Table 10

Difference Between the Assessment of the Respondents on the Mentoring

Practices
Mentor Mentee
Components
t-test Sig. Decision Remarks t-test Sig. Decision Remarks
Content Knowledge and Not Not
2.183 .092 Accept Ho 3.116 .067 Accept Ho
Pedagogy Significant Significant
Learning Environment Not
1.911 .414 Accept Ho 3.112 .001 Reject Ho Significant
Significant
Diversity of Learners Not
6.013 .223 Accept Ho 5.112 .002 Reject Ho Significant
Significant
Curriculum and Planning Not Not
2.183 .092 Accept Ho 2.107 .073 Accept Ho
Significant Significant
Assessment and Reporting Not Not
3.251 .176 Accept Ho 1.733 .305 Accept Ho
Significant Significant
Community Linkages and Not Not
2.104 .081 Accept Ho 5.104 .222 Accept Ho
Professional Engagement Significant Significant
Personal Growth and Not Not
1.833 .213 Accept Ho 3.714 .216 Accept Ho
Professional Development Significant Significant

Table 10 draws the Difference between the Assessments of the Respondents on

the Mentoring Practices. In in the part of mentor the following domains such as Content

Knowledge and Pedagogy (T-test Value= 2.183, P Value = .092), Learning Environment and

Diversity of Learners (T-test Value= 1.911, P Value= .414), Curriculum Planning (T-test Value=

2.183, P Value = .092), Assessment and Reporting (T-test Value= 3.251, P Value = .0176), and

Community Linkages and Professional Engagement (T-test Value= 1.833, P Value= .213) lead

to accept the null hypothesis of no significant difference. In in the part of mentee the

following domains such as Content Knowledge and Pedagogy (T-test Value= 3.116, P Value

= .067), Learning Environment and Diversity of Learners (T-test Value= 3.112, P Value= .002),

Curriculum Planning (T-test Value= 2.107, P Value = .073), Assessment and Reporting (T-test

Value= 1.733 P Value = .305), and Community Linkages and Professional Engagement (T-test

Value= 5.104 P Value= .222) In other words, the assessment of the respondents in mentoring

practices is statistically not significant or do not have a significant interplay. This is probably

because the assessment of mentoring practices of both group of respondents are the same in

all aspects with just a minor difference for proficient teachers in other indicators.

In domains for mentee like Diversity of Learners (T-test Value= 5.112, P Value= .002)

and Learning environment (T-test Value= 3.112, P Value= .00) lead to reject the null hypothesis

of significant difference. In other words, the assessment in mentoring practices in this domain
are noteworthy. This is possibly because of varied paperwork to accomplished, teachers’

response to the educational needs of learners are sometimes put aside and also their personal

and professional growth are at stake.

This finding is close to the study of Celik et. al., (2016) which enlightened social diversity

within a group which provides opportunities for solving problems in new ways because

individuals bring alternative viewpoints to the group. Diversity within a group also allows

individuals to be more innovative and creative. Interacting with people from different

backgrounds permits individuals to experience new information, take up alternative viewpoints,

and find ways to reach a consensus or disagree while maintaining civility.