Evaluation of the Mentoring Program for Teachers in Rural Areas Affected by Disasters: Perspectives of Mentor and Mentee

Introduction
Teaching in rural areas presents unique challenges and opportunities compared to urban settings. Small class sizes and close-knit student-teacher relationships allow for individualized instruction, enabling teachers to foster strong connections with students and families. However, these benefits are often tempered by limited resources and the potential for isolation, with teachers facing restricted access to educational materials and professional development opportunities. Furthermore, challenges such as managing classrooms effectively, fostering student-parent engagement, and addressing socio-emotional needs are particularly pronounced in rural contexts.

In disaster-affected rural areas, the vulnerabilities of these communities are amplified, with education systems enduring both physical and psychological devastation. In such circumstances, teachers must navigate the compounded difficulties of rural education alongside the disruptions caused by disasters. The role of mentorship becomes especially crucial in helping teachers adapt to these challenging conditions, maintain their professional competence, and continue to provide quality education (Parker et al., 2021; Hayes et al., 2019).

Mentoring programs are essential in supporting the personal and professional development of novice teachers, providing guidance from experienced educators (Butler & Cuenca, 2012; Feiman-Nemser, 2001). These programs are particularly valuable in rural areas, where they help address high teacher attrition rates, promote collaboration, and enhance teaching quality. By sharing expertise and experience, mentor teachers empower new educators, fostering their pedagogical growth and helping them integrate into the school culture (Hobson et al., 2009). Furthermore, effective mentoring strengthens teachers' academic and social-emotional skills, contributing to improved student outcomes in rural and post-disaster settings (Yirci, 2017). Remote mentoring can also offer critical support in these isolated environments, providing resources and strategies that are essential for successful teaching and classroom management (Cooper et al., 2014). Ultimately, mentorship programs play a vital role in ensuring the sustainability of education in these challenging environments.

On February 6, 2023, the Kahramanmaraş Earthquakes struck Turkey, affecting 11 provinces and causing a major disaster. Supporting teachers both personally and professionally in the aftermath of such events is crucial for sustaining educational processes. In response, the Rural Schools Transformation Network (KODA) launched a mentoring program to provide emotional and professional support to teachers working in rural areas while fostering solidarity among them. The program aimed to offer guidance tailored to the challenges teachers faced due to the disaster.

This study explores the perspectives of mentors and mentees on the mentoring program designed for early-career teachers in rural areas affected by disasters. The research question guiding this study is: 'What are the perspectives of mentors and mentees regarding the mentoring process for teachers at the beginning of their careers in rural areas affected by the disaster?'

KODA Mentorship Program
KODA’s Mentorship Program focuses on two main objectives first, to strengthen solidarity and facilitate experience-sharing among teachers in rural areas; and second, to provide personal, professional, and emotional support to early-career rural teachers in the earthquake-affected region.
The program was implemented between September 2023 and June 2024, featuring a range of activities, including foundational teacher training, summer and winter camps, six one-on-one mentoring sessions, five group mentoring meetings, as well as support meetings and supervisions provided by KODA trainers.
Participants conducted their one-on-one mentoring sessions online, scheduling them at their convenience between September 2023 and January 2024. Group mentoring meetings took place from February to June 2024. Weekly topics for both one-on-one and group sessions were predetermined by KODA and further developed and shared with mentors through instructional handbooks. Additionally, a mentor advisor from KODA provided supervision support through individual meetings with mentor teachers.

This study, which utilized a case study design—a qualitative research method—included mentor and mentee teachers participating in KODA’s mentoring program. The purposive sampling method was used to select participants. For mentor teachers, the selection criteria included a- being a classroom teacher with experience in rural areas, b- completion of KODA’s Mentorship Training, and c- a minimum of eight years of professional experience. Mentees are teachers in the first years of their profession and working in rural areas of the disaster-affected provinces. During this process, all 30 mentors successfully completed one-on-one mentoring sessions, while all 14 mentors completed group mentoring sessions. Among the mentees, all 57 teachers completed one-on-one mentoring sessions, and all 41 teachers completed group mentoring sessions. As part of the monitoring and evaluation activities for the mentoring program, a total of four distinct Mentoring Interview Evaluation Forms were developed for both mentees and mentors, covering one-on-one and group mentoring sessions. The mentorship program was structured over six weeks of one-on-one sessions in the first semester and five weeks of group sessions in the second semester of the 2023-2024 academic year. Mentees and mentors completed the forms in alignment with the program's implementation schedule. These forms were customized separately for mentees and mentors to capture their unique perspectives. The primary objective of these forms was to assess mentees' and mentors' experiences, opinions, and suggestions regarding the mentorship program and the process, as well as to evaluate the changes in their competencies and professional development over time. This approach ensured a comprehensive evaluation of mentor meetings, each covering different topics and scopes, while also allowing for triangulation of the data to provide a holistic analysis of the mentoring experience. Additionally, data collected at different stages of the mentoring process (one-on-one and group mentoring) are compared between mentor and mentee groups. This comparison allows for a more comprehensive evaluation of the mentoring experience, highlighting the differences in perspectives and assessing the overall effectiveness of the process. The analysis is based on the data provided by the forms, mentees, and mentors regarding their experiences, opinions, suggestions, competency changes, and professional developments. Using content analysis, participants' statements will be categorized, and recurring themes will be identified. These themes are expected to provide valuable insights into how the mentoring process is perceived.

The data analysis is ongoing, and as the study progresses, the analysis will be further refined, with the findings presented in a more comprehensive manner. The findings aim to assess the extent to which the mentoring process contributes to the professional development and competency growth of teachers working in rural areas affected by the disaster. Once the data analysis phase is complete, a detailed examination of the mentoring program’s effectiveness, its impact on personal and professional development, and participants' perceptions will be presented based on the experiences of both mentees and mentors. Additionally, participants’ suggestions regarding the mentoring process will be analyzed to identify its strengths and weaknesses of the mentorship program. These insights are expected to provide valuable guidance for improving future mentoring programs and enhancing their impact on teachers in similar contexts.

Babione, C., & Shea, C. (2005). Special education mentoring within the context of rural schools. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 24(2), 3-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/875687050502400202 Butler, B. M., & Cuenca, A. (2012). Conceptualizing the roles of mentor teachers during student teaching. Action in Teacher Education, 34(4), 296–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2012.717012 Cooper, M. G., Williams, J., & Awidi, I. (2014). Professional distance-mentoring of beginning design and technology home economics teachers. Australian and International Journal of Rural Education, 24(2), 45-58. https://search.informit.org/doi/abs/10.3316/informit.642362867761052 Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). Helping novices learn to teach: Lessons from an exemplary sup- port teacher. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(1), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487101052001003 Hayes, L., Lachlan-Haché, L., & Williams, H. (2019). 10 Mentoring and Induction Challenges in Rural Schools and How to Address Them. Center on Great Teachers and Leaders. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED602971.pdf Hobson, A. J., Ashby, P., Malderez, A., & Tomlinson, P. D. (2009). Mentoring beginning teachers: What we know and what we don’t. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.09.001 Kartal, S. E., Özdemir, T. Y., & Yirci, R. (2017). Mentorship needs of early career teachers working in rural regions. Turkish Journal of Education, 6(1), 30-40. DOI:10.19128/turje.284833 Manning, C., & Hobson, A. J. (2017). Judgemental and developmental mentoring in further education initial teacher education in England: mentor and mentee perspectives. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 22(4), 574–595. https://doi.org/10.1080/13596748.2017.1381377 Parker, A. K., Zenkov, K., & Glaser, H. (2021). Preparing school-based teacher educators: Mentor teachers’ perceptions of mentoring and mentor training. Peabody Journal of Education, 96(1), 65–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2021.1877027 Yirci, R. (2017). The evaluation of new mentoring program for novice teachers according to their perceptions. Pedagogika, 126(2), 29-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.15823/p.2017.18