PURPOSE: This rule establishes standards for successful mentoring programs.

1. (1) A successful mentoring program will include, but may not be limited to, the standards listed below:

   1. (A) An introduction to the cultural environment of the community, school district, school building, and classroom that:

      1. 1. Provides awareness of school and dis-

trict policies, procedures, and mission (teacher and student handbooks, Comprehensive School Improvement Plan (CSIP), goals, etc.);

1. 2. Expresses community norms/local

expectations (community tour, housing, medical facilities, faith community, etc.);

1. 3. Complements professional organiza-

tions at district and state/national levels;

1. 4. Discusses classroom equality gen-

der/race/abilities;

1. 5. Is a systematic and ongoing introduc-

tion to data analysis, assessment practice and process, etc. (not a one (1)-day workshop);

1. 6. Includes district initiatives and

parental concerns; and

1. 7. Defines professional and district

acronyms (Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), Missouri School Improvement Program (MSIP), Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Parent Teacher Organization (PTO), etc.).

1. (B) A systemic and ongoing program review/evaluation by all stakeholders:

   1. 1. Identifies all stakeholders;
   2. 2. Identifies mentoring outcomes, how

they will be measured, and timelines;

1. 3. Gathers regular and systematic feed-

back from mentor, protégé, and administrators to determine if mentoring is working (might include preand post-surveys for mentors and protégés and may include information on retention rates/numbers, levels of job satisfaction, student achievement, or cost of turnover);

1. 4. Is based on a foundation of best prac-

tices;

1. 5. Requires independent/anonymous exit

interviews of staff (may be connected to beginning educators’ survey at state level) so clear reasons for staff departures can be determined;

1. 6. Is supported by central office and

school board—trend data; and

1. 7. Is included in broader Professional

Development (PD) program evaluation (locally and on Missouri School Improvement Program reviews).

1. (C) An individualized plan for beginning educators that aligns with the district’s goals and needs that:

   1. 1. Is aligned with the department’s

Performance Based Teacher/Educator Evaluation (PBTE) standards;

1. 2. Is a systematic and concise mentoring

and professional development plan that prioritizes the immediate and future needs of the new educator;

1. 3. Aligns with district’s CSIP and certi-

fication requirements; 4 Establishes outcomes for new educators;

1. 5. Is an extension or part of a profes-

sional development plan that may have begun during student teaching/internship or culminating project in college;

1. 6. Establishes classroom or on-the-job

observations that are guided by practices. Observations should include preand postobservation conferences, including reflective questions; and

1. 7. Encourages structured experiences

and expectations for all new educators.

1. (D) Appropriate criteria for selecting mentors that:

   1. 1. Should have a minimum of three (3)

years of experience;

1. 2. Have traits such as enthusiasm and

job commitment;

1. 3. Are committed to self-growth as well

as mentoring;

1. 4. Hold a same or similar position/job

of grade/subject area (inor out-of-building/district);

1. 5. May use a mechanism to end pairing

if either mentor or protégé is not satisfied;

1. 6. Understand broad educational issues

as well as specific teaching/education issues;

1. 7. Have a strong understanding of peda-

gogy, instructional expertise, and relevant administrative issues;

1. 8. Are available to mentor (release time,

fewer additional assignments);

1. 9. Are assigned collaboratively by

administrator(s) and local professional development committee with input from gradelevel or department chair; and

1. 10. Are supported in time/effort by

administration and school board.

1. (E) Comprehensive mentor training that:

   1. 1. Recognizes mentoring is NOT evalu-

ation; confidentiality is required between mentor and protégé (except in situations of child endangerment);

1. 2. Includes cognitive coaching skills

along with collaborative training;

1. 3. Includes observation and feedback

training/skills;

1. 4. Provides an awareness of phases of

first-year educators (stress, depression, etc.);

1. 5. Provides training on mentoring stan- 5 CSR 20-400

dards, performance-based evaluation requirements, certification requirements, and local expectations;

1. 6. Includes a catalogue of resources

available for beginning educators;

1. 7. Recognizes the need for knowledge

and strategies on classroom management;

1. 8. Encourages small districts to form

mentoring consortia (may use existing structures to form consortia (e.g., conference schools));

1. 9. Focuses on exemplary teaching and

assessment practices;

1. 10. Builds working strategies that

encourage problem solving and independent thinking;

1. 11. Provides understanding of student

assessments and how educators can utilize them to guide instruction; and

1. 12. Includes self-assessment that identi-

fies whether mentoring is meeting both the mentor’s and protégé’s expectations.

1. (F) A complete list of responsibilities for the mentor, beginning teacher and administrator(s) is addressed in Appendix A.

2. (G) Sufficient time for mentors to observe beginning educators, and for the beginning educators to observe master educators, are structured to provide multiple opportunities over time to minimize the need to require substitute teachers to facilitate observations by:

   1. 1. Aligning class schedules and planning

periods to complement mentoring duties;

1. 2. Utilizing state and local professional

development funds, Career Ladder, or stipends to support mentors’ additional duties;

1. 3. Providing release time for coaching,

observation, and meeting (minimum of three (3) each year); and

1. 4. Encouraging college support of

resources, on-line classes, personal visits, and/or beginning educators’ assistance programs. SECONDARY EDUCATION Division 20—Division of Learning Services AUTHORITY: sections 160.720, 161.092, and 161.375, RSMo Supp. 2007.* This rule previously filed as 5 CSR 80-850.045. Original rule filed Oct. 29, 2002, effective June 30, 2003. Rescinded and readopted: Filed Jan. 18, 2008, effective Sept. 30, 2008. Moved to 5 CSR 20-400.380, effective Aug. 16, 2011. *Original authority: 160.720, RSMo 2002, amended 2004; 161.092, RSMo 1963 amended 1973, 2002, 2003; and 161.375, RSMo 2007.