Mentoring and Tutoring

Vol. 12, No. 1, April 2004

Developing a mentoring internship model

for school leadership: using legitimate
peripheral participation
Ellen J. Williams*, Joseph Matthews & Steven Baugh
Brigham Young University, Provo, USA

Educational Leadership students need to spend significant time in authentic school contexts work-
ing alongside well-prepared mentor principals to be adequately prepared for complex leadership
roles. Through carefully-designed internships, students link school leadership theory from academic
coursework with actual improvisational practice. This type of knowledge can be accessed only in the
context of action. Lave and Wenger’s (1991) model of legitimate peripheral participation (LPP)
describes effective means for bringing intern administrators from the periphery to the center of the
community of leadership practice. In LPP mentors create growth-promoting divisions of labor that
allow interns to coparticipate with them, completing part of the task while simultaneously observing
mentor principals perform theirs, gradually increasing the complexity of tasks that interns are given.
LPP is a promising model for guiding selection and preparation of principals for mentoring roles.
This paper concludes with four recommendations for creating effective mentored internships.

Introduction
Several years ago, a Peace Corps volunteer recalled his experience in teaching village
children in a Third World country to play baseball. He discovered that teaching
them to play baseball involved more than developing skills, memorizing rules and
mastering strategies. Using chalk talk, demonstrations, case studies and simulations,
he meticulously taught the children the points of the game, including the goal of
running around the bases as fast as they could when the batter hit the ball. This
volunteer coach was sure the children were ready the first time they took their posi-
tions on the diamond. When the first batter hit the ball straight into outfield, the
volunteer shouted, ‘Run! Run!’ Ignoring the ball, every player on the field ran
around the bases, greatly excited about all the points they had scored for their team.
The coach declared to himself, ‘Somewhere … we’ve got a gap between theory and
practice’ (Baird, 1996, p. 1).

*Corresponding author: Ellen J. Williams, Associate Professor, 306R MCKB, Brigham Young Uni-
versity, Provo, Utah 84602, USA. Email: ellen_williams@byu.edu

ISSN 1361–1267 (print)/ISSN 1469–9745 (online)/04/010053–18 © 2004 Taylor & Francis Ltd
DOI: 10.1080/1361126042000183048
54 E. J. Williams et al.

The children’s mistakes in their first baseball game cost little and were easily
corrected. However, like the children whose grasp of baseball was not grounded in
authentic field practice, too many novice school administrators run around the bases
when they should run after the ball. These early career mistakes are not easily
corrected and may seriously hamper leadership efforts with faculty and community,
perhaps even damaging the novice’s future administrative career.
The young baseball players would have been much better prepared if their coach
had trained them using bats, balls and gloves on the field, which is where the action
of the game naturally occurs. Conceptual knowledge cannot be entirely isolated from
the everyday activity, context and culture in which it is used (Brown & Duguid,
1996). Increasingly, those preparing school leaders are finding that even the most
effective coursework is not sufficient to prepare novice administrators to be effective
in the early most formative stage of their careers (Murphy & Hallinger, 1987). Coach
Edwards expressed it well in a radio interview after his novice team lost their first few
games in the 2000 season: ‘You can’t manufacture experience!’. Even on the field
under the mentorship of their coach, practice did not hone players’ skills and judg-
ment as effectively as participating in the action of a real game. The same holds true
with aspiring school leaders.
Aspiring school leaders, hereafter referred to as interns, need sustained experience
in the context and action of the community of practice, working alongside successful
mentor principals, to be fully prepared to take on complex roles. In such settings,
interns discover what they know, what they do not know, what works and what does
not work. In the field, what is important is what a leader can do and this type of
knowledge cannot be explicitly taught nor can the need for it be accurately predicted
(Baird, 1996). This knowledge can be acquired incidentally from merely being
in situ; but to achieve the potential of fieldwork learning, universities must craft
school leader internships to include mentoring by willing, successful educational
leaders capable of fulfilling the mentor role. Legitimate peripheral participation
(LPP) as conceived by Lave and Wenger (1991) offers a conceptual model with the
potential to create well-designed internships that prepare school leaders effectively
for their complex roles.

Background
In this paper we consider the use of the conceptual model of LPP, as conceived by
Lave and Wenger (1991), to develop school leader internship programs and to
prepare mentor principals for their roles. LPP is a means for bringing aspiring admin-
istrators into the center of the full community of school leadership practice by having
them work closely with mentor principals on site for sustained periods of time. A brief
review of relevant literature will link mentoring to field-based internships. Drawing
on the works of Lave and Wenger (1991) and other researchers, a description of LPP
and its related terms will be given to lay the groundwork for understanding the pivotal
role of mentors and the importance of selecting and preparing successful principals
for these responsibilities. A concise treatment of LPP and mentored internships in
perspective with the full educational leadership preparation program will provide the
 Developing a mentoring internship model 55

context for a larger discussion including the mentoring role guided by key LPP
elements. Also included are pitfalls to avoid in selecting and preparing principals for
their mentoring roles. We conclude with recommendations for designing internships
using LPP.

Mentoring in school leadership internships

Mentors are individuals with experience and influence who teach those with less
experience (Crow & Matthews, 1998). They are trusted guides who teach (Levinson
et al., 1978), sponsor (Schein, 1978), challenge (Daloz, 1983) and act as confidantes
(Odell, 1990). In the context of school leadership, mentors are successful principals
who are committed, willing and able to invest sufficient time and effort to develop the
next generation of educational leaders (Milstein et al., 1991, Milstein, 1993; Crow &
Matthews, 1998). Our goal for mentoring prospective school leaders is to foster
dynamic administrators who cultivate a learning community for other leaders, teach-
ers, staff members, parents and students.
The mentoring process is a socialization strategy that helps aspiring administrators
learn the requisite knowledge, skills, behaviors and values to take on complex, respon-
sibility-laden school leadership roles (Crow & Matthews, 1998). This mentoring
process is initiated and directed by both interns and mentor principals (Altounyan,
1994) and is used in concert with complementary learning strategies. Mentoring
exposes interns to the full range of responsibilities that they might confront in practice
(Crow & Matthews, 1998).
Mentoring is deemed essential to preparing aspiring school leaders to move into
complex positions vested with significant authority (Daresh, 1988; Barnet et al., 1999).
One mentor principal noted: ‘Nothing teaches like being there. You can’t feel it unless
you are there. Administrators need to know this part!’ (Milstein, 1993, p. 103). The
importance of mentoring was supported by the results of a survey conducted to assess
the outcomes of Danforth Programs for the Preparation of School Principals
(DPPSP), an effort to assist universities to reconceptualize the way they prepared
school leaders (Milstein, 1993).
Regardless of the internship duration, all 22 DPPSP survey respondents viewed the
internship as a major instructional learning mechanism providing a powerful link
between theory and practice (Cordeiro et al., 1993). Internships that comprised 90
days of continuous experience seemed more valuable than those spread over a year
because interns were able to be more deeply involved in the flow of school life,
enabling them to see situations evolve and to complete complex activities. Viewing
mentoring as the key to productive learning, all DPPSP institutions believed that if
they could select a ‘cadre of successful practitioners who would willingly bond with,
model for, and demonstrate to talented novices the best of administrative practice,
their mutual enterprise would have a remarkable likelihood of success’ (Milstein,
1993, p. 29).
Mentors facilitate the journey from novice to full practitioner by focusing on the
individual intern’s experience, developmental levels, interests, dispositions and
interpersonal skills (Gordon & Maxey, 2000). Mentors challenge interns and build
56 E. J. Williams et al.

confidence in their developing abilities by scaffolding growth-promoting experiences,

shifting between nurturing and challenging or between supporting and prodding
(Crow & Matthews, 1998). As a mentor perceives problems in some aspect of an
intern’s work, the mentor alerts the novice to the problem, explains the possible
consequences and challenges the intern to try another method (Tomlinson, 1995).
Under these circumstances, the mentor might encourage the intern to seek additional
information or apply relevant theory and research, thus linking theory with practice.
Selecting mentor principals and training them are crucial to successful mentoring
relationships (Milstein, 1993; Gordon & Maxey, 2000). Little et al. (1984) found that
effective mentors respect those they assist and are more interested in facilitating than
controlling beginners. Bova and Phillips (1984) noted that successful mentors
evaluate situations from diverse points of view and generate many alternatives for
solving problems. DeBolt (1989) established that accomplished mentors are
approachable, collaborative individuals who possess strong interpersonal skills. Odell
(1990) reported mentors to be excellent teachers who are willing to engage in active
open learning and have the ability to work with adults.
Gordon and Maxey (2000) identified the lack of preparation as the greatest
obstacle to developing successful mentor relationships. Mentors need skills in
cultivating trust and rapport, adapting to adult learning characteristics, using effective
interpersonal communication and fostering effective decision-making and problem-
solving. Likewise, Cordeiro and colleagues (1993) found mentor preparation both
crucial and problematic in the DPPSP project. While 94% of the 22 participating
universities sponsored some form of mentor preparation, training ranged from as little
as a half-day meeting twice a year to full-day sessions each month for eight months.
A few DPPSP sites reported problems with persuading mentor principals to
participate in mentor training owing to time constraints and the perception that they
received adequate training on coaching, observing and other growth-promoting
processes within their own districts.
In the next section, we identify the components of legitimate peripheral participa-
tion. We examine LPP-mentored internships in the context of the full leadership
preparation program. And we consider mentoring as an LPP process and reflect on
potential pitfalls of mentored internships. Finally, we focus our discussion on how
LPP could enhance the preparation of school leaders through internships with
carefully selected and well-prepared mentor principals.

LPP: a conceptual model for designing internships

A brief treatment of situated learning will provide a context for understanding
legitimate peripheral participation. Lave and Wenger (1991) described situated
learning as learning that comes from participating in the practice in which the desired
conceptual knowledge, skills and dispositions are used to perform relevant tasks; for
example, internship experience for a school leader. Brown et al. (1996) proposed that
experience is central to learning and that acquiring knowledge is an active process.
They suggested that learners get a more complete account when they participate in
authentic activity, using the tools of their discipline to solve real problems within the
 Developing a mentoring internship model 57

context where the knowledge is located. For example, the young Third World
baseball players knew to run around the bases when the ball was hit—but they did not
understand that only the person who hit the ball should run around the bases.
Brown et al. (1989) illustrated the active nature of learning with a comparison
of acquiring new conceptual knowledge with purchasing a new set of tools. New
tools can only be understood through active use and one’s understanding of both
the tool and the world in which it is used continually changes. Schön (1983)
characterized the acquisition of professional knowledge as ‘knowing-in-action.’
Brown et al. (1996) presented the view that ‘learning and acting are interestingly
indistinct, learning being a continuous life-long process resulting from acting in
situation’ (p. 23).
To clarify the concept of situated learning, Lave and Wenger (1991) developed the
theoretical model of legitimate peripheral participation as the central defining feature
of situated learning. They suggested: ‘Learning is not merely situated in practice but
learning is an integral part of generative social practice in the lived-in world’ (p. 35).
LPP occurs when learners engage with masters in legitimate expert activity but in a
limited way with limited responsibility for the ultimate product. Thus learners are
responsible for completing a part of the task as co-participants with masters who are
in charge of the whole task. Learners gain the advantage of completing their part of
the task while observing the masters complete theirs. (Hereafter, ‘mentor’ will be used
in place of ‘master’.) This model accurately represents the concept of developing
internships for new school leaders. As interns are given legitimate practicum
assignments, their mentors serve as models and guides to help them complete tasks.
As interns become more familiar with and qualified to perform tasks, mentors
cautiously pull back to allow these developing leaders to fully mature in their leader-
ship abilities (e.g. conducting faculty meetings, supervising instruction, planning,
making decisions).

Definition of key LPP terms

LPP is a means to bring interns to the center of the community of practice as full
participants by starting them at the periphery, working with mentors in legitimate
activities. We clarify this conceptual model by defining the following key terms as
used by Lave and Wenger (1991): legitimate, peripheral, participation, community of
practice and ‘talk-in-the-practice.’ We illustrate these terms by applying each to
resolving parent–teacher conflicts (e.g. taking meeting notes, collecting information,
identifying outcomes, strategizing, reflecting).
Legitimate refers to the daily activities that are integral to the practice (Lave &
Wenger, 1991). Peripheral is the notion that interns will participate at the edge of the
practice alongside their mentors, initially doing simple tasks then moving on to tasks
that increase in complexity as their skills and knowledge develop. Participation suggests
that mentors and interns work and talk within the practice as they negotiate meanings
and improvise to solve problems that occur as a result of the changing circumstances
in which they perform their tasks. For example, in resolving parent–teacher conflicts,
an important aspect of school leadership practice, interns could co-participate on the
58 E. J. Williams et al.

periphery by taking meeting notes while their mentor leads the discussion to resolve
the problem. This arrangement gives interns the opportunity to complete a legitimate
part of the task (taking notes), while at the same time observing their mentors guiding
the discussion. As their skills develop, interns could take on more responsibility for
resolving these types of issues, while their mentors slip back into more supportive roles.
Lave and Wenger (1991) used the term community of practice to refer to ‘a set of
relations among persons, activity, and world over time’ (p. 98). It consists of the
knowledge, tools, culture and collective wisdom of practitioners who engage in
relevant activities and participate in dialogue to coordinate and deal with problematic
situations. For educational leadership, the community of practice includes the
relationships among stakeholders (e.g. administrators, teachers, patrons, central office
staff and students), leadership activities, conceptual frameworks and conversations
within the school culture and with other cultures with which it interacts. For example,
as interns work with mentor principals to resolve parent–teacher disagreements, they
will talk with teachers, counselors, parents and students and in doing so use relevant
conceptual tools and procedures for conflict resolution.
Talk in the practice is an integral part of LPP. Language is part of the practice, and
learning advances through collaborative social interaction (Lave & Wenger, 1991).
Through dialogue interns gain insight into ways that mentors think about decisions
or approaches to solving problems. Through dialogue mentors communicate mental
models as conceptual tools, beliefs and values they hold that extend through the
community of practice. For example, prior to meeting with the parent(s) and teacher
to resolve a conflict, mentors and interns might identify the outcomes they desire and
discuss possible approaches to achieving them.
Two important forms of talk in the practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991) are reflec-
tion and reflective storytelling. Reflection—in, on and for practice (Schön,
1983)—is integral to collaborative social interaction. Mentors reflect with interns in
practice as they assess and adapt to moment-by-moment situations. They reflect on
practice as they think through past actions to evaluate their effectiveness and derive
insight to be applied to similar issues. They reflect for practice as they ponder
future actions. By reflecting on what worked and what did not and anticipating
how that should inform future actions, interns learn from successes and mistakes,
make sense of experiences and construct knowledge about the practice (Milstein
et al., 1991; Baird, 1996). In resolving parent–teacher conflicts, mentors might
reflect with interns on what the underlying issues were that created the problem;
at the conclusion mentors might ponder on the connection between their actions
and arriving (or not arriving) at amenable solutions. After the meeting mentors
might examine with their interns the implications of this case for avoiding or
resolving future parent–teacher conflicts.
Practitioners tell reflective stories to demonstrate how they solved problems,
gained a new insight or developed a critical relationship; in the process they reflect
on what they learned (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Crow & Matthews, 1998). Stories
supply practitioners with the improvisational skills needed to diagnose the state of
problems and to appropriately alter their approaches to each unique presenting
situation (Brown & Duguid, 1991).
 Developing a mentoring internship model 59

Key elements of LPP that could optimize administrative internships

Using key elements of LPP, universities can transform internships from merely
learning in situ to learning in practice. First, learning is most complete if it occurs in
the place where the knowledge resides. Second, learning is an active process wherein
interns learn by engaging in daily work activity using the conceptual tools of the
community of practice. Third, working with mentors doing simple tasks, interns can
move from the periphery to the center of practice as they take on more complex
responsibilities and interact with the full community of practice. Finally, reflective
dialogue is fundamental because important learning occurs as interns talk in the
practice with mentors who are assessing, solving and evaluating problems in real time.
Successful mentor principals are pivotal to creating the necessary conditions for
LPP learning to occur. They structure growth-promoting opportunities for interns to
work with them. Mentors link interns to other relevant individuals and aspects of the
community of practice. They dialogue and reflect with interns in, on and for their
work (Schön, 1983) and tell stories that provide access to the conceptual tools and
collective wisdom of the practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Crow & Matthews, 1998;
Matthews & Williams, 2001).

Mentored internships using elements of LPP

Using LPP, universities can position administrative interns at the center of
educational leadership practice. While co-participating in the legitimate activity of
school leadership, interns can work, talk and reflect with mentors and other commu-
nity leaders as they collaboratively adapt their conceptual knowledge and skills to
solve problems of student learning, teacher supervision, student discipline and
coordination. Interns can learn in the experience—not from it or about it (Schön,
1983). Not only do interns develop school leadership, they fashion an identity of
themselves as school leaders. Lave and Wenger (1991) summarized LPP this way:
LPP provides a way to speak about the relations between newcomers and old timers [and
mentors], and about activities, identities, artifacts, and communities of knowledge and
practice. It concerns the process by which newcomers become part of a community of
practice. A person’s intentions to learn are engaged and the meaning of learning is config-
ured through the process of becoming a full participant in a sociocultural practice …. This
social process includes, indeed it subsumes, the learning of knowledgeable skills. (p. 37)
As they become members of a community of practice through LPP, interns gain
generative knowledge, skills and dispositions that bridge the gap between the formally
articulated theory they learned in academic coursework and daily practice as they
experience it in the world in which they live (Brown & Duguid, 1991).

Mentored LPP internships in context

Well-designed field experiences and research-based academic experiences are
interdependent and essential. Academic coursework without authentic field-based
experience offers theory without practice, and therefore remains empty. Internships
60 E. J. Williams et al.

without academic coursework provide practice without theory, which also is empty.
Alone, either perpetuates the status quo (Hay, 1995).
Optimally, universities should include three components in their preparation
programs: theory-based academic coursework, field-based mentored internships and
regular opportunities for reflection (Milstein et al., 1991). In coursework professors
can connect theory with practice by using relevant case studies which help students
find, frame and solve problems and thus cultivate critical thinking capabilities.
Mentor-guided internships provide authentic experience in which students can
simultaneously complete tasks and observe successful principals as they function
improvisationally in the action of practice. Regular reflection in situ, in weekly semi-
nars and individually, provides opportunities for interns to make sense out of their
experience, comprehend and refine their practice and learn to know themselves in the
administrative role. Reflection also allows mentors and university professors to
provide psychosocial support for interns as they grapple with the stress of school lead-
ership.
These three interlinking components prepare interns to employ theory-driven prac-
tices when they become school leaders, more than do programs that rely solely on
academic coursework or that offer poorly developed disjointed internships. These
three components can be examined in greater depth, but we focus here on mentored
internships that are guided by elements of LPP. Because mentor principals play a
significant role in creating LPP conditions, the internship discussion centers mainly
on the mentors’ requisite roles and skills and on the means by which universities
might prepare them.

Mentoring, the heart of internships that are guided by LPP

Caravalho and Maus (1996) suggested that mentors are wise, accomplished veterans
who share their knowledge and experience with newcomers and help them learn to
balance the daily organizational operations with the process of adapting to the
dynamic, unknowable future. Crow and Matthews (1998) described mentors as
‘active, dynamic, visionary, knowledgeable, and skilled [individuals] who [have] a
committed philosophy that keeps the teaching and learning of students in focus; and
who [guide] other leaders to be similarly active and dynamic’ (p. 2).
In LPP, learning does not depend on mentors’ ability to describe the practice, but
rather on their ‘ability to manage effectively a division of participation that provides
growth on the part of the student’ (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 21). Mentors identify
situations and events that will contribute to interns’ professional knowledge by
intelligently designing organized and sequenced opportunities that promote the
development of broad-based expertise (Muse et al., 1988) and an understanding of
the full practice (Crow & Matthews, 1998; Matthews & Crow, 2002). A study of the
University of Ohio’s administrative internship program revealed a pattern used by
mentor principals to scaffold learning opportunities for interns: being directive
initially, but progressively having interns take on more responsibility for carrying out
administrative tasks (e.g. designing and supporting professional development,
working with parents, leading group decision-making). Mentors gradually stepped
 Developing a mentoring internship model 61

back but still provided a safety net of support as interns tested their capabilities by
taking greater charge of increasingly complex tasks (Cordeiro & Smith-Sloan, 1995).
Crow and Matthews (1998) suggested that mentors attend to interns’ professional,
career and psychosocial development. Professional functions assist interns ‘to learn
the knowledge and technical skills of how things are done and acquire the cultural
knowledge of how things are done here’ (p. 58). Careerwise, mentors open doors to the
full community of practice by helping learners identify administrative career oppor-
tunities, learn procedures to access diverse career opportunities and access networks
of people who hold the keys to such opportunities (Ferriero, 1982; Kram, 1985). In
the psychosocial function, mentors help interns cope with the emotional and cognitive
dissonance experienced as they shed past roles and perspectives, fashion new roles and
grapple with the demands of the job (Carden, 1990; Crow & Matthews, 1998).
Mentors engage with newcomers in important legitimate activity to negotiate
meanings and solve problems, share and convert implicit knowledge into explicit
knowledge, construct understanding and engage with the ambient community of
practice (McLellan, 1996). To facilitate the development of interns’ skills and
judgment, mentors use specific strategies including reflection, stories, coaching and
articulation of learning skills.

Reflection. Reflection is a cognitive activity that, when integrated with experience,

provides depth and clarity to new knowledge (McClellan, 1996). Reflection invokes
insights, refines practice and fosters a personal cycle of growth by which interns
develop in their roles. Reflection provides the social interaction between mentor and
learner that helps makes sense of the experience—it is the ‘talk in the practice’ that is
so essential to LPP (Lave, 1988). When reflection is an integral part of the LPP
experience, more learning occurs (McClellan, 1996) and mentors and interns
develop a shared perspective of the practice (Brown & Duguid, 1991).

Stories. Stories are vehicles for learning and remembering—an effective system for
storing, linking and accessing information readily under multiple, new and
unpredictable conditions (Brown & Duguid, 1991; Lave & Wenger, 1991). ‘Stories
do not just describe a life in a learned genre, but are tools for reinterpreting the past
and understanding the self in terms of identity [with the full practice]’ (Lave &
Wenger, 1991, p. 84). Stories contain packets of situated knowledge that assist
interns to deal with challenging situations of their own (Lave & Wenger, 1991;
McClellan, 1996). When interns hear or tell stories, they learn to diagnose problems,
reinterpret experiences and perceptions, fashion an identity crucial to full
participation in the practice and learn to talk (or be silent) like a full practitioner.
Personal stories provide a bank of knowledge from which interns draw wisdom as
they perform increasingly complex and diverse tasks and make decisions under
changing circumstances, thereby developing their own ability to improvise as
circumstances demand. For example, a mentor might share his or her experience in
getting the building wired for technology. In the process he or she might reflect on
what was learned from the mistakes made and what kinds of bureaucratic challenges
62 E. J. Williams et al.

had to be worked through in order to accomplish this endeavor. These reflections

would give interns knowledge that they could draw on in the future when solving
issues that might require working through systems.

Coaching. Mentors teach specific skills through guided experiences. Mentors may
describe and model leadership skills, then guide from the side, providing learners
opportunities for ‘initiative and self-directed problem-solving: constructive learning’
(McLellan, 1996, p. 11). In the coaching role mentors function as collaborator, team
leader and guide rather than boss.

Articulation of learning skills. Articulation refers to the ‘concept of articulating or

separating out different component skills in order to learn them more effectively’
(McLellan, 1996, p. 11). Interns verbalize their own knowledge, reasoning and
thinking processes while solving problems; in so doing they access deeply rooted
unconscious implicit knowledge and transform it into explicit knowledge. Articula-
tion leads to reflective thinking, which helps interns to adapt what they know and do
to the shifting conditions of school leadership.
A secondary history teacher related how his mentor integrated these processes as
the two co-participated in the clinical teacher supervision process. Initially, the intern
began on the periphery with little responsibility, then moved to the center, where he
took the major role. First, his mentor discussed teacher supervision generally, then
modeled the clinical supervision cycle with a teacher, including a pre-observation
conference, classroom observation, data analysis, write-up and post-observation
conference. At this peripheral stage, the intern took observational notes, as did his
mentor principal, which they both analyzed and discussed to prepare for the post-
observation teacher conference. After each component, the mentor and intern
reflected on methods, procedures and outcomes, then repeated the process with a
second teacher. This time the intern took the major responsibility for conducting the
supervision cycle and the mentor observed and reflected with him at each stage. This
process was rich with social co-participation and employed many mentoring processes.
The mentor rehearsed the clinical supervision steps with the intern, coached him in
ways to reflect with teachers during the pre-observation and post-observation confer-
ences, and told stories of supervising and supporting problematic teachers in the past.

LPP influence on mentors. Mentoring relationships ‘not only open the individual up
for change but are a critical point in the organization’s life cycle’ (Crow & Matthews,
1998, p. 28). In spite of few material rewards, mentors reported many personal and
professional payoffs (Odell, 1990; Milstein, 1993). Mentoring refines the skills of the
mentor principals themselves (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Cordeiro & Smith-Sloan,
1995). University of Ohio mentor principals reported that working with mentors
impacted their practices significantly (Cordeiro & Smith-Sloan, 1995). First, mentors
had to reflect on their practice to decide what experiences learners needed in order to
gain a complete picture of the new role. Second, reflecting interactively with interns
 Developing a mentoring internship model 63

helped mentor principals ponder on what they valued, why they did what they did and
how they personally could make better contributions to achieving important
outcomes.
In addition, opportunities to collaborate with other adults stimulated mentors’
thinking, broadened their knowledge and perspective and helped them discover alter-
native approaches to administrative tasks and leadership. For example, interns can
look with fresh eyes at the school setting and at problem-solving processes; they may
see things that people who have worked at the school for years might not notice.
Mentors reported that they learned more through mentoring than in traditional staff
development (Blank & Sindelar, 1992; Ganser, 1997).

Considerations for designing mentored internships. Most universities recognize the

value of field-based internships. A study by Mullen and Cairns (2001) indicated that
graduate students considered the internship to be very important, but not always
feasible or appealing. Since the 1980s and 1990s, most universities have included the
field experience as a component in their educational administration programs with
the goal of better preparing students for this complex role (Evers & Gallagher, 1994).
Hopkins (2000) reported that many universities were adding mentoring components
to their programs as a way to provide much-needed practical experience to prepare
potential school leaders. Although recognized as helping aspiring administrators learn
and develop critical knowledge, skills and dispositions, administrative internships are
not always as beneficial as they should be. A brief discussion of the pitfalls of many
mentored internship programs will punctuate the value of LPP as a conceptual model
for designing effective internships that avoid such problems. Perhaps the most impor-
tant consideration is to ensure that interns are mentored by carefully selected, willing
and successful principals who are well prepared to use core LPP elements in their
mentor role.

Potential pitfalls for internships. Typically, it is expedient for students to perform their
administrative internship in the school in which they teach, usually part time, before
and after school and during preparation periods. Because internships frequently
occur while the aspiring administrator is teaching full time, and because they often
take place at the end of the administrative program, many internships might not give
interns meaningful opportunities to observe or participate in the essence of school
leadership in LPP.
If mentoring is the primary socialization method, some internships pose particular
problems for students in the amount of clinical time and the scope of experiences.
The clinical aspects of most preparation programs are notoriously weak (Murphy,
1990). LaPlant (1988) suggested that even when embedded in the school context,
not all internships are actually clinical in nature because they lack a clear delineation
of skills to be learned and demonstrated. Field-based experiences are not always (1)
context-sensitive, (2) purposeful and articulated, (3) participatory and collaborative,
(4) knowledge based, (5) ongoing, (6) developmental and (7) analytic and reflective.
In particular, without reflection participants are left with merely an assortment of
64 E. J. Williams et al.

activities that might not require them to apply conceptual knowledge and develop
flexible problem-solving to address future circumstances (Daresh, 1988; Milstein et
al., 1991; Prestine & LeGrand, 1991; Cordeiro, 1995; McLellan, 1996).
Another common problem of some clinical experiences is that the internship is
treated as the culmination of learning rather than as the beginning of lifelong learning
(Daresh, 1988). Medical and law schools design preparation programs to provide
students with skills and knowledge necessary to start the job and to equip them with
the conceptual tools to continue learning as new problems, cutting-edge information
and solutions emerge. Education is also dynamic and similarly demands that aspiring
leaders continuously learn and refine their skills.
Unfortunately, many interns get stuck at the periphery of practice and are not
drawn into the center, where leaders make the most important decisions and do the
more complex improvisational work. McKerrow’s (1998) study found that the
majority of the interns’ time was spent in attending meetings, doing office work and
supervising students. Less than 4% of their time was spent acting independently as a
principal. McKerrow also found that most of the interns’ time was spent on activities
for which they depended on the mentor, not in activities designed to promote
independent decision-making or problem-solving. This study found that most
internships offered little ‘legitimate peripheral participation’ (Lave & Wenger, 1991)
that allowed interns to exercise professional judgment and to receive mentoring.

Potential pitfalls for mentoring interns. Clinical experiences can be problematic for
practicing teachers, often causing time conflicts and financial distress. Because most
aspiring school leaders are full-time teachers who are drawing full salaries, internships
often require that they relinquish all or part of their regular salary in order to perform
an internship. This burden of needing to keep a teaching position can cause many
qualified and promising school leaders to forgo quality internships for partial, less-
involved internships. Further discourse among practitioners and higher education
faculty members must consider this problem. A few university programs (Brigham
Young University, University of New Mexico and University of Utah) have found
ways to address the need for students to be freed from their teaching responsibilities
to perform in an administrative internship. This paper does not directly address these
strategies because of their complexity and uniqueness to the context of each program.
For discussion of internships in school leader preparation programs, we advise the
reader to refer to either Crow and Matthews (1998) or Capasso and Daresh (2001).
Our purposes here are to address the mentoring problems that often do occur in these
internships.
A potential problem emerged in studies of LPP in meat-cutting guilds. Some
masters tended to view their apprentices as a cheap way to extend productivity rather
than as learners for whom they had responsibility. Apprentices often got ‘stuck doing
repetitive, nonenlarging tasks [in isolation from their masters] in order to keep labor
costs low and volume production up’ (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 76). Because they
rarely observed their masters in action and seldom engaged in task-related conversa-
tions, apprentices did not get a well-rounded preparation.
 Developing a mentoring internship model 65

Likewise, if mentor principals view their interns as merely extra help rather than as
learners, interns too could be relegated consistently to tasks at the periphery of the
practice. These conditions deprive administrative interns of experience in more
complex leadership tasks (e.g. understanding, building and managing school culture;
visioning; participating in instructional decision-making and supervision; engaging in
team-building; and participating in negotiations, coordination and information flows
with other administrators). Consequently, they are not fully prepared to take on the
complicated roles of school leadership.
Another potential problem with internships is the involvement of the mentor with
the intern (Crow & Matthews, 1998). Although the LPP model would advocate the
mentor as a constant companion to the intern, the reality of schools is that they are
multifaceted organizations that require principals to be constantly involved with
educational processes. Principals, unlike many other organizational leaders, cannot
simply put things aside while they attend to mentoring a newcomer. In most
situations, mentoring of prospective administrators is not part of a principal’s job
description or expectation. Problems occur, therefore, in principals finding time for
the mentoring process and then in receiving appropriate rewards for their efforts.
Even with the best mentoring, problems can interfere with the effective develop-
ment of a prospective administrator. Because schools are context driven, some
principals may mentor an intern with the best of what they have to offer within the
context of that school. What the intern experiences may be effective for that school
environment, but not so effective in another setting. This intensely context-specific
training may prevent a novice from developing his or her own skills in decision-making
and problem-solving (Hay, 1995; Crow & Matthews, 1998).

Avoiding pitfalls of mentored internships

To address potential internship pitfalls, we offer two recommendations using the LPP
model. First, universities must select successful and willing principals at all school
levels to serve as mentors. Second, principals must be prepared with the knowledge,
skills and dispositions required to fulfill their roles as mentors in the LPP process.

Mentor selection. In light of their central role in LPP, selection of mentors is crucial
to the success of internships. Crow and Matthews (1998) outlined four factors to be
considered in selecting mentors. First, mentors should exemplify good school leader-
ship, possess strong character reputations and be well respected. Second, mentors
should be committed to the concept of mentoring and to receiving the training
necessary to become a better mentor. Some leaders are not willing or available to
commit themselves to receive training or fulfill mentoring expectations effectively.
Third, mentors should be selected who are learners themselves and are eager to
model and engage others in learning. Fourth, universities should select mentors who
have the time for mentoring. Although they may be committed, even the best leaders
can be involved in so many programs that they lack the time to mentor others
effectively.
66 E. J. Williams et al.

Mentor preparation. Preparing selected principals for their mentor roles is important
to the success of the internship. Mentor principals need to acquire understanding and
skill in the processes of social co-participation described in the LPP model (Lave &
Wenger, 1991; Brown & Eisenhardt, 1998). The curriculum for mentor training must
be aligned with the knowledge, skills and dispositions mentors need to structure
social co-participation that gives interns increasing access to the practice. These skills
are best acquired under conditions that most closely approximate the circumstances
in which principals will be working with interns on site.
The curriculum must be tailored to the particular knowledge, skills and disposi-
tions that prepare mentor principals for their central and specialized role in LPP.
Specifically, LPP is about what interns will learn in the practice by co-participating
with their mentors (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Hence, mentors must be skilled at
organizing a division of labor that provides growth for the interns. They must be
sensitive to interns’ readiness for increased complexity and know how to scaffold
opportunities that help interns extend leadership skills and take on more responsi-
bility, while still providing the interns appropriate support and protection (Cordeiro
& Smith-Sloan, 1995).
Mentor principals must know how to assist interns in gaining professional, career
and psychosocial development. Mentors must be skilled at structuring opportunities
for interns to take part in the full range of the practice and at arranging opportunities
for interns to showcase their abilities to key administrators in the hierarchy of the
school system (Crow & Matthews, 1998). As interns grow and develop an identity of
themselves as school leaders, mentors must be able to assist them to cope with the
accompanying stress and disorientation.
Mentor principals need to know how to ‘talk in the practice’ (Lave & Wenger,
1991) with their interns and how to scaffold opportunities for them to dialogue with
other practitioners as well. These problem-based dialogic discussions give interns
access to the shared culture and wisdom of the full community of practice (Lave &
Wenger, 1991).
Curricula must comprise mentoring constructs and practices, including reflective
storytelling, written and oral reflection, coaching and articulation of learning skills
(Crow & Matthews, 1998; Matthews & Williams, 2001). Some of these practices
can be taught through conventional didactic means, but most are improvisational
and are best learned ‘by doing’ (Nonaka et al., 1996).
Mentor preparation is most effective if it closely approximates the conditions in
which mentoring at school sites occurs. Following are some training suggestions that
also give novice mentor principals opportunities to work with experienced and skilled
mentors. First, formal instruction in mentoring expertise could be delivered by prin-
cipals who are currently experienced and successful mentors. Successful mentor prin-
cipals could teach sessions that might include specific mentoring skills, strategies for
integrating interns into the center of practice, means by which interns’ abilities can be
showcased to key individuals in school districts, or methods for supporting interns
psychosocially. Second, retreats could include opportunities for novice mentor prin-
cipals to dialogue informally with experienced mentors, where stories of likely prob-
lematic situations would be shared and reflected upon. Third, case studies of actual
 Developing a mentoring internship model 67

situations could be used for practicing specific mentoring processes. Finally, newly
assigned interns could participate with their mentors in part of the training, which
gives an authentic purpose to the development of mentoring processes and acceler-
ates interns’ integration into the school sites.

Recommendations for strengthening internships through LPP

We offer the following recommendations for designing mentored internships:
1. University pre-service programs should design internships using elements of LPP that
locate learning in the venue where practitioners use the desired knowledge and
tools in the daily activities of the practice, to draw interns from the periphery to
the center of the educational leadership community of practice. Mentor principals
are crucial to successful internships because it is they who organize a division of
labor that promotes interns’ growth in the full range of the practice. Mentor
principals must engage interns in the intricate dialogues that are so valuable to
acquiring improvisational and generative knowledge of the practice.
2. University and school district administrators must select mentor principals carefully,
choosing those who are successful in their school leadership role, are willing to
develop mentoring skills in LPP, and who will invest the time and energy required
to mentor interns.
3. Universities should assist selected principals to develop mentoring skills. To this end
they must sponsor formal training, using a curriculum that is aligned with the
knowledge, skills and dispositions required of mentors. Training must simulate
LPP conditions, using interactive participant-centered learning strategies and
scheduling informal opportunities for novice and experienced mentor principals
to dialogue and reflect on the practice of mentoring (e.g. reflecting on problem-
atic situations, recounting stories, sharing strategies, etc.). For example, Brigham
Young University sponsors two days of mentor training twice yearly, that is
taught by experienced and effective mentor principals. Newly assigned interns
participate with their mentor principals in the first training, which many report
puts their internship ahead by two weeks. A research-based mentor handbook
provides long-term support for practicing mentors.
4. Universities must assist mentor principals in becoming conversant with leadership theories
taught in coursework and in designating experiences interns should have under their
mentorship. This coordination will potentially bridge theory with practice at the
school site.

Conclusion
Universities struggle to bridge the gap between leadership theory presented in
academic coursework and practice as it occurs in the field as they prepare future
educational leaders. Even well-designed coursework cannot present the complete
picture of educational leadership. This picture can only be accessed through carefully
crafted experience in the action of the practice.
68 E. J. Williams et al.

Similar to the children learning to play baseball, interns need practice in the
field. Interns need to learn in the daily action of school leadership in real settings
and in real time under the direction of mentor principals. Interns must be able to
co-participate in the unpredictable conditions in which school leaders constantly
assess shifting situations and judge which knowledge is needed and in which form.
Much of this knowledge is intuitive, inarticulatable and experience based; it cannot
be easily isolated from the situation in which it is manifest. Because much of the
most critical knowledge is improvisational and resides with the thinking and actions
of practitioners, interns must fully participate in this milieu for sustained periods to
absorb the collective wisdom, conceptual tools and culture of the community of
educational leaders.
While not a panacea, internships that are designed using key elements of LPP will
better prepare aspiring school leaders for their future roles. However, these internships
will be completely successful only if principals are carefully selected and thoroughly
prepared for their mentoring roles using the conceptual model of legitimate peripheral
participation.

Endnote

Challenges related to timing for meaningful internships

Internship timing is a challenge to which there are no easy or uniform solutions.
Some possible approaches to arranging time during the school day might be to
schedule internships during the summer track of year-round schools, co-direct or
assist in administering academic summer schools, apply for public school/university
liaison positions or request sabbaticals. A difficult but more fruitful approach is to
establish a partnership between public school districts and universities in which
districts sponsor a certain number of educators to participate in administrator prepa-
ration programs and the university trains principals in the mentoring process. Using
these or similar alternatives, interns will be able to spend enough continuous time at
a site to have a meaningful internship experience. Capasso and Daresh (2001)
addressed another timing issue in their book The school administrator internship hand-
book: leading, mentoring, and participating in the internship program. They suggested
that leadership students can strengthen their internships if they complete them
during their preparation program rather than waiting until the end, and become
more proactive in arranging meaningful and broad-ranged experiences.

References
Altounyan, C. (1994) Putting mentors in their place: the role of workplace support in professional
education. Unpublished dissertation, Sheffield.
Baird, B. N. (1996) The internship, practicum, and field placement handbook: a guide for the helping
professions (Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall).
Barnett, B. G., Hall, G. E., Berg, J. H. & Camerena, M. M. (1999) A typology of partnerships for
promoting innovation, Journal of School Leadership, 9, 484–509.
 Developing a mentoring internship model 69

Blank, M. A. & Sindelar, N. (1992) Mentoring as professional development: from theory to

practice, Clearinghouse, 66(1), 44–48.
Bova, B. M. & Phillips, R. R. (1984) Mentoring as a learning experience for adults, Journal of
Teacher Education, 35(3), 16–20.
Brown, J. S. & Duguid, P. (1991) Organizational learning and communities of practice: toward a
unified view of working, learning, and organization, Organization Science, 2(1), 40–50.
Brown, J. S. & Duguid, P. (1996) Stolen knowledge, in: H. McLellan (Ed.) Situated learning,
(Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Educational Technology Publications), 47–55.
Brown, S. & Eisenhardt, K. (1998) Competing on the edge (Boston, MA, Harvard Business School
Press).
Brown, J. S., Collins, A. & Duguid, P. (1989) Debating the situation: a rejoinder to Palincsar and
Wineburg, Educational Research, 19(4), 10–12.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A. & Duguid, P. (1996) Situated cognition and the culture of learning, in: H.
McLellan (Ed.) Situated learning perspectives (Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Educational Technology
Publications).
Capasso, R. L. & Daresh, J. C. (2001) The school administrator internship handbook: leading,
mentoring, and participating in the internship program (Thousand Oaks, CA, Corwin Press).
Caravalho, G. A. & Maus, T. (1996) Mentoring: philosophy and practice, Public Management,
17–20.
Carden, A. D. (1990) Mentoring and adult career development: the evolution of a theory, The
Counseling Psychologist, 18(2), 275–299.
Cordeiro, P. A. & Smith-Sloan, E. (1995) Apprenticeships for administrative interns: learning to
talk like a principal, paper presentation at the Annual Conference of American Educational
Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
Cordeiro, P. A., Krueger, J., Parks, D., Restine, N. & Wilson, P. T. (1993) Taking stock: learnings
gleaned from universities participating in the Danforth Program, in: M. M. Milstein (Ed.)
Changing the way we prepare educational leaders: the Danforth experience (Newberry Park, CA,
Sage), 17–38.
Crow, G. M. & Matthews, J. (1998) Finding one’s way: how mentoring can lead to dynamic leadership
(Thousand Oaks, CA, Corwin Press).
Daloz, L. A. (1983) Mentors: teachers who make a difference, Change, 5(6), 24–27.
Daresh, J. C. (1988) The role of mentors in preparing future leaders, paper presentation at the
Annual Conference of American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA, April.
DeBolt, G. P. (1989) Helpful elements in the mentoring of first year teachers, a report to the State
Education Department on the New York State Mentor Teacher-internship Program (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED 316).
Evers, N. A. & Gallagher, K. S. (1994) Field-based preparation of educational administrators, in:
N. Prestine & P. Thurston (Eds) Advances in educational administration: new directions in
educational administration: policy, preparation and practice, Volume 3 (Greenwich, CT, JAI
Press), 77–97.
Ferriero, D. (1982) ARL directors as protégés and mentors, Journal of Academic Librarianship,
7(6), 358–365.
Ganser, T. (1997) The contribution of service as a cooperating teacher and mentor teacher to the
professional development of teachers (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 408 279).
Gordon, S. P. & Maxey, S. (2000) How to help beginning teachers succeed (Alexandria, VA, Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development).
Hay, J. (1995) Transformational mentoring: creating developmental alliances for changing organizational
cultures (London, McGraw-Hill).
Hopkins, G. (2000) Decisions, decisions! A week in the life of the principal, Education World,
School of Administration, 1–4. Available online at: www.education world.com/a_admin/
admin164.
Kram, K. E. (1985) Mentoring at work: developmental relationships in organizational life (Glenview,
IL, Scott, Foresman).
70 E. J. Williams et al.

LaPlant, J. C. (1988) An examination of approaches to field-based learning in other professions,

paper presentation at the Annual Conference of American Educational Research Association,
New Orleans, LA, April.
Lave, J. (1988) Cognition in practice: mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life (Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press).
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991) Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation (Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press).
Levinson, D. J., Darrow, C. N., Klein, E. B., Levinson, M. H. & Mskee, B. (1978) The seasons of a
man’s life (New York, Ballantine).
Little, J. W., Galagaran, P. & O’Neal, R. (1984) Professional development roles and relationships:
principals and skills of advising (San Francisco, CA, National Institute of Education).
Matthews, J. & Crow, G. M. (2002) Being and becoming a principal: new conceptions of the contempo-
rary principalship (Boston, MA, Allyn & Bacon).
Matthews, J. & Williams, E. J. (2001) Brigham Young University Leadership Preparation Program
mentor handbook. Unpublished manuscript, Provo, UT.
McKerrow, K. (1998) Administrative internships: quality or quantity, Journal of Education, 8,
171–186.
McLellan, H. (1996) Situated learning perspectives, in: H. McLellan (Ed.) Situated learning
(Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Educational Technology Publications), 311.
Milstein, M. M. (1993) Changing the way we prepare educational leaders (Newbury Park, CA,
Corwin Press).
Milstein, M. M., Bobroff, B. M. & Restine, L. N. (1991) Internship programs in educational adminis-
tration: a guide to preparing educational leaders (New York, Teachers College Press).
Mullen, C. A. & Cairns, S. S. (2001) The principal’s apprentice: mentoring aspiring school
administrators through relevant preparation, Mentoring & Tutoring, 9, 125–152.
Murphy, J. (1990) Restructuring the technical core of preparation programs in educational admin-
istration, UCEA Review, 21(3), 4–5, 10–13.
Murphy, J. & Hallinger, P. (1987) Approaches in administrative training (Albany, NY, State University
of New York Press).
Muse, I., Wasden, F. & Thomas, G. (1988) The mentor principal (Provo, UT, Brigham Young
University Press).
Nonaka, I., Takeuchi, H. & Umemoto, K. (1996) A theory of organizational knowledge creation,
Internal Journal of Technology Management, 11, 833–845.
Odell, S. J. (1990) Support of new teachers, in: T. M. Bey & C. T. Holmes (Eds) Mentoring:
developing successful new teachers (Reston, VA, Association of Teacher Educators).
Prestine, N. A. & LeGrand, B. F. (1991) Cognitive learning theory and the preparation of
educational administrators: implications for practice and policy, Educational Administration
Quarterly, 27(1), 61–89.
Schein, E. H. (1978) Career dynamics: matching individual and organizational needs (Reading, MA,
Addison-Wesley).
Schón, D. A. (1983) The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action (New York, Basic
Books).
Tomlinson, P. (1995) Understanding mentoring: reflective strategies for school-based teacher preparation
(Buckingham, Open University Press).