The fourth meeting of the TA training CoP was held on March 21, 2012. The topic of the discussion was Mentorship in TA training programs at UBC. This page gathers notes and thoughts about this meeting. Thanks to Catherine (PSYCH) for recording this meeting.

Mentorship in TA training programs at UBC

UBC TA Training; Community of Practice
Site content
	Main Page
	Overview by Departments
	CoP Meetings
	Site map

Why have mentors?

Have community of TAs rather than isolation
So junior TAs can learn from senior TAs
So senior TAs can learn from junior TAs
Relaxed, comfortable atmosphere to offer feedback/criticism
Continuity of learning rather than one-stop shop pre-teaching
Encourages self-reflection toward improvement
Mentors get experience in leadership-ish position
Can catch some of the misperceptions, subtleties that would otherwise fall through the cracks

In Physics/Astronomy

In addition to weekly meetings with Lab Coordinator/Course Instructor, plus Lab TAs for content/equipment stuff
All TAs teaching labs or tutorials (weekly responsibility of managing class)
Everyone new TA gets a mentor automatically (all 35-40 incoming TAs)
- “Head Mentor” matches up based on course experience
- 6 mentees each, 1-2 mentors per class (Phys 100, 101)
- Mentors have been singled out for being good at giving feedback, the best TAs
Professional development for the Mentors
- Peer review training (CTLT; 6h)
- Culture & diversity training through Centre for Intercultural Communication (3h, $894)
- Feedback from mentees
- Monthly mentor meetings, led by Head Mentor (4h)
- ...
5 mtgs with mentees & mentors (about 24 hours of mentor-mentee interactions across all 6 mentees)
- (CR editorial: Seems to follow Formative Peer Review Model from CTLT)
- Intro mtg
- In-class observation
- Post-observation debrief
- In-class observation, either mentee observes another mentee in class (peer review) OR another mentor visit (optional)
- Follow-up discussion (optional)
New adding next time: new TAs want to observe Mentor
About 36 hours per mentor in one term, so give $1200 per mentor; works out to about $200 per mentee
- They get funded for this program (but it’s expensive!)
- A mentor usually takes this Mentor TAship + a half TAship of grading
Happens only during fall term
Staggering running it
What is role of faculty?
- None. Well, supportive Dept Head, but grad students go do whatever ideas they come up with.
- Should faculty be there? Making sure our content is still useful; continuity aspects (would be really useful to have regular support as people Graduate); lends legitimacy

How to do this on a lower budget with lots of people?

Maybe do it on a volunteer basis → whoever wants to be mentored and mentor
Has to be something in it for them (recognition & value) → e.g., Mentor Training from CTLT
Offer Honorarium rather than funding
Documenting, put it into our reports (how much relying on volunteers)

FHIS (French, Hispanic, and Italian Studies)

Less formal/involved
Co-attend training
Relies on mentor to check in with mentee
One visit in mentee’s classroom with feedback
Give $150 honorarium for mentoring 1, maybe 2
20 new TAs each year (each taking a course)

How do these programs start?

Physics&Astronomy: Mentor program came before the opening workshop, motivated by new TAs who were just blown away by experience of teaching
In CompSci: undergrad TAs are informally mentored by grad TAs

Feedback to TAs by Instructors

Apparently it’s required that each TA is formal, summative evaluation, going into employment file
- Plus some do formative feedback as well
Happens in some departments, some courses, but not others
How did Biology come to know? 20 years ago told they should.
- Two bad evaluations, don’t have to take the TA back in that course.

Benefits

Benefits to graduate students running these things, being facilitators, etc., is employability.
Knowledge & skills not only applicable to academic research context