The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/2046-6854.htm

Mentor–mentee
Mentor–mentee relationships as relationships
anchors for pre service teachers’
coping on professional placement
Anat Wilson 71
Department of Education,
Received 14 April 2019
Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia, and Revised 30 June 2019
Minh Huynh 21 August 2019
29 September 2019
Department of Statistics, Data Science and Epidemiology, 3 November 2019
Accepted 4 November 2019
Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia

Abstract
Purpose – Mentor–mentee relationships are important for individual wellbeing, mental health, professional
agency and confidence. In the context of an initial teacher education (ITE) programme, these relationships
become a key factor. Pre-service teachers’ capacity to cope on a professional placement is closely linked to the
quality of the mentoring relationship. The purpose of this paper is to identify the negative coping strategies
used by pre-service teachers who struggle to cope in a school placement in Melbourne, Australia, highlighting
the importance of providing quality mentorship.
Design/methodology/approach – A mixed-methods approach was used for the analysis of pre-service
teachers’ coping on a teaching practicum and to identify common related beliefs. A total of 177 pre-service
teachers, who have completed at least one supervised practicum participated in this study. The Coping Scale for
Adults second edition (CSA-2) was administered alongside an open-ended questionnaire to identify frequently
used coping styles and associated thoughts and beliefs.
Findings – The results show that pre-service teachers who favour non-productive coping strategies were
more likely to express feelings of loneliness, pointed at poor communication with their mentor and described
thoughts about leaving the teaching profession.
Originality/value – Using the Coping Scale for Adults in the context of practicum provides an insight into
individual experiences. The implications of mentor–mentee relationships for individuals’ coping are highlighted.
initial teacher education programs and schools have significant roles in supporting mentor–mentee
relationships and practical supportive interventions are offered.
Keywords Mentoring in education, Coping, Loneliness, Pre service teachers, Professional experience
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
In the last few years, mentor–mentee relationships in initial teacher education (ITE)
programs have been the focus of much international research (Kindall et al., 2017;
Shanks, 2017; Tonna et al., 2017). In Australia, this has occurred in response to the report
released by the Australian Federal Government’s Teacher Education Ministerial Advisory
Group (TEMAG, 2014) that highlighted the need to provide quality professional experience
in Australian ITE. TEMAG found “challenges in ensuring a sufficient number of
professional experience placements of appropriate timing and length are available for all
pre-service teachers” (p. xvii). Pre-service teachers, who are also known as pre-service
educators or candidates, need to complete between 60 to 80 days of supervised professional
experience in Australia (AITSL, 2018, p. 16). According to a recent report, “in 2016 for
example, school placements were required in metropolitan, regional and remote locations
across Australia for over 81,000 pre-service teachers in 375 ITE programs offered by
International Journal of Mentoring
48 accredited providers” (Morrison et al., 2018, p. 10). This high demand puts the Australian and Coaching in Education
Vol. 9 No. 1, 2020
education system under strenuous conditions, creating what was coined by Feiman-Nemser pp. 71-86
© Emerald Publishing Limited
2046-6854
Funding: Swinburne University of Technology, Department of Education Mentored Seeding Grant. DOI 10.1108/IJMCE-04-2019-0052
IJMCE (2001) as a “sink or swim induction” (p. 1014). Previous research has shown that if teachers
9,1 are expected to mentor, lead and engage in regular reflective conversations and debriefs, a
full-time release from teaching is required (Carver and Feiman-Nemser, 2009). The TEMAG
(2014) report also highlighted that “supervising teachers should have the training and skills
required to effectively supervise and assess professional experience placements” (p. xviii); a
growing concern is that, in reality, this is often not the case. In addition, recent studies have
72 shown that early-career and pre-service teachers experience an array of coping difficulties
that require intervention and support (Hong et al., 2018; Ngui and Lay, 2018; Yayli, 2017).
Yet measuring pre-service teachers’ coping styles in relation to the mentor–mentee
relationship has not been thoroughly explored before. This paper addresses this gap in
particular and sheds new light on individuals’ non-productive coping strategies in relation
to the mentor–mentee relationship. Data from a recent Australian study are discussed and
shed new light on previous calls (Carver and Feiman-Nemser, 2009) for a necessary policy
reform in relation to the provision of mentorship in teacher education.

Literature
Ambrosetti and Dekkers (2010) defined mentoring in teacher education as a “non-hierarchical,
reciprocal relationship between mentors and mentees who work towards specific professional
and personal outcomes for the mentee” (p. 52). Hobson (2016) furthermore identified the
non-hierarchal relationship as one of seven imperative indicators of quality mentorship, the
absence of which “makes it difficult to establish relational trust and for mentees to openly
share their professional learning and development needs with mentors” (Hobson, 2016, p. 101).
Mentor teachers have a crucial role in providing pre-service teachers with learning
opportunities that impact students’ learning outcomes and develop their teaching proficiency
(Norman and Feiman-Nemser, 2005). Therefore, quality and effective mentoring is of key
importance, which ought to include a rigorous selection process of knowledgeable and
experienced mentors and thoughtful matching to mentees (Hobson, 2016, p. 103; Tonna et al.,
2017). However, where the mentor teachers formally assess pre-service teachers’ performance,
hierarchical and power relationships do occur, and often, mentoring happens without
sufficient professional development of mentoring skills or a supportive work environment
(Carver and Feiman-Nemser, 2009).
These challenges are commonly associated with the busy school environment of the
placement (Feiman-Nemser et al., 1992), as well as a lack of time, skills and resources
afforded to mentor teachers (Forgasz, 2016; Leshem, 2012). Mentor teachers have the
capacity to either instil a sense of confidence and agency in pre-service teachers or inhibit
the formation of teacher identity (Izadinia, 2015). Not surprisingly, calls for more rigorous
and structured mentorship programs within teacher education are commonly made
(Hobson, 2002, 2016; Izadinia, 2015).
Beutel et al. (2017) examined a structured mentor preparation programme and investigated
how to provide current educators with the necessary skills and knowledgebase to be an
effective mentor to beginning teachers. The authors reported that the preparation programme
provided mentors with the ability to self-reflect and critique their own (and others’) mentoring
approaches. In particular, the participating mentors were able to establish a shared
understanding around the role of a mentor.
Similarly, Daly and Milton (2017) investigated the experiences of 70 mentors participating
in a professional learning and development programme. This study involved mentors
providing advice and support to their mentees in the form of class observations, mentoring
conversations, reflective discussions and face-to-face learning events. The authors commented
that whilst the preparation programme was overall effective, many of the mentors expressed
concerns that it was not sufficient to fully support beginning teachers with critical reflection
and optimised ways of thinking. Furthermore, mentors indicated that they were insecure
about holding mentor–mentee conversations and would have liked a template or protocol Mentor–mentee
listing “exactly what to say/do” (p. 189). This notion regarding insecurity does raise some relationships
concern, as inexperienced mentors are unlikely to engage with their mentees on a deeper level,
resulting in an uncomfortable, didactic relationship where independent growth cannot be
fostered (Daly and Milton, 2017).
Furthermore, Bentley and et al.’s (2017) study explored mentor–mentee relationships
across a yearlong placement programme that ran for one to two semesters at the same 73
location. By having an entire year dedicated to the same school, pre-service teachers were
more likely to establish stronger and trusting relationships with their mentors. The authors
noted that mentees who felt comfortable with their mentors were more willing to take
risks and utilise any mistakes that arose during the process as valuable learning
experiences. Such environments, where mentees can feel safe to try new things, provide
a more enriching learning experience and foster the development of their teaching identities
(Bentley et al., 2017). Unfortunately, most placement programs do not provide pre-service
teachers enough time to build a strong relationship with their mentors, often resulting in
poor outcomes. Without having appropriate mentorship support, pre-service teachers who
experience heightened levels of stress and anxiety may require other coping strategies to
deal with the situation. The following therefore provides additional insights from recent
studies on stress and coping in pre-service placement.

Placement-related stress
A growing concern in teacher education research is the high levels of stress pre-service
teachers experience in school placements (Gutierrez et al., 2016; MacDonald, 1993;
Mahmoudi and Özkan, 2016; Murray-Harvey et al., 2000; Vickery and Gray, 2014). Anxiety
associated with professional placement is a key hindering factor (Danyluk, 2013;
Grant, 1992; Hart, 1987; Miller and Fraser, 2000; Morton et al., 1997; Sumsion, 1998). Lower
levels of resilience and self-efficacy contribute to feelings of stress and impact success in
teaching (Vickery and Gray, 2014). Brown (2017) claimed that the rigorous demands and
certification requirements unique to ITE programs produce additional multiple stressors.
A recent study (Gutierrez et al., 2016) reported on five main stress factors for pre-service
teachers on placement: workload, authority, time management, financial concerns and
students’ behaviour. Others have found that the most prevalent stressor associated with
professional experience is behaviour management, followed by feeling a lack of confidence
in one’s ability to cope with the demands of the school experience (Knight et al., 2010).
Lewis (1999) found that in-service teachers also experience a high level of stress, which
results from the gap between their preferred approach to classroom discipline and the
approach they actually use.
Some successful interventions are known to reduce placement-related stress and anxiety,
including teaching pre-service teachers to self-identify their stress factors and scaffolding
strategies to manage those stressors (Knight et al., 2010), teaching effective coping strategies
through cognitive interventions to reduce pre-service teachers’ stress (Fitch and Marshall,
2002; Gutierrez et al., 2016) and offering counselling in developing pre-service teachers’
personal coping skills, self-management and management of anxiety (Murray-Harvey et al.,
2000). The importance of including mentor teachers in the support cycle is further shown in
the benefits of emotional intelligence training, which was shown to raise self-awareness,
improve reasoning, increase self-regulation and reduce the “emotional labour” experienced
by those new to teaching (Vesely et al., 2014).

Coping with placement

Coping with the challenges of teaching is described in the literature as complex and
emotional. In this paper, we follow Lazarus and Folkman’s (1984) definition of coping,
IJMCE explained as the “changing cognitive and behavioural efforts to manage specific
9,1 external and/or internal demands that are appraised as taxing or exceeding the resources of
the person” (p. 141). An Australian study conducted by a team of researchers from
Flinders University (Murray-Harvey et al., 2000) found four main categories of coping
strategies pre-service teachers use: personal coping strategies (cognitive, physical
strategies, behavioural strategies, emotional strategies and rational/time organisation
74 strategies), professional coping strategies (knowledge of the curriculum and the school and
thorough preparation), social coping strategies (turning to family and friends and
involvement in social events) and institutional coping strategies (support provided by
mentor teachers, peer support, and university staff support). The researchers in the Murray-
Harvey et al.’s (2000) study used the modified Survey of Practicum Stresses (SPS; D’Rozario
and Wong, 1996) to analyse pre-service teachers’ stressors on placement and the kinds of
coping strategies they used. Their results showed that pre-service teachers used an array of
personal, professional, social and institutional coping strategies. Gender, age and whether
the practicum was their first placement made no difference to their stress level. The authors
highlighted that the “opportunity to debrief and talk through problems” (Murray-Harvey
et al., 2000, p. 29) with their mentor teachers was the most important coping strategy.
A number of studies have explored how pre-service teachers cope with stress.
MacDonald (1993) found pre-service teachers used coping strategies that can be categorised
into communication, conformity, showing initiative, goal setting and relaxation techniques.
Pre-service teachers coped better by asking their mentor teacher for help or feedback and by
observing experienced teachers’ classes (Mahmoudi and Özkan, 2016). In some cases, the
more teachers are concerned about how well they are doing, the less they are able to cope in
positive ways (Salkovsky et al., 2015). In other work, Lewis et al. (2011) established a link
between in-service teachers’ perceptions of student behaviour, their use of coping strategies
and their use of effective classroom management techniques.
Individual differences are also key contributing factors to coping. High self-esteem in
pre-service teachers is seen in association with positive coping styles, whereas low
self-esteem is associated with avoidance behaviour (Onen and Ulusoy, 2015). Some
individuals may turn to non-productive and dysfunctional coping strategies, such as
avoidance, when feeling scared and overwhelmed (Frydenberg et al., 2008). For pre-service
teachers undertaking professional experience in unfamiliar school environments, coping is
critical in managing the challenges that arise.

Research design
A mixed-methods study investigated pre-service teachers’ coping on placement and examined
what they found challenging about their professional experiences. The main question of the
study was “What can we learn about the non-coping pre-service teachers, and what can we do
to support them on placement?” After obtaining university ethics approval, an invitation to
participate in the study was sent to all pre-service teachers studying in the ITE programme of a
Melbourne-based university during 2018. In this programme, the university had minimal
oversight of the pre-service teachers and their mentor teachers when they were on placement.
The mentor teachers discussed in this paper were mostly full-time teachers, untrained in
mentoring, who were put in a position to observe, support and assess pre-service teachers who
attended their schools for a period of 20 to 30 days. On completion of the placement, a
remuneration was offered to the mentor teacher, which was sometimes absorbed by the school.
The mentors received an information booklet and evaluation forms designed to assess
pre-service teachers on areas of professional knowledge, professional practice and professional
engagement against specific national standards for teachers at the graduate level. In the
current model, mentor teachers did not receive specific mentoring training. When concerns
were flagged about the progress or performance of a pre-service teacher, an academic liaise
person was made available to discuss and mediate through remote means of communication. Mentor–mentee
In this particular programme, school visits by university academics were uncommon. relationships
Participation in the study was voluntary, anonymous and bore no consequence on
students’ academic performance. The recruitment letter invited any student, who had
completed at least one supervised practicum and experienced difficulties coping on
placement, to participate. Table I shows information about the 177 participants.
Participants were invited to complete anonymously an online questionnaire comprising 75
two parts. The first was the Coping Scale for Adults Second Edition (CSA-2) developed by
Erica Frydenberg and Ramon Lewis (2014). The CSA-2 is a valid instrument that measures
the usage and helpfulness of 20 distinct coping strategies, categorised into three coping
styles relating to the situation at hand. In this study, only the “usage” measure was used.
The CSA-2 has been used in a growing body of literature that supports its validity
(Frydenberg and Lewis, 2002), yet to the best of our knowledge has not been previously
used to study pre-service teachers’ coping with placement. The second part of the online
questionnaire included the following five open-ended questions:
(1) Describe in your own words a situation you felt you have had difficulty coping with
in relation to professional practice.
(2) Identify what thoughts, emotions and actions are associated with the situation
described above (what I did; how I felt; what I was thinking about).
(3) Provide more detail on self-talk that occurred in relation to the situation you
described (as if someone could hear your inner-speech/thoughts).
(4) What would you have liked to change about your coping on placement?
(5) What additional help or support would you consider to be helpful? Explain.
The open-ended questions drew on recommended thought-provoking protocols and cognitive-
behavioural models designed to identify underlying beliefs, reduce unhelpful thoughts and
enhance problem-solving performance (Edelman, 2006; Neenan and Palmer, 2013).
Mixed methods were used for the data analysis. During the quantitative phase, both
descriptive and inferential statistics were acquired to examine the CSA-2 questionnaire
responses. The scale examines 20 different coping strategies, each consisting of
three survey items rated on a five-point scale from 1 (never use this coping strategy) to
5 (very often use this coping strategy) (Frydenberg and Lewis, 2014). Prior to running any
inferential analyses, coping strategy scores were adjusted for the purpose of providing
meaning and to standardise the response scale across all items using the following function
(Frydenberg and Lewis, 2014):
P
20 xi
Adjusted Score ¼ :
n

Overall

n 177
Gender ¼ M (%) 14 (8.0)
Context (%) Table I.
Early years 54 (30.5) Participants’
Primary school 107 (60.5) demographic
Secondary school 16 (9.0) information – gender
Placement number (mean (SD)) 2.14 (0.83) and practicum context
IJMCE Each of these adjusted scores was assigned to one of three coping styles: productive (which
9,1 contains eight coping strategies), non-productive (which contains five coping strategies) and
problem solving (which contains four coping strategies). Frydenberg and Lewis (2002)
identify under the non-productive coping style five avoidance strategies associated with an
inability to cope with stressors: dwell on the negative, self-blame, worry, not coping and
tension reduction. The different coping strategies and how they are allocated across the
76 three coping styles can be found in the CSA-2 manual (Frydenberg and Lewis, 2014). It
should be further noted that three of the coping strategies (keep to self, physical recreation
and work hard) are not allocated to any of these three styles. This paper primarily reports on
the 53 pre-service teachers who were shown to use the non-productive coping style.
In comparing the differences between coping strategies, single factor analysis of variance
tests, with Bonferroni adjusted post hoc tests, were utilised ( for further reading see Lee and
Lee, 2018). Normality was assessed via a Shapiro–Wilk test in conjunction with normal
quantile–quantile (Q–Q) plots. The assumption of independence was ensured prior to
commencing data collection, with early consultation with a statistician at the study design
phase. Homogeneity of variances was assessed via Levene’s test for each coping strategy,
with the Dunnett T3 method used as an alternative when the assumption was violated.
Drawing on naturalist inquiry methods (Lincoln and Guba, 1985), the qualitative
analysis of the open-ended responses followed a data-driven inductive approach. In reading
and re-reading the open-ended responses, units of meaning were assigned and recurring
themes identified ( Johnson and Christensen, 2008). In the next stage of the analysis,
emerging themes were mapped against the coping styles in search of associations.
The coding was then checked by the two authors for accuracy and validation.

Results
What we can learn about the non-coping pre-service teachers is seen in the descriptive
statistics for each of the non-productive coping strategy items, as reported in Table II. These
results revealed that non-productive coping strategies were not frequently used by the

Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always

Coping strategy Item n % n % n % n % n % α

Dwell on the negative Focus on my losses 41 25 59 36 49 30 10 6 5 3 0.88

Notice that bad things happen
to me 35 21 48 29 43 26 27 17 11 7
Keep thinking about my failures 43 26 51 31 39 24 19 12 12 7
Self-blame Criticise myself 14 8 26 15 57 32 50 28 30 17 0.92
Blame myself 26 16 36 22 52 32 34 21 16 10
See myself as being at fault 25 15 43 26 59 36 22 13 15 9
Worry Worry about my future 11 6 47 27 53 30 35 20 31 18 0.89
Worry about what is happening 6 3 24 14 64 36 53 30 30 17
Worry about what will happen
to me 18 11 34 21 59 36 29 18 24 15
Not cope Get stressed out and despair 22 12 54 31 50 28 32 18 19 11 0.76
Get sick 35 20 64 36 41 23 22 12 15 9
Suffer headaches or
stomach aches 25 15 34 21 51 31 29 18 25 15
Tension reduction Cry or scream 58 33 59 33 36 20 19 11 5 3 0.72
Table II.
Descriptive statistics Find a way to let off steam 56 32 47 27 46 26 20 11 8 5
and percentage usage Take my frustrations out
for non-productive on others 40 24 62 38 44 27 15 9 3 2
coping strategies Note: α, Cronbach’s α
pre-service teachers in this sample (modal response was either “rarely” or “sometimes” Mentor–mentee
across all items). relationships
Using their adjusted scores (see function above), the pre-service teachers were classified
into one of the three coping styles based upon the strategies they favoured. This resulted in
37 (22.6 per cent) pre-service teachers being classified productive copers, 53 (32.3 per cent)
pre-service teachers classified as non-productive copers and 74 (45.1 per cent) pre-service
teachers classified as problem-solving copers. Table III contains the descriptive statistics for 77
the adjusted scores across the three groups.
As can be seen from Table III, the most commonly used coping strategy among
productive copers was focus on the positive (M ¼ 80.36, SD ¼ 9.15). Among non-productive
copers, the most commonly used coping strategy was worry (M ¼ 83.77, SD ¼ 13.87). And
among problem-solving copers, the most employed coping strategy was solve problem
(M ¼ 79.46, SD ¼ 9.73). The results of the Bonferroni adjusted post hoc tests, focusing on
non-productive pre-service teachers, are provided in Table IV.
Overall, the results indicated that non-productive copers differed significantly compared
to productive and problem-solving copers for their usage of most of the coping strategies.
Only wishful thinking, humour and protect self did not differ significantly. As expected, the
five non-productive coping strategies (dwell on the negative, self-blame, worry, not cope and
tension reduction) were used significantly more by non-productive copers than productive
and problem-solving copers.
A further analysis was conducted of the open-ended responses of the 53 participants that
were found to use non-productive coping strategies. We sought evidence of the experiences
and challenges described in relation to the mentor–mentee relationship. The following
headings are used to present these results: perceptions of power imbalance and of
miscommunication, loneliness and desired support for career planning. The results of the
qualitative analysis are described below while the relationship between the scale and
qualitative analysis are further explained in the discussion section.

Perceptions of power imbalance and of miscommunication

One of the main issues raised in the open-ended response was the experience of difficult
mentor–mentee communication. This was particularly seen alongside descriptions of power

Productive Non-productive Problem solving

M SD M SD M SD

Wishful thinking 68.28 13.64 60.13 17.76 61.81 17.60

Improve relationships 60.37 19.30 47.17 15.13 53.51 15.13
Ignore 53.34 12.56 54.21 15.41 44.50 12.64
Humour 57.66 16.57 55.98 18.54 56.67 17.69
Seek spiritual advice 54.24 27.14 36.48 23.22 33.16 21.48
Protect self 56.03 20.09 51.57 19.04 49.18 17.41
Focus positive 80.36 9.15 57.87 13.94 74.14 13.60
Seek relaxing diversion 73.88 15.58 59.12 16.34 71.80 14.33
Dwell on the negative 40.18 17.24 68.05 15.77 38.56 13.83
Self-blame 51.90 18.47 78.87 14.72 49.46 18.13
Worry 54.24 16.64 83.77 13.87 55.31 16.47
Not cope 47.94 16.24 73.58 16.01 47.03 15.91
Tension reduction 37.66 13.35 59.37 16.50 38.65 13.28 Table III.
Solve problem 74.78 11.45 67.80 12.85 79.46 9.73 Descriptive statistics
Seek professional help 38.92 14.95 46.29 17.41 57.66 19.63 of the 20 coping
Social action 39.46 15.11 40.25 15.74 54.77 16.00 strategies split by
Social support 64.68 18.79 62.01 12.98 75.68 10.73 coping style
IJMCE 95% confidence interval
9,1 Strategy NPC compared to Mean difference SE Lower Upper

Wishful thinking PC −8.16 3.61 −16.89 0.58

PSC −1.68 3.03 −9.02 5.65
Improve relationships PC −13.20** 3.79 −22.48 −3.91
PSC −6.34 2.72 −12.94 0.25
78 Ignore PC 0.88 2.91 −6.16 7.92
PSC 9.71*** 2.44 3.80 15.62
Humour PC −1.68 3.80 −10.87 7.51
PSC −0.69 3.19 −8.41 7.03
Seek spiritual advice PC −17.76** 5.01 −29.89 −5.62
PSC 3.32 4.21 −6.87 13.52
Protect self PC −4.46 3.98 −14.09 5.16
PSC 2.39 3.34 −5.70 10.47
Focus positive PC −22.49*** 2.44 −28.42 −16.57
PSC −16.27*** 2.48 −22.29 −10.26
Seek relaxing diversion PC −14.76*** 3.27 −22.68 −6.84
PSC −12.68*** 2.75 −19.33 −6.03
Dwell on the negative PC 27.87*** 3.27 19.95 35.79
PSC 29.49*** 2.75 22.83 36.14
Self-blame PC 26.98*** 3.68 18.07 35.88
PSC 29.41*** 3.09 21.93 36.89
Worry PC 29.54*** 3.37 21.39 37.68
PSC 28.46*** 2.83 21.62 35.30
Not cope PC 25.65*** 3.43 17.35 33.95
PSC 26.55*** 2.88 19.58 33.53
Tension reduction PC 21.71*** 3.16 14.03 29.39
PSC 20.73*** 2.74 14.07 27.39
Solve problem PC −6.98* 2.40 −12.79 −1.18
PSC −11.66*** 2.02 −16.54 −6.79
Seek professional help PC 7.37 3.85 −1.94 16.68
PSC −11.37** 3.23 −19.19 −3.55
Social action PC 0.79 3.37 −7.36 8.94
Table IV.
PSC −14.53*** 2.83 −21.37 −7.68
Bonferroni Adjusted/
Dunnett T3 post hoc Social support PC −2.67 3.57 −11.43 6.08
tests of coping PSC −13.67*** 2.18 −18.95 −8.38
strategies across Notes: NPC, non-productive coping; PC, productive coping; PSC, problem-solving coping. *p o0.05;
styles **p o 0.01; ***p o 0.001

imbalance and participants’ comments that they lacked support and that “mentors should
be prepared to take more time out of their day to support us”. One participant wrote:
My mentor was not really available for assistance. She asked me not to talk to the other teachers
and take their advice, only hers yet when I asked if I could meet with her, she always was not
available. Then my final report came back saying I should ask for help. (F Early Years)
Other comments expressed a measure of disappointment and pointed at what they wished
the mentor communication would be like, asking mentors to be “more accountable and
demonstrate their level of support and be accountable to that support”. Lack of
communication was seen alongside perceptions that suggested mentors had excessive
power over the placement outcome:
I have struggled to get along with my mentor as she has not introduced me to any of her classes
and is not allowing me to teach in her classes, which is making it hard to learn and put my teaching
theory into practice. (F Secondary)
Data showed that the quality of guidance and feedback received from mentors was Mentor–mentee
perceived to be poor: “[I needed] more assistance from my mentor in forming activities in a relationships
subject I have never taught before and that is not my discipline area” (F Secondary). These
results align with a recent study (Deng et al., 2018) that showed a need to be more attentive
to pre-service teachers’ emotions and consider their challenging placement circumstances.
Some comments highlighted the difficulty in calling out unprofessional behaviours as well
as the negative impact unprofessionalism had on individual experience: 79
It is important that [pre-service teachers] are being placed with reputable teachers to ensure
that they are experiencing a rich and valuable placement as opposed to wasted time. I have
experienced a terrible mentor on my first placement and was not able to express this to anyone.
(F Primary)
In my final placement, I disclosed I had mental illness. Later during my placement, my mentor
suggested that people with mental illness had no place in teaching and that they really should just
focus on the good things in life. This was despite her saying that she had had a previous partner
with mental illness issues who really should just get over things. (F Early Years)
Feeling they had no-one to turn to, some pre-service teachers were seen to require
more structured communication strategies to manage their professional concerns.
A key concern is the risk involved in and implications that may arise from speaking
out about their concerns: “How we can help ourselves and have the confidence to
speak out if we feel that the situation has got to a place of insecurity” (F. Early Years).
Failing to meet the expectations of the mentor–mentee relationship contributes to
feeling isolated or lonely (Lam and Lau, 2012, p. 4266). Feelings of loneliness are
further described below.

Loneliness and isolation

Another key finding that emerged was the feeling of loneliness, which was seen in
association with social disconnect and an increased level of anxiety. Loneliness was seen in
the data as a sense of sadness and distress over feeling disconnected: “It feels very isolated
at school and the days are long and hard” (F. Early Years), “I openly told [my lecturer]
several times of my feelings and worries, but I was still alone” (F. Early Years), and “I felt
confused and quite abandoned and felt really discouraged to continue with my placement”
(F. Early Years). Such a response is common for pre-service teachers undertaking their
placement, as recent studies have pointed at the importance of dealing with feeling isolated
and lonely (Deng et al., 2018; Klinenberg, 2018). Loneliness appeared alongside fearing the
consequences of speaking about negative experiences:
I didn’t want to go back and lied to the university about my experience there, as I didn’t want the
information to go back to the Mentor for fear of what might occur. (F Early Years)
[I felt] anxious, stressed and uncomfortable. I kept quiet and didn’t get involved in talking badly
about anyone. (F Primary)
I felt like a naughty child who was being reprimanded for […] ask[ing] questions. I wish I could
have stood up to [my mentor] but my self-esteem was shattered that day. I had no one to talk to that
would understand. (F Early Years)
Fearing to share with the mentor or university staff important individual and professional
aspects of their experiences left pre-service teachers feeling there was “no-one” who they
could turn to. Choosing to keep to self was also seen, alongside physically avoiding going
back to placement, which impacted pre-service teachers’ wellbeing:
I did not disclose this to the university at all and actually had taken time off from the placement as I
really didn’t want to go back. (F Early Years)
IJMCE As the placement continued, I could feel myself withdrawing from physical activity, big social
9,1 events. (F Primary Years)
I felt alone, stressed and very overwhelmed and was so emotionally/physically sick with stress.
(F Early Years)
[I felt] confusion, hesitation, lack of confidence, loneliness […] and wanted to give up and not go
back. I cried but carried on. (F Primary)
80
In these comments, pre-service teachers show that failing to share their experiences with
others had impacted their emotional and mental wellbeing. Similar findings reported by
Lam and Lau (2012) suggest that lack of trust in others or fearing exploitation inhibits social
exchange and characterises lonely individuals in the workplace (p. 4268). The implications
for mentorships are explored in the discussion section.
To combat loneliness, some pre-service teachers reached out to social connections
outside of the placement context: “(I) focused on getting sleep, meeting up and talking with
my core group of family and friends” (F Primary); “I’ve been catching up with some friends
from the placement class and talking to them has partially helped” (F secondary). When the
professional mentor–mentee relationships were perceived to be negative or even posed a
threat, those who had strong social and family connections turned to these relationships
instead. In other cases, attempts to connect with others did not relieve the feeling of
loneliness: “I openly told (my university lecturer) several times of my feelings and worries,
but I was still alone”.

Thinking about leaving teaching and needing career advice

For many of the pre-service teachers, the professional experience made them think about
whether or not teaching was the right profession: “Is teaching the right career for me?”
(F. Primary), “How can I stay in the education industry but not be a full time mainstream
teacher?” (F. Secondary), “I have spent most of [my time on placement] thinking that once
it’s done I will change my course” (F. Secondary), “I felt very upset and frustrated, it caused
me to question what I am doing and if teaching is the right career for me” (F. Early Years).
These comments seem to provide evidence that pre-service teachers who had used
strategies from the non-productive coping style were thinking about leaving the teaching
profession in the early stages of their education programme. These kinds of comments can
be found in previous studies that point at the high rates in which teachers are known to
leave their jobs. Carlson (2012) described the teaching profession as notorious in that regard,
quoting Halford (1998) who said it was a “profession that eats its young” (p. 33). Ingersoll
(2001) used the general term “turnover” to describe leaving teaching for other professions
(attrition) or going from one teaching job to another (migration). In our data, we saw
individuals’ personal perceptions of whether their resources were sufficient for coping with
the demands of the job, which is known to be amongst the reasons for leaving teaching
(McCarthy et al., 2010). Pre-service teachers’ perceived inability to manage their workload,
lack of support and lack of enjoyment from school placement have previously been found to
be some of the main reasons that lead to leaving an ITE programme (Hobson et al., 2009).
These were seen in our data alongside concerns about financial implications and time
wasted associated with continuing with the teaching degree:
Lots of confusing thoughts [such as] is this what I want? What other career might I enjoy? […] I’m
not sure if waiting twelve months to see if my next placement is better is the best idea because if it’s
not, that’s a year I could have been studying something else or a year’s worth of tuition fees that
could be put towards something more beneficial to my new career path. (F Secondary)
Some pre-service teachers wrote about looking for career advice from professionals other
than their mentors or lecturers: “I have sought professional help to assess my future
direction” (F. Primary). A change of mind about teaching as a career was also found by Mentor–mentee
Hobson et al. (2009) as a key reason for leaving an ITE programme. Evaluating the support relationships
structures in place and the role of mentorship in supporting individuals’ career decision-
making are further discussed below.

Discussion
The findings from this study showed that mentorship is central to pre-service teachers’ 81
coping on placement. As the results showed, pre-service teachers who tended to use the
non-coping strategies (dwell on the negative, self-blame, worry, not cope and tension
reduction), on average, did not use problem-solving strategies (solve the problem, seek
professional help, social action and social support) and did not seek professional help (i.e. the
assistance of their mentors) as often as the problem-solving pre-service teachers. The
qualitative comments provided some insight into this matter, with some pre-service teachers
commenting that they would not contact their mentor again if their initial encounter was
negative. When pre-service teachers who tended to use non-productive coping strategies did
not perceive the interaction or guidance from their mentor as sufficient, they reported feeling
lonely and isolated during their practicum. Here, loneliness can be understood as a
distressing and “detached feeling that a person endures when there is a gaping emptiness in
their life due to an unfulfilled social and/or emotional life” (Killeen, 1998, p. 762). Pre-service
teachers who reported feeling lonely were also worried about the mentor–mentee
relationship. These results echo previously made links between individuals who feel lonely
in the work place and perceived or real poor leadership (Peng et al., 2017) seen in association
with considering a career change (see Figure 1).
The figure shows that pre-service teachers who used strategies from the non-productive
coping style reported miscommunication, power imbalance and feelings of loneliness in their
mentor–mentee relationships. The same group also described thinking about leaving the
teaching profession. Caution is advised when interpreting these results as this study examined
participants’ subjective perceptions and did not evaluate directly the mentorship provided.
There are several additional limitations to the current study. The data presented here
provide an emic perspective that captures pre-service teachers’ perceptions of the
mentorship relationship. Maybe these personal reflections do not objectively point at issues
with the mentoring, given that mentees are known to “shift responsibilities of their anxieties
and problems onto the mentors” (Tonna et al., 2017, p. 219). Importantly, this study did
not include mentor teachers’ perspectives or observations and documentation of the
mentor–mentee interactions. As Kwan and Lopez-Real (2005) identified, mentor teachers’

Subjective perceptions of power imbalance and

miscommunication + loneliness and isolation

Non-productive coping:
• Dwell on negative Figure 1.
Mentor–mentee • Self-blame Thinking about Schematic diagram of
relationship leaving teaching the qualitative themes
• Worry identified (power
• Not cope imbalance, loneliness
• Tension reduction and thinking about
leaving teaching) and
their relationship to
Productive coping/ non-productive coping
Problem-solving coping strategies
IJMCE perceptions of their role is multilayered as it reflects the identities they construct to
9,1 themselves within the context of their school community, can vary from being pragmatic,
interpersonal and managerial, and may change over time. If we aim to capture the complex
web of interactions, future investigations of pre-service teachers’ coping on placement
would benefit from including the important factor that is the mentor teacher
perspective. Moreover, this study only utilised the usage scale of the CSA-2 and did not
82 include the usefulness component. Future studies may also consider the usefulness scale
and correlate the responses accordingly. Furthermore, this paper reports only on the group
of teachers who used strategies from the non-productive coping style. Further analysis may
shed light on those who used strategies from the productive and problem-solving coping
styles, which might contribute to understanding what copers use that non-coping
individuals may miss.
Using the CSA-2 with pre-service teachers is still rather novel. Whilst the CSA-2 has been
firmly established as a valid instrument across several contexts, future studies should analyse
the items and scales to ascertain reliability and validity within this research context, as well.
This discussion highlights the relevance of questions that have been previously raised
about the quality of mentorship provided to pre-service and beginning teachers, which still
have currency and importance (Carver and Feiman-Nemser, 2009; Feiman-Nemser et al.,
1992; Norman and Feiman-Nemser, 2005). There is no doubt that establishing “a trusting,
supportive and affirming” (Tonna et al., 2017, p. 221) mentor–mentee relationship is
critically important, yet not commonly practised. One possible intervention that may
support pre-service teachers’ coping could be formulating mentor–mentee spoken
interactions through the use of protocols such as cognitive coaching frameworks
(Fitch and Marshall, 2002; Smith, 2008) and transformative talk (Garmston et al., 1993; Grift,
2014; Smith, 2008) known to enable self-analysis, transform practice and reduce emotional
disturbance. Scaffolding the spoken interaction may also help to shift the focus of the
conversation on pre-service teachers’ professional disposition, values and beliefs (Kindall
et al., 2017). Critically engaging with and attending to pre-service teachers’ thoughts and
beliefs on placement may help in turn to decrease feelings of isolation and loneliness.
Ensuring that both mentors and mentees are appropriately selected, trained and matched,
and that mentorship is non-hierarchal and excludes the assessment component, is essential
(Hobson, 2016). Changing current school culture and ITE work environments so that
thoughtful and professional mentoring programs are enabled and supported is of key
importance (Carver and Feiman-Nemser, 2009).

Conclusion
This paper highlights that pre-service teachers who favour non-productive coping
strategies tend to have heightened challenges whilst on placement. Typically, they were
found to be more aligned to dwelling on the negative, self-blaming, worrying, use of tension
reduction and not coping as their primary coping strategies. This group of pre-service
teachers also reported difficult mentor–mentee communication. Specifically, they were
worried about the mentorship provided, yearned for greater support and overall felt lonely.
A possible conclusion would be to identify this group of non-productive pre-service teachers
as a vulnerable population. Such a recognition would allow us to re-think supportive
interventions and vary the degree of outreach programs that universities currently offer to
cater for their particular needs. Future studies might set to identify causation between
mentorship and coping to explore more explicitly the impact of different mentorship styles
on pre-service teachers’ coping.
Professional experience presents pre-service teachers with real challenges relating to
their coping and wellbeing. For mentor teachers, schools and universities, the challenges are
just as great. Of key importance is to end the global scrutiny of teachers and teacher
preparation programs seen by “national accrediting agencies, stake holders and federal Mentor–mentee
governments” (Kindall et al., 2017, p. 206). It appears that pointing a blaming finger at relationships
teachers only adds additional stress to the education system, stretching teachers’
professional engagement beyond the duties of their teaching roles. Our recommendations
echo previous calls for a policy reform that acknowledges and supports mentoring in
schools as a distinct professional activity. If we expect full-time classroom teachers to
mentor pre-service teachers, then providing them with relevant qualifications, allotted time 83
to conduct mentoring and sufficient financial contribution for their efforts is necessary.
It could also increase the feasibility of the mentoring task and develop a sense of
professional agency. This could contribute to a more positive placement experience for
pre-service teachers, which in turn may help to improve their coping. Furthermore, and
despite the high demand for mentor teachers, restrictions around eligibility and increased
accountability of those trusted with the supervision and assessment of pre-service teachers
is essential. While in the short term such an approach may reduce the number of available
placements, it could help to create a higher quality work-integrated learning programme.
Further research is needed to explore coping in relation to professional experience and to
examine the effectiveness of supportive interventions.

References
Ambrosetti, A. and Dekkers, J. (2010), “The Interconnectedness of the roles of mentors and mentees in
pre-service teacher education mentoring relationships”, Australian Journal of Teacher
Education, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 42-55.
AITSL (2018), Accreditation of Initial Teacher Education Programs in Australia, Australian Institute
for Teaching and School Leadership, Melbourne.
Bentley, E., Workman, M. and Overby, A. (2017), “Being ‘adopted’ into a teaching community:
exploring mentoring relationships in a yearlong field placement”, International Journal of
Mentoring and Coaching in Education, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 228-241.
Beutel, D., Crosswell, L., Willis, J., Spooner-Lane, R., Curtis, E. and Churchward, P. (2017), “Preparing
teachers to mentor beginning teachers: an Australian case study”, International Journal of
Mentoring and Coaching in Education, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 164-177.
Brown, R. (2017), “The perceived impact of mindfulness instruction on pre-service elementary
teachers”, Childhood Education, Vol. 93 No. 2, pp. 136-146.
Carlson, C.L. (2012), “The profession that eats its young: the effect of principal leadership on the
survival rate of teachers”, Journal of Arts and Humanities, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 48-53.
Carver, C.L. and Feiman-Nemser, S. (2009), “Using policy to improve teacher induction: critical elements
and missing pieces”, Educational Policy, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 295-328.
Daly, C. and Milton, E. (2017), “External mentoring for new teachers: mentor learning for a change
agenda”, International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 178-195.
Danyluk, P. (2013), “The role of the pre practicum in lessening student teacher stress: student teachers’
perceptions of stress during practicum”, Action in Teacher Education, Vol. 35 Nos 5/6,
pp. 323-334.
Deng, L., Zhu, G., Li, G., Xu, Z., Rutter, A. and Rivera, H. (2018), “Student teachers’ emotions, dilemmas,
and professional identity formation amid the teaching practicums”, The Asia-Pacific Education
Researcher, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 441-453.
D’Rozario, V. and Wong, A.F.L. (1996), “A study of practicum-related stresses in a sample of first year
student teachers in Singapore”, Annual Conference of the Singapore Educational Research
Association and Australian Association for Research in Education, Conference Proceeding,
Singapore, 25-29 November.
Edelman, S. (2006), Change Your Thinking, ABC Books, Sydney.
IJMCE Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001), “From preparation to practice: designing a continuum to strengthen and
9,1 sustain teaching”, Teachers College Record, Vol. 103 No. 6, pp. 1013-1055.
Feiman-Nemser, S., Park, B.M. and Zeichner, K. (1992), “Are mentor teachers teacher educators?”,
Research Report Nos 92-11, The National Center for Research on Teacher Learning, MI.
Fitch, T.J. and Marshall, J.L. (2002), “Using cognitive interventions with counseling practicum students
during group supervision”, Counselor Education and Supervision, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 335-342.
84 Forgasz, R. (2016), “Rethinking the observation placement: a community/cohort approach to early
professional experiences”, in Brandenburg, R., McDonough, S., Burke, J. and White, S. (Eds),
Teacher Education: Innovation, Intervention and Impact, Springer, Singapore, pp. 99-116.
Frydenberg, E. and Lewis, R. (2014), Coping Scale for Adults (CSA-2): User Manual, Australian Council
for Educational Research (ACER) Press, available at: www.acer.org/au/publications-and-
resources/acer-press
Frydenberg, E. and Lewis, R. (2002), “The coping scale for adults: correlates of productive and
nonproductive coping”, The Educational and Developmental Psychologist, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 5-17.
Frydenberg, E., Eacott, C. and Clark, N. (2008), “From distress to success: developing a coping language
and programs for adolescents”, The Prevention Researcher, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 8-13.
Garmston, R., Linder, C. and Whitaker, J. (1993), “Reflections on cognitive coaching”, Educational
Leadership, Vol. 51 No. 2, pp. 57-61.
Grant, D. (1992), “From coping to competence? Teaching practice, stress and the professionalisation of
student teachers”, Pastoral Care in Education, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 20-27.
Grift, G. (2014), “The power of cognitive coaching”, in Grift, G. (Ed.), Transformative Talk: Cognitive
Coaches Share their Stories, Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD, pp. 1-14.
Gutierrez, J.C., Marzo, R.R., Lid-ayan, Z.B., Cuison, C.J.M., De Vera, J.B., Domingo, V.B. and Dilem, C.D.
(2016), “Stressors and coping mechanisms of pre-service teachers”, South American Journal of
Academic Research, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 1-10.
Halford, J.M. (1998), “Easing the way for teachers”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 55 No. 5, pp. 33-36.
Hart, N.I. (1987), “Student teachers’ anxieties: four measured factors and their relationships to pupil
disruption in class”, Educational Research, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 12-18.
Hobson, J.A. (2002), “Student teachers’ perceptions of school based mentoring in Initial Teacher
Training (ITT)”, Mentoring and Tutoring, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 5-20.
Hobson, J.A. (2016), “Judgementoring and how to avert it: introducing ONSIDE mentoring for beginning
teachers”, International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 87-110.
Hobson, J.A., Giannakaki, M.S. and Chambers, N.G. (2009), “Who withdraws from initial teacher
preparation programmes and why?”, Educational Research, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 321-340.
Hong, J., Day, C. and Greene, B. (2018), “The construction of early career teachers’ identities: coping or
managing?”, Teacher Development, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 249-266.
Ingersoll, R.M. (2001), “Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: an organizational analysis”, American
Educational Research Journal, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 499-534.
Izadinia, M. (2015), “A closer look at the role of mentor teachers in shaping preservice teachers’
professional identity”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 52, November, pp. 1-10.
Johnson, B. and Christensen, L. (2008), Educational Research: Quantitative, Qualitative and Mixed
Approaches, Sage Publications, Los Angeles.
Killeen, C. (1998), “Loneliness: an epidemic in modern society”, Journal of Advanced Nursing, Vol. 28
No. 4, pp. 762-770.
Kindall, D.H., Crowe, T. and Elsass, A. (2017), “Mentoring pre-service educators in the development of
professional disposition”, International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, Vol. 6
No. 3, pp. 196-209.
Klinenberg, E. (2018), “Is loneliness a health epidemic?”, New York Times, available at: www.nytimes.
com/2018/02/09/opinion/sunday/loneliness-health.html.
Knight, C., Balatti, J., Haase, M. and Henderson, L. (2010), Preservice Teacher Stressors and their Mentor–mentee
Reactions to Those Stressors: Resilient Responses, James Cook University, Townsville. relationships
Kwan, T. and Lopez-Real, F. (2005), “Mentors’ perceptions of their roles in mentoring student teachers”,
Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 275-287.
Lam, L.W. and Lau, D.C. (2012), “Feeling lonely at work: investigating the consequences of
unsatisfactory workplace relationships”, The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 23 No. 20, pp. 4265-4282. 85
Lazarus, R.S. and Folkman, S. (1984), Stress, Appraisal, and Coping, Springer, New York, NY.
Lee, S. and Lee, D.K. (2018), “What is the proper way to apply the multiple comparison test?”, Korean
Journal of Anesthesiology, Vol. 71 No. 5, pp. 353-360.
Leshem, S. (2012), “The many faces of mentor-mentee relationships in a pre-service teacher education
programme”, Creative Education, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 413-421.
Lewis, R. (1999), “Teachers coping with the stress of classroom discipline”, Social Psychology of
Education, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 155-171.
Lewis, R., Roache, J. and Shlomo, R. (2011), “Coping styles as mediators of teachers’ classroom
management techniques”, Research in Education, Vol. 85 No. 1, pp. 53-68.
Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. (1985), Naturalistic Inquiry, Sage Publication, Newbury Park, CA.
McCarthy, C.J., Lambert, R.G., Crowe, E.W. and McCarthy, C.J. (2010), “Coping, stress, and job
satisfaction as predictors of advanced placement statistics teachers’ intention to leave the field”,
Nassp Bulletin, Vol. 94 No. 4, pp. 306-326.
MacDonald, C. (1993), “Coping with stress during the teaching practicum: the student teacher’s
perspective”, The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 407-418.
Mahmoudi, F. and Özkan, Y. (2016), “Practicum stress and coping strategies of pre-service English
language teachers”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 232, October, pp. 494-501,
available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.067
Miller, D. and Fraser, E. (2000), “Stress associated with being a student teacher: opening out the
perspective”, Scottish Educational Review, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 142-154.
Morrison, C., Buckworth, J., Hay, I., Masters, J., Page, L., Quentin-Baxter, M. and Saunders, C. (2018),
NADPE Report: Professional Experience in Initial Teacher Education, Federal Department of
Education and Training, available at: www.acde.edu.au/?wpdmact=process&did=
MjI1LmhvdGxpbms=
Morton, L.L., Vesco, R., Williams, N.H. and Awender, M.A. (1997), “Student teacher anxieties related to
class management, pedagogy, evaluation, and staff relations”, British Journal of Educational
Psychology, Vol. 67 No. 1, pp. 69-89.
Murray-Harvey, R.T., Slee, P., Lawson, M.J., Silins, H., Banfield, G. and Russell, A. (2000), “Under stress:
the concerns and coping strategies of teacher education students”, European Journal of Teacher
Education, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 19-35.
Neenan, M. and Palmer, S. (Eds) (2013), Cognitive Behavioural Coaching in Practice: An Evidence Based
Approach, Routledge, London.
Ngui, G.K. and Lay, Y.F. (2018), “Investigating the effect of stress-coping abilities on stress in
practicum training”, The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 1-9.
Norman, P.J. and Feiman-Nemser, S. (2005), “Mind activity in teaching and mentoring”, Teaching and
Teacher Education, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 679-697.
Onen, A.S. and Ulusoy, F.M. (2015), “Investigating of the relationship between pre-service teachers’
self-esteem and stress coping attitudes”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 186,
May, pp. 613-617, available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.194
Peng, J., Chen, Y., Xia, Y. and Ran, Y. (2017), “Workplace loneliness, leader-member exchange and
creativity: the cross-level moderating role of leader compassion”, Personality and Individual
Differences, Vol. 104, January, pp. 510-515, available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.09.020
IJMCE Salkovsky, M., Shlomo, R. and Lewis, R. (2015), “Teachers’ coping styles and factors inhibiting
9,1 teachers’ preferred classroom management practice”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 48,
May, pp. 56-65.
Shanks, R. (2017), “Mentoring beginning teachers: professional learning for mentees and mentors”,
International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 158-163.
Smith, A.K. (2008), “Restructuring metaphors: using mental re-mapping in cognitive coaching”, Journal
of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 16-29.
86
Sumsion, J. (1998), “Stories from discontinuing student teachers”, Teachers and Teaching: Theory and
Practice, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 245-258.
TEMAG (2014), Action Now: Classroom Ready Teachers, Department of Education and Training,
Teacher Education Ministerial Advisory Group, Canberra.
Tonna, A.M., Bjerkholt, E. and Holland, E. (2017), “Teacher mentoring and the reflective practitioner
approach”, International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, Vol. 6 No. 3,
pp. 210-227.
Vesely, A.K., Saklofske, D.H. and Nordstokke, D.W. (2014), “EI training and pre-service teacher
wellbeing”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 65, July, pp. 81-85.
Vickery, N. and Gray, T. (2014), “The effects of professional experience upon pre-service physical and
health education teacher’s resilience, self-efficacy and stress”, University of Sydney Papers in
HMHCE, Vol. 3, pp. 17-42, available at: www.academia.edu/download/35755394/VICKERY___
GRAY_HMHCE_Article_02_2014-2.pdf
Yayli, D. (2017), “Coping strategies of pre-service teachers of Turkish with tensions in achieving
agency”, Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 7 No. 68, pp. 187-202.

About the authors

Dr Anat Wilson explores ways to support teachers and students in dealing with the stresses of
performance expectation through educational interventions and self-regulation. Her research areas
are in pre-service teachers’ coping with work-integrated practice, metacognition and self-awareness
and notions of consciousness in education. Prior to working at Swinburne University, Dr Anat has
worked in various tertiary and secondary educational settings as Teacher and Educational Leader.
Dr Anat is passionate about pursuing avenues of study that will bring individuals closer to an
understanding of self. Dr Anat Wilson is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
anatwilson@swin.edu.au
Dr Minh Huynh is involved with curriculum design, implementation, quality control and evaluation
for all units within the Applied Statistics Major. He is also involved with teaching intensive statistics
courses internationally, which focuses on delivering content to students who are not fluent with
English. His primary area of research is focused on statistics education and teaching statistics, where
he presents at both national and international conferences. For his PhD research, Dr Minh investigated
novel approaches to teaching statistics with modern technology, with the aim of improving student
attitudes towards statistics.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com