaching role. A mentoring programme was proposed in which university academics design and implement a programme of support for these ECTs. Our motivation for undertaking the scoping review reported in this article was to illuminate the character of different forms of mentoring programmes and to understand in greater depth the qualities of effective external mentoring programmes to inform our efforts in designing and implementing an appropriate university–school mentoring partnership. The scoping review focussed on analysing literature that addresses the design and character of effective approaches to external mentoring of ECTs in schools. Following a brief outline of the background to this study, a literature review then explores the character and effectiveness of different types of mentoring programmes designed to support ECTs. We then describe the aims, methods, and scope of the scoping review undertaken. An account of the findings of the scoping review is then presented.

Background to the study

Most challenging time in ECTs’ teaching careers is the early transition phase from a graduate teacher to a proficient teacher (Kelchtermans, 2017). Sullivan et al. (2019) note that combination of fewer teachers entering the profession, high levels of teacher turnover, and unprecedented demands for teachers in the current international and Australian contexts contribute to the difficulties schools have in retaining teachers newer to the profession. Aarts et al. (2020) examined the concerns of first-year and second-year teachers about teaching. They found that the concerns of first-year ECTs included workload, teaching, and classroom management. The concerns of the second year ECTs included their role as a teacher, school organisation, and overload of non-teaching tasks. According to Dupriez et al. (2015), these factors likely contribute to the high proportion of teachers leaving the profession in the first 5 years of commencing their careers in a range of international contexts. Similarly, in a study of data and research on teacher attrition in Australia, Weldon (2018) found that it is within 5 years of entering teaching that ECTs leave the profession. It follows that during the early stages of their careers, it is crucial to provide support to ECTs. One type of support that can be implemented to prevent early teacher attrition and increase retention is mentoring (Colognesi et al., 2019).

To address issues of ECT retention, the Australian Guidelines for Teacher Induction into the Profession (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership, 2023), recognise teacher induction as the crucial first step during the transition stage from a graduate teacher to a proficient level. Ingersoll (2012) states it is widely accepted that induction (introducing an ECT into a school and its specific culture) and mentoring programmes for new teachers are a crucial component of ECT developing into quality teachers. In Australia, Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (2023) recommends that ECTs are engaged in induction programmes which recognise the value of mentoring as a facet of supporting the transition of teachers from graduate to proficient career stage. Mentoring programmes that are ‘practice focussed’ are considered to be effective strategies that support ECTs in areas such as pedagogical practice, classroom management, and managing their workload (Achinstein & Villar, 2004). However, despite the acknowledgement of the importance of mentoring and its focus on relationships, the optimum approach to mentoring ECTs is difficult to determine. In the following scoping review of literature, we examine the character and design of internal and external mentoring programmes and factors shaping the effectiveness of these different approaches to supporting ECTs in schools.

Literature review

Forms of mentoring programmes

In general terms, mentoring designed to support ECTs takes the form of internal and external programmes. With no consensus as to what constitutes best practice in each form, each type of mentoring arises within and is shaped by contextual factors (Kemmis et al., 2014; Mullen & Klimaitis, 2021). In a study of mentoring programmes in Australia, Sweden, and Finland, Kemmis et al. (2014) identified three different forms of internal mentoring. This study was framed in terms of how mentoring programmes were structured according to practice architectures. Practice architectures are the sayings, doings and relatings that participants engage within communities of practice. The work of Kemmis et al. (2014) is helpful in identifying the various forms of internal mentoring programmes and their strengths and limitations. The first, mentoring as supervision, is common in Australia and refers to being supported by a more experienced colleague or principal. In our experience, the ECT enacts the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership, 2024) and collects evidence of their quality teaching practice. The mentor observes the mentee’s teaching practice, assesses their portfolio of evidence, and meets with the ECT, where they both engage in professional reflection. The mentor must also report on the mentee’s performance to the state teacher registration body. The resulting imbalance of power in the relationship is more supervision and less mentoring.

The second type, internal mentoring as support, has been prevalent in Sweden for the last 40 years (Kemmis et al., 2014). This type of internal mentoring involves supporting the ECT on the job, through observations while the ECT is teaching, reflections, and guidance where appropriate. The mentee collects evidence about their practice and reflects both individually and with the mentor. There is a focus on well-being, professional development and classroom management. The aim of this type of mentoring is to support the development of the mentee as a teacher, a participant in the workplace, and a member of the profession.

Mentoring as collaborative self-development within the school context has become the most common form of mentoring in Finland (Kemmis et al., 2014). Conducted through various collaborative strategies such as peer mentoring, the aim of these programmes is to support the ECT in becoming a member of the professional community where members are equals and develop individual and collective identities. The results of Kemmis et al.’s study demonstrate there is little agreement or right way to understand and implement mentoring but the authors suggest that educational leaders take the context and the needs of the ECTs into consideration when designing mentoring programmes that are effective. Common to these examples of internal mentoring programmes is the prioritisation of social relationships through which ECTs develop their identity as teachers through the things they say, do and enact with mentors.

Factors shaping the effectiveness of internal mentoring programmes

Judgemental and evaluative forms of support provided to mentees are factors that shape the effectiveness of mentoring programmes. Colognesi et al. (2019) found when ECTs were mentored by the school principal, consisting of a class visit and a performance interview (mentoring as supervision), five out of six ECTs did not perceive mentoring as a positively developing opportunity but rather felt judged during the performance interview. Colognesi et al. (2019) also reported that when the ECTs were mentored by a more experienced colleague, the support was perceived as evaluative, and thus more positive, because it was associated with practical day-to-day issues rather than a judgement of their performance. Interestingly, when ECTs did require help, asking the more experienced colleague for help was rare and they much more preferred to approach a colleague that happened to be nearby. Hobson and Malderez (2013) found that in a study of 47 mentees the largest downfall of school-based mentoring was judgemental mentoring, where mentoring was linked to school performance or teacher appraisal process. They found this to be an impediment to the professional learning and wellbeing of ECTs. Further Hobson and McIntyre (2013) reported that 42 of the 47 participants used a technique known as teacher fabrication, to prevent colleagues from knowing their limitations and areas of weaknesses as a teacher. They identified two main types, fabrication as strategic silence and fabrication as strategic avoidance. Fabrication as strategic silence referred to the ECTs being silent and not wanting to be honest about any difficulties they were experiencing with their formal or informal school-based mentors. Fabrication as strategic avoidance referred to the ECTs avoiding any form of interaction with their formal or informal school-based mentors to avoid drawing attention of their weaknesses. The results of this study suggest that the appointment of school-based mentors limits ECTs’ development, a finding suggesting that the appointment of an external mentor, such as a university lecturer mentor, may more effectively extend ECTs’ development.

External mentoring programmes

Bernay et al. (2020) reviewed three partnership models to determine necessary elements for successful partnerships with partners such as university lecturers. Model A was the traditional model, where the role of the university lecturer was to teach the theory and the student to observe and imitate their supervising teacher at their assigned school. Model B involved professional community professionals, such as university lecturers, working with the school and the ECT. Model C consisted of a ‘transformational learning community’ (Bernay, 2020, p. 305), where new strategies would be developed to prepare the new learners to support their future by focusing on changing only the school but the community as well. Out of the three models, the Model B was considered by the researchers in this study to be the most ‘realistic description’ (Bernay, 2020, p. 305) to implement as it consisted of key components that are essential to promoting ‘adaptive expertise’ (Bernay, 2020, p. 305) as a consequence of engaging in a professional learning community with other teachers, their peers and university mentors.

In conclusion, the diverse landscape of mentoring programmes for ECTs encompasses various internal and external approaches, each shaped by contextual factors and yielding distinct strengths and limitations. One of the major limitations that affect the effectiveness of internal mentoring is that these relationships are often judgemental and evaluative. In contrast, external mentoring programmes, in particular those involving professional community professionals, such as university lecturers present additional possibilities. The review of partnership models reveals that engaging with external mentors, particularly university lecturers, can offer a transformative learning experience. The current study is focused on external mentoring, as that was the desired focus of the mentoring partnership between the researchers and the partner school.

Aim

The aim of this study was to determine the scope of the current literature relating to external mentors as supports for ECTs. Specifically, the review was designed to examine the benefits of external mentoring for ECTs, identifying a perceived gap in the literature.

Identifying the research questions

This review was guided by three research questions:

1. How are external mentors conceptualised in the literature?

2. Are external mentors beneficial to the professional learning and development for ECTs? Why or why not?

3. What are the barriers and enablers that impact the effectiveness of external mentoring?

Methods

The authors determined that a scoping review would be the most appropriate strategy to meet the aims of the study and answer the research questions. Arksey and O’Malley (2005) suggested that there are four reasons to conduct scoping reviews. First, scoping reviews are undertaken to investigate the extent and type of research literature. This reason is well aligned with the aims of our study, as we were trying to determine the character of existing effective programmes in the research literature in order to guide our own programme. Second, they are used to examine whether a systematic review is necessary. This was true of our study, as we conducted the scoping review to determine whether or not we needed a more extensive review. Third, they are used to summarise and disseminate the research findings, as we are doing here, in the hopes that it will be helpful in informing future mentoring programmes. Finally, scoping reviews are conducted to identify paucity in research. We aimed to identify gaps in the existing external mentoring literature to inform our own study.

A scoping review was conducted using the Arksey and O’Malley’s (2005) five-stage framework: (1) identifying the research question, (2) identifying relevant studies, (3) study selection, (4) charting the data, and (5) collating, summarising, and reporting the results. The stages are described in detail below.

Identifying relevant studies

In order to identify studies relevant to the research aims, an initial search commenced in November 2023 in three electronic data bases: Google Scholar, ERIC, and Psychinfo. These databases were selected, as they cover literature in the education context. The search consisted of terms used in the literature to describe external mentoring programmes and participants. They included: early-career teacher* OR novice teacher* OR inexperienced teacher* OR first-year teacher* AND external mentor* OR lecturer mentor* OR university mentor*. This search yielded a list of 63 relevant publications.

Study selection

Eligibility criteria

A two-stage screening process was used to examine the relevance of literature found in the search. In order to be included in the review, publications had to be current (in the last 10 years), peer reviewed, written in English, and disseminating studies that examined ECTs receiving support by a university mentor or some other type of external mentor. Publications that were not written in English, not peer-reviewed, and that examined school-based mentors were excluded. Publications that were older than 10 years were also excluded on the grounds that results needed to align with policy imperatives over the past decade that have re-prioritised the need for ECT induction and mentoring given concerns about retaining new teachers in the profession (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership, 2016, 2023; Centre for Educational Statistics and Evaluation [CESE], 2017; Commonwealth Department of Education, 2023).

Relevance screening

The first level of screening involved reviewing the abstracts of each publication to determine whether they met the minimum inclusion criteria. An abstract screening excel spreadsheet was used to evaluate reviewer agreement. The abstract of each publication was independently examined and screened by the first and third author. Any disagreements were resolved through discussion with the second author. This resulted in the elimination of 52 articles. The second level of screening was conducted in the same manner as the first, with the third and first authors conducting independent examinations, but of the entire body of each of the nine remaining publications. Disagreements were again resolved through discussion with the second author. This screening eliminated three more articles, due to their lack of meeting the criteria of being a study focused on external mentoring for ECTs, leaving six that met the inclusion criteria for analysis. Based on Arksey and O’Malley’s (2005) purposes of a scoping review, the small number of publications (nine) that met the criteria and were therefore retained, indicated that the scoping review was sufficient and there was no need for a systematic review.

Charting the data

The remaining publications were then charted according to the fourth step of Arksey and O’Malley’s (2005) framework. A table was created with the following headings: author, participants, location, purpose method, and mentor type. The following results section details step five: collating, summarising, and reporting the results based on the research question.

Results

Data summary and synthesis

The data was collated in a single excel file. The details of each publication included the author/s, type of study, participants, location, research method, type of mentor and their role and purpose of the study. The six selected publications were published between 2013 and 2021; three studies were conducted in England, and one each in New Zealand, the United States of America, and Wales. None of the selected studies were conducted in Australia, the context from which this review was conducted and framed. Interestingly, as it was not a criterion of the current scoping review, all of the retained publications employed a qualitative approach to conduct research and focused on the impact of external mentors on ECTs. All but two of the studies involved external mentors mentoring ECTs. Although the studies reported in Bernay (2020) and Cavendish et al. (2021) involved university mentors and preservice teachers, they were included because the university mentors were not acting in an evaluative role, as is typical. See Table 1 for details of the studies.

Table 1. Details of included studies.

Authors	Participants	Location	Purpose	Method	Mentor
Bernay (2020)	Author	New Zealand	To trial a range of strategies for enhancing school/university partnerships to support student teachers’ confidence to meet the needs of diverse learners as preparation for their first year of teaching.	Practitioner-based research model	University Mentor, deputy principal from the school, and teachers hosting the student teachers
Cameron and Grant (2017)	18 teachers, 88 Early career physics teachers	England	To explore ways external specific mentoring can influence the development of professional identity construction of early career physics teachers.	Qualitative Interviews	External mentor: subject (physics) specialist and teachers who were non-school based
Cavendish et al. (2021)	11 supervising teachers, 9 preservice teachers	USA	To examine the mentoring component of the teacher preparation program restructuring project (Project INCLUDE) by looking at the perceptions of pre-service and clinical teachers of non-evaluative mentor supports	Qualitative Interviews	University graduate student teachers
Daly and Milton (2017)	70 external mentors	Wales	To report on the learning and development of external mentors during the first year of their deployment to support ECTs enrolled in a Masters of Educational Practice program	Qualitative focus group interviews	External mentors who were members of a nation-wide network of experienced teachers and employed outside of their mentee’s schools.
Hobson and McIntyre (2013)	47 mentees, 19 mentors	England	To explore existing knowledge of mentoring components of three support programs for teachers of science; to produce detailed insights into the lived experiences of participants who had access to or were providing external mentor support and to examine the extent to which the emergent findings were also evident in relation to a national sample of primary and secondary teachers of all subjects	Qualitative Interviews	External mentors: experienced teachers not based in the same school
Manderstedt et al. (2023)	4 preservice teachers, 4 teacher co-mentors, 4 University mentors		To examine power aspects within triadic mentoring in teacher education in Sweden.	Qualitative; Critical Discourse Analysis	External mentors, university-based and professional teachers.
McIntyre and Hobson (2016)	28 beginning teachers, 13 mentors, 4 external mentors, 6 PEP participants	England	To examine the identity development of beginning physics teachers. Only some received mentoring	Structured interview, case study data, and third space theory	External mentors: experienced, subject specialist teachers who were not based in the same schools as the teachers they were supporting
Snook (2021)	Wales	16 early career teachers, 6 external mentors, 9 academic tutors	To examine the perceptions of early career teachers, external mentors, and academic tutors.	Qualitative Inquiry Project	External mentors: experienced schoolteachers and academic tutors
Wetzel et al. (2023)	USA	7 external/teacher leaders (TLs)	To understand the collectively constructed understandings of systemic inequities faced by ECTs through conversations with mentors.	Qualitative	External mentor

Descriptive overview

The study examined how external mentors are conceptualised in the literature, as well as determining what benefits of and barriers to external mentoring exist. In broad terms, a gap in the literature on external mentoring where university–school external mentoring programmes are a feature was identified. Despite government initial teacher accreditation mandates for university–school partnerships in Australia, mentoring programmes of this kind are rare (Betlem et al., 2019). The logistics of brokering and sustaining such programmes is complex, as is the prospect of sustaining long-term commitments between universities, their graduates, and schools (Bradbury and Acquaro, 2022). In international contexts, the financial support alone required to cover the human resources for university academics and ECTs to participate in external mentoring programmes during working hours over sustained periods of time represents further challenges (Daly & Milton, 2017). Similarly, Milton et al. (2022) examined the demise of a large-scale mentoring programme (Snook, 2021), to find that unless schools are ready to function as learning communities, the development of a community of practice focussed on ECTs is likely unsustainable. These factors help understand the precarious nature of university–school external mentoring programmes and the rarity of research in this area internationally and in Australian contexts specifically.

More specifically, the selected articles were analysed deductively, using the research questions. Therefore, the results are reported according to: (a) conceptualisation of external mentor, (b) benefits of external mentoring, and (c) factors that make external mentoring effective. Table 2 provides details of the results of this analysis.

Table 2. Results organised by theme.

Authors	Conceptualisation of External Mentor	Benefits of External Mentoring	Components of Effective External Mentoring
Bernay (2020)	University lecturer that is just one member of a professional community, including school-based mentors mentoring preservice teachers	Provides an overlap between university and school, breaking down the separation between the two Provides a professional community Student teachers feel more confident in their abilities as educators	Flexibility and adaptability Unique partnerships tailored to student teachers’ needs Trust
Cameron and Grant (2017)	External subject-specific mentors who are current or former teachers mentoring ECTs	Supports the emergence of ECTs’ professional identities Increases ECTs’ confidence/efficacy Positive impact in teacher retention Developed ECTs’ enthusiasm for teaching Provided ECTs with a link to the professional community	Meeting in person Responding to ECT requests quickly Demonstrate/ provide teaching ideas Raise awareness about resources Model based around a hierarchy needs that includes internal and external support Sustained over time (three years)
Cavendish et al. (2021)	University-based graduate students (former teachers) implementing non-evaluative mentoring for preservice teachers, with a university Professor providing support to both groups	Develops a community of practice for ECTs Positive reinforcement builds confidence Career preparation advice	Continuity between university teacher prep and classroom Clarify roles and expectations from the beginning Mutual trust and respect Mentors coming on site regularly (fortnightly) Sustained over time
Daly and Milton (2017)	External mentor as experienced teacher from another educational context	Development of a professional learning community Reconceptualisation of professional learning Agentive mutuality Conflicted relations with knowledge base	Recognition of the complexity of mentoring relationships and contexts The need to develop principes for mentoring to support teachers to embrace uncertainty The need for robust recruitment processes for external mentors
Hobson and McIntyre (2013)	External mentoring by experienced subject specific teachers not based in the same schools as ECTs, but where the interactions may take place within and/or outside of ECTs’ schools and may be face-to-face and/or remote.	Reduces fabrication, develops community of practice, greater familiarity with and ability to use equipment, improves subject knowledge, increased confidence, and reduced anxiety and stress.	Trust and honesty, sustained over time, non-evaluative/judgemental. Observations only at the requests of ECTs. Support subject knowledge and pedagogy (classroom management).
Manderstedt et al. (2023)	Joint external mentoring by experienced subject specific teachers not based in the same schools as ECTs and university-based mentors. Each ECT had one of each kind of mentor.	Seeing the perspectives of others, gaining teaching ideas for each other, gives ECTs an opportunity to recognise and experience the value of the profession.	The triad model of mentoring was a major component of effective mentoring, as was the creation of a third space, relationship building, symmetrical and complimentary relationships.
McIntyre and Hobson (2016)	External mentoring by experienced subject specific teachers not based in the same schools as ECTs, but where the interactions may take place within and/or outside of ECTs’ schools and may be face-to-face and/or remote.	Enhanced ECTs’ professional learning Supported the emergence of ECTs’ professional identities Increased subject and pedagogical knowledge Improvements in teaching and learning Positive effect on wellbeing and confidence Enhanced recognition and career advancement	Nonjudgemental support (third space) Support subject knowledge and pedagogy (classroom management) Support development of wellbeing, confidence, resilience.
Snook (2021)	External mentors were retired headteachers, teachers, senior leaders, teacher educators and independent educational consultants	Supported the emergence of ECTs’ professional identities. Improved ECTs’ ability to explore difficult conversations ECTs were more confident and empowered Increased levels of agency for ECTs ECTs developed a greater understanding of their students’ needs Attainment of Master’s degree Increased capacity skillset in teaching and learning	Sustained over time (3 years) Part of an inquiry based MTeach (government mandated) External mentors worked through a suite of theoretical content with ECTs ECTs supported through cycles of informal action research (teacher inquiry) Engagement through blended learning collaborative face-to-face and day long professional learning sessions with other ECTs, mentors, and an academic team
Wetzel et al. (2023)	Teacher Leaders (TL) who were former classroom teachers in the district, others external consultants, and instructional coaches.	TLs foregrounded inequities for the ECTs, and collectively highlighted and brainstormed responses to the inequities.	The provision of just-in-time support based on the needs of ECTs and their campuses through mentoring, coaching, and professional development.

Conceptualisation of external mentor

An external mentor was typically defined in all nine of the selected publications as a mentor who was not based in the same school as the ECT. There was variance found with the external mentor’s primary occupation. In some studies, external mentors were university-based lecturers (Bernay, 2020; Daly & Milton, 2017). In others, external mentors were more experienced school teachers (Hobson & McIntyre, 2013), such as retired teachers or headteachers, senior leaders, teacher educators, and independent educational consultants (Daly & Milton, 2017; Snook, 2021; Wetzel et al., 2023). In McIntyre and Hobson’s (2016) study, external mentors were experienced teachers who specialised in the same subject as ECTs.

The benefits of external mentoring

Most of the publications (5/9) contained discussions on the benefits of external mentoring. This provided evidence of the potential importance of external mentors to ECTs

Communities of practice and identity

Cameron and Grant (2017) reported external mentors acted as a ‘lifeline’ (p. 134) for supporting ECTs. In their study, they found the urgent needs of ECTs were more associated with general support, rather than specifics related to teaching in their specialisation, physics. However, ECTs who were the only teacher in their specialisation in their school were at risk of professional isolation because they were not part of a specialised community of practice (learning network connecting teachers to their subject area peers). Hobson and McIntyre (2013) found that the mentoring relationship with external mentors provided the necessary community of practice for the ECTs and encouraged ECTs to join the broader science education community.

Manderstedt et al. (2023) discovered the benefit of a tridactic mentoring arrangement, where the triad comprised a pre-service teacher, a professional teacher acting as co-mentor, and a university mentor. All triad members spoke of the benefits of this type of mentoring, particularly around the idea that they now had a mutually benefical community of practice, where they were sharing ideas and problem solving together. This arrangement also allowed the ECT to position themselves as part of both the university culture and the profession.

Hobson and McIntyre (2013) reported 42 out of the 47 ECTs expressed that external mentoring had a positive impact on their professional practice. Hobson and McIntyre (2013) identified external mentors as an antidote to help compensate for the negative effects of teacher fabrication. The ECTs expressed they felt able to be more open and honest about their weaknesses and limitations with their external mentors than they were with school-based informal and formal mentors. This finding suggests that external mentors may be better suited to support ECTs’ needs by providing support themselves or by facilitating access to other external mentors outside of their schools.

External mentoring was an important factor of identity development for ECTs. Cameron and Grant (2017) discussed the role external mentors played in opportunities for ECTs to develop a sense of positive professional identity as a teacher by being involved in communities of practice and subject-specific mentoring. In cases where schools lacked the opportunities to employ multiple subject-specific specialists, community of practice was deficient, as it puts teachers in a position of isolation and at risk of professional marginalisation. Cameron and Grant (2017) reported external mentors played an important role in compensating for these deficiencies in the community of practice as the mentor played the role of a facilitator for ECT’s professional socialisation, therefore mitigating the professional isolation. Similarly, McIntyre and Hobson (2016) also identified the need for partnering ECTs with corresponding subject specialist external mentors (experienced teachers at a different school). While the mentoring relationship in Wetzel et al. (2023) study was focused on disrupting systemic inequities, they observed all participating mentors leaning towards practical discussions, hesitant to spend a large amount of time on systems analysis without incorporating tangible ideas. They were particularly focused on exploring the locus of control as a means of offering support to early-career teachers (ECTs) in addressing the daily tensions they encounter. This shift towards the locus of control is a deliberate effort to disrupt inequities and re-establish a sense of agency for teachers who perceive their roles as disempowering.

Support

Support was also a significant benefit of external mentoring for ECTs. External mentors were found to support ECTs’ wellbeing (McIntyre & Hobson, 2016; Snook, 2021), by assisting with time management issues (Snook, 2021), professional and personal challenges, and how these challenges would impact their ability to work (Snook, 2021). Additionally, McIntyre and Hobson (2016) discovered external mentors were also found to support early-career teacher with general pedagogical knowledge, career planning, and methods to increase their resilience and confidence as teachers of science.

Personalised supports were a positive factor in external mentoring. McIntyre and Hobson (2016) found that effective external mentors personalised their support according to the early-career teacher’s needs (pedagogy, emotional wellbeing, confidence, resilience, and career progression). Hobson and McIntyre (2013) reported external mentors provided practical supports to ECTs by applying strategies such as ‘modelling teaching and practical work, assistance with lesson planning and developing schemes of work, explaining subject content, helping mentees to use specialist equipment, facilitating access to teaching resources, and (in a minority of cases) observing and having follow-up discussions about mentees’ teaching’ (p. 352).

Safe space

A safe learning space (Snook, 2021) was another benefit of external mentors. Early-career teachers received non-judgemental support (McIntyre & Hobson, 2016) and collaborated and reflected on their values (Snook, 2021). It was in the safe learning space where the ECTs shared their challenges and discussed taking risks in their teaching practises. The safe learning space was created by the external mentors by supporting and collaborating with the ECTs, constructing ideas of inquiry together, and by listening to how ECTs felt about their views, experiences, and ideas about learning and teaching (Snook, 2021). Trust was also a big part of the creation of this space, as discovered by Manderstedt et al. (2023), especially when the relationships are provided the time to develop. Also, Hobson and McIntyre (2013) discussed the emotional support the external mentors provided to ECTs by being ‘a shoulder to cry on’ (p. 352).

Barriers

The barriers to effective external mentoring were particularly concerning. Cameron and Grant (2017) highlighted the importance of external mentors needing to respond to ECTs’ requests of support, as they found there were ECTs who required support from their external mentors but at times external mentors’ earliest point of availability was ‘too late’ (p. 135). Such delays and feelings of not being supported have the potential to contribute to ECTs leaving the teaching profession altogether. Another interesting account was the ratio of the amount and the type of support the external mentor provided. Cameron and Grant (2017) also reported cases where the types of support, for example, emails and phone support, were not enough to counter the type of challenges the ECT was facing. Wetzel et al. (2023) found that the external mentors often found themselves not knowing how to effectively mentor early-career teachers (ECTs), as they were not part of their context and were unsure of the systemic inequities that needed to be addressed.

Factors that make external mentoring effective

There were several components that were consistently mentioned as enablers of successful external mentoring. The fact that external mentoring was not linked to teacher evaluation was crucial, as it provided ECTs with non-judgemental support (Cavendish et al., 2021; Hobson & McIntyre, 2013; McIntyre & Hobson, 2016; Snook, 2021). Hobson and McIntyre (2013) explained that part of this was for mentors not to do classroom observations unless the mentees specifically requested it. Related to this, every study analysed mentioned the importance of trust between a mentor and a mentee. This is consistent with previous and current literature on mentoring in general (Aarts et al., 2020; Colognesi et al., 2021). The provision of a professional community, facilitated by the mentor, was an important component, as it provided the ECT with sustainable supports when the mentoring relationship ended.

To be effective, external mentoring should be sustained over time. The included studies suggested periods of time from 1 year (Bernay, 2020; Cavendish et al., 2021) to 3 years (Cameron & Grant, 2017; Hobson & McIntyre, 2013; McIntyre & Hobson, 2016; Snook, 2021). External mentoring was more effective when mentors contacted ECTs on a regular basis and came on site regularly (Cavendish et al., 2021). Cameron & Grant found that ECTs also appreciated meeting in person rather than mentoring through emails or texts and that ECTS needed mentors that could respond to requests for support in a timely manner.

Several researchers recognised the advantages of both internal and external mentoring, suggesting that external mentoring worked best when it was part of a model that included internal and external support (Bernay, 2020; Cameron & Grant, 2017; Cavendish et al., 2021). These researchers felt that this collaborative mentoring model supported the ECTs in becoming part of a community of practice in their school and assisted them in extending their subject-area skillset. These models were often connected to university teaching programmes (Bernay, 2020; Cavendish et al., 2021), with mentors who were university lecturers or graduate students.

The mentoring programme in Snook’s (2021) study was an inquiry-based model, where external mentors worked through a suite of theoretical content with ECTs and supported them through cycles of informal action research. He found that ECTs preferred to engage through blended learning that consisted of collaborative face-to-face mentoring, and day-long professional learning sessions with a collaborative team. The programme was linked to ECTs’ attainment of a master’s degree.

Limitations of external mentoring programmes

There were a several limitations identified in external mentoring programmes that created challenges for ECTs to build rapport with their mentors. Cameron and Grant (2017) discussed external mentor’s availability as a limitation. One significant limitation was the lack of availability of external mentors. When ECTs wanted to discuss something with their mentor, by the time the mentor was available ‘it was too late’ (Cameron & Grant, 2017, p. 135). Another limitation was the lack of email response from their mentors or organising meeting times by the mentors. ECTs have also reported feeling lonely particularly at the beginning of their teaching career yet arranging meetings spontaneous meetings often proved a challenge (Cameron & Grant, 2017). Email communications between mentee and mentors were often sporadic, providing little scope for ECTs to address issues as they arose. Instead, their concerns were deferred to pre-arranged meetings which tended to focus on pedagogy and teaching resources. Another limitation discussed by Cameron and Grant (2017) was that even when the external mentor was responsive to emails, this form of communication was insufficient in addressing the needs of ECTs. In summary, if ECTs were experiencing difficulties specific to their school, difficulties arose in seeking timely and appropriate advice about how they might address these emergent challenges.

Strengths and limitations

The main strength of the current scoping review is that it identified a gap in the literature on external mentoring. The study examined how external mentors are conceptualised in the literature, as well as determining what benefits of and barriers to external mentoring exist. The study also had several limitations. Firstly, only six papers on the topic of external university mentors could be found. Secondly, the six articles presented are limited geographically, with three from England, one in Wales, one in the United States and one in New Zealand. Additionally, half are situated in physics/science. Finally, although the study was framed in the Australian context, no studies conducted in Australia could be found that met the inclusion criteria. This outcome suggests that future research in the form of an extended literature review should be conducted in which search terms are broadened in order to better capture literature addressing external mentoring programmes that have been implemented and reported in Australia.

Potential theorisation of external mentoring programmes

Given the strengths and limitations of this scoping review, we assert that a significant finding is the centrality of social relationships to effective mentoring programmes. On these grounds, and before further research is undertaken, it is useful to clarify how such programmes can be theorised. We conclude that external mentoring programmes involving school and university partners have the potential to provide a neutral space in which participants can safely, and without judgement, or school sanction, negotiate issues pertinent to their development as teachers. Following Bernay et al. (2020), we assert that Bhabha’s concept of a third space is useful in defining how a mentoring programme is structured and how it functions effectively as it disrupts binary conceptions of school and university as separate fields in teaching (Johnston et al., 2021). The inclusion of studies such as Daly and Milton (2017) further conceptualise external mentoring of ECTs as a critical component of professional development. This could broaden the professional horizon of the ECTs, equipping them with the skills necessary to work in various teaching environments.”nary conceptions of school and university as separate fields in teaching (Johnston et al., 2021). In such a space ECTs and university lecturers are considered equals within a collaborative professional learning community that operates neither as part of the school or the university, instead becoming a hybrid space that develops out of the settlements established by ECTs and university lecturers as community of practitioners (Kemmis et al., 2014). On these terms, ECTs develop their identity as members of the profession through relational exchanges with fellow ECTs and university lecturers as peers. This arrangement delimits formal sanctions, such as hierarchical arrangements based on qualifications or authority, or policy imperatives that operate in each site of practice. Such a space may also augment the development of relationality within the mentoring programme in which ECTs develop their identity as teachers through an iterative process of (1) initiation, (2) cultivation, (3) separation, and (4) redefinition (Lynn & Nguyen, 2020). Firstly, initiation refers to the mentor or mentee initiating the contact to create a relationship to build trust, goals, and mutual respect. Second, cultivation involves the growth and maintenance of the relationship between the mentor and the mentee. The separation and redefinition stages of the relationship involve the mentee becoming independent, as the roles are renegotiated, and the mentee and the mentor become peers.

In this sense, the provision of a third space sustains a basis on which university mentors and ECTs can, over time, develop a community of practice. Searle’s (2008) philosophical realism is instructive in establishing an understanding of what is a community of practice and how it is formed through relational exchanges among participants. Searle argues that social agents, in this case ECTs and mentors, co-construct shared practices through their collective beliefs, desires and motives as they develop concensus about what is their common purpose. Communities of practice are thus forged through the recognition of common purposes that both galvanise individuals as members and the collective as a whole, as the social enterprise is co-constructed. As Searle (1995) argues, the building blocks of a social reality such as a community of practice, comprise collective intentionality, the assignment of function to activities, and constitutive rules that regulate how participants act, talk and think collectively. It follows that in an external mentoring programme these factors create the conditions in which mentees and mentors negotiate the purpose of the mentoring enterprise, what it means and how it functions, and how they want to work together within a community of practice. A community of practice is therefore conceived of as a third space in which ECTs and university lecturers draw on individual identities, experience and intentions to collectively construct consensual agreements that manfiest as a shared culture of professional practice (Searle, 2008). On these terms, the development of mutual aims and goals provides a basis for collaborative actions, collective rules of engagement, and exchanges that can be realised within a particular context over time. These factors are key to the development of a community of practice within which participants have opportunity to bridge the gap between the realities of teacher education programmes sanctioned by professional teaching standards that initially form ECTs’ knowledge of teaching and the actualities of teaching in a particular school site win the external mentoring programme.

Conclusion

The most important results of this scoping review are the orientation to the extent and type of the literature identified on ECT external mentoring programmes. The gap in the literature identified in this review pertains to research in the area of external mentoring for ECTs in Australia. Only six studies met the criteria for the review, two of them (Bernay, 2020; Cavendish et al., 2021), focused on mentoring pre-service teachers by university and school-based mentors, which is a common practice in many countries, however these relationships are typically more evaluative than supportive (Kemmis et al., 2014). Three other publications (Cameron & Grant, 2017; Hobson & McIntyre, 2013; McIntyre & Hobson, 2016) were focused on an initiative in the UK designed to retain early-career physics teachers. The last (Snook, 2021) was also based in the UK, and was a PhD thesis disseminating the results of a post-graduate teacher inquiry project, which was also implemented as part of the same government initiative as the physics studies listed above. The findings of the current review are aligned with what Hobson and McIntyre (2013) discovered nearly a decade ago—that there is a dearth of the literature examining and calling for the widespread implementation of external mentoring as a potentially effective means to support ECTs’ professional development and improve retention rates.

External mentors, by taking on the role of facilitators, play a crucial role in cultivating the development of ECT external mentoring programmes as a community of practice. ECTs in all studies felt that their mentoring experience made them more confident, enthusiastic, and efficacious, thus improving their overall well-being. These benefits strongly support further implementation and investigation of external mentoring to improve the retention of ECTs and foster their capacity to build professional identities as teachers within a safe and supportive environment.

The results of this scoping review indicate that external mentoring programmes for ECTs are potentially effective if they are conceived as communities of practice in which social relationships focussed on the common purpose of identity construction through professional learning exchanges that are built through collaborations among university mentors and ECT mentees. The co-construction of communities of professional practice affords supports for ECT mentees to construct their identities as teachers through engaging with their mentors as peers. In addition to this outcome, it is also feasible to see how the following components would promote the effectiveness of external mentoring programmes that:

• Engage mentees by mentors in collaborative working and learning activities.

• Develop a culture of trust and common purpose fostered through critical reflection and enquiry in a culturally responsive way.

• Exclude professional accreditation or formal evaluation of teaching.

• Inculcate ECTs in the co-construction of a community of professional practice and contribute with mentors on equal terms.

• Meet ECTs’ individual and collective needs in terms of subject content knowledge, subject pedagogy, and classroom management skills.

• Recognise and address ECTs’ emotional and well-being needs

• Provide opportunities for follow-up and support in a sustained period of time.

We suggest that this approach to mentoring may contribute to the retention of ECTs. In the light of these findings, we conclude that this scoping review is a step towards further research in the form of a systematic review in which a broader search of literature on external mentoring programmes involving universities and schools may be possible. The inclusion of studies such as Daly and Milton’s (2017) further conceptualise external mentoring of ECTs as a critical component of professional development. This could broaden the professional horizon of the ECTs, equipping them with the skills necessary to work in various teaching environments. Future research should include these components and examine the efficacy of external mentoring in terms of supporting the development ECTs’ professional identity, increasing their confidence and skills, and becoming part of both local communities of practice and the larger professional community in Australian. Future studies in the form of a systematic review could broaden the scope of the search terms to determine the necessity for external mentoring programmes to be subject-specific. Further research studies could also determine whether remote external mentoring is as preferred by ECTs and is as effective as in-person mentoring, especially in the post-pandemic context, where online exchange has become the norm and promotes the inclusion of ECTs situated in remote and regional communities in Australia. Regardless of the focus of future research, further consideration of the resources allocated to ensuring the viability and longevity of ECT mentoring programmes from the perspectives of all partners is also required (Milton et al., 2022). Policy mandates from accrediting bodies aside, schools and universities need to navigate sustainable arrangements for programmes that are built on mutual agreements about what matters in terms of ECT mentoring and induction into the profession (Bradbury and Acquaro, 2022). Factors such as ECT identity formation, relational practices, and a consensus of values need to be negotiated when it comes to supporting and retaining ECTs in the profession through the development of a third space that sustains a genuine community of practice (Bernay et al., 2020).

Authors’ contributions

Maras- project lead, designed the project, main author, led data analysis.

Cumming- second author, managed research assistant, assisted with data analysis.

Lee- third author, research assistant, conducted searches, organised data.

Availability of data and materials

Data can be accessed by contacting the first author.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This project received a small grant ($5,000) from the UNSW School of Education.