Summary

This case study explores the implementation and outcomes of mentoring circles as an active learning strategy within a post-1992 higher education institution. The mentoring circles were utilised in the Advance HE professional recognition experiential scheme with thirty-five colleagues working on different categories of fellowship. Participants came from various academic and professional services departments across multiple campuses. The mentoring circles were designed to support professional development by fostering peer mentoring learning, collaboration, and reflective practice. The intervention created structured opportunities for staff to reflect on their own practice and be active learners to support their own professional development.

What Did We Do?

The mentoring circles were structured as online peer mentoring sessions designed to foster collaborative knowledge construction, reflective practice, and the sharing of strategies for professional development. These circles were open to staff across all academic schools and professional services departments and were conducted as twilight sessions to accommodate work schedules. Flipped learning was used to deliver instruction before class, allowing class time to focus on applying and extending learning (Bintz & Hajovsky, 2024). Participants prepared by completing a pre-session reflective template to inform the discussion.

A trained internal Mentor Reviewer facilitated each circle, guiding focused discussion to support participants in sharing practice, exploring common challenges, and developing professional strategies together. The focus of these circles was both individual growth and the creation of a community of practice, where participants could draw on the knowledge and experiences of their peers. The online format and mentoring model encouraged active participation, with all members given equal opportunity to contribute. One specific example involved participants reflecting on the Dimensions of the Professional Standards Framework 2023 (AdvanceHE, 2023), a tool commonly used in the UK to benchmark HE practice. Participants used this framework to consider what evidence they already held, how they might source additional evidence, and what further development they may require. Ethical approval from the University of Greater Manchester was granted in January 2025 for the use of the feedback data cited.

Why Did We Do It?

The decision to implement mentoring circles as a professional development strategy is grounded in several key theories of learning and educational research. Active learning, as defined by Bonwell and Eison (1991), involves engaging learners in activities that promote participation and knowledge application. Mentoring circles create space for participants to explore real-world challenges and share insights that enhance individual and group learning.

Mentoring circles align with Vygotsky’s (1978) constructivist theory, which emphasises the co-creation of knowledge through social interaction. By encouraging peer mentoring discussions, the circles create an environment where participants can learn from each other’s experiences and collaboratively develop solutions to professional challenges. This also reflects Lave and Wenger’s (1991) concept of situated learning, where learning occurs through participation in communities of practice.

Mentoring circles provide a space for reflection, where participants can critically assess their experiences and identify areas for improvement. Schön (1983) highlights the importance of reflection in developing professional competence. Brookfield (2017) further emphasises the value of peer discussion in enhancing reflective practice, as it allows participants to challenge assumptions and expand their perspectives.

The experiential learning cycle, as proposed by Kolb (1984), is also evident in the structure of the mentoring circles. Participants engage in concrete experiences (sharing challenges and successes), followed by reflective observation (discussing and evaluating those experiences), abstract conceptualisation (developing strategies), and active experimentation (applying new approaches). This process supports deeper learning and helps participants apply knowledge, while also developing their identity as active learners who can model these approaches in their own practice to support their students.

Participant Responses

Participants noted that the circles allowed them to learn from diverse viewpoints. As one Mentor Reviewer explained: ‘Engaging in these mentoring circles has strengthened my collaborative skills, as I have learned from the perspectives and challenges shared by mentees, further enriching my own approach to educational leadership and mentoring’.

The flipped learning approach was well-received. One Mentor Reviewer shared: ‘I really appreciate the strategic organisation of mentoring circles. In my circle, the colleagues know each other much better than I know them, so time was given to their discussion and sharing ideas on specific dimensions and criteria. The mentees in fact supported each other much more effectively than I could have done’. This insight reflects the power of peer mentoring discussions, where participants took responsibility for their learning and supported one another’s development.

The sessions also created opportunities for staff to reflect on their own practice. One participant mentioned how it encouraged them to revisit their work: ‘It has made me go back and look over some of my lesson plans to see if I could implement different teaching ideas that were discussed at the mentoring circles’. Another participant stated that ‘discussing ideas with individuals outside of your immediate team offers fresh perspectives and deeper reflection, supporting a richer understanding of what active learning can look like’. This demonstrates the direct impact the mentoring circles had on refining participants’ teaching practice and encouraging continued professional growth.

The flexible, informal structure of the mentoring circles contributed to an open and approachable environment. Participants noted that the small group format and use of technology, such as screen-sharing, facilitated productive discussions. ‘The informal nature of the session worked well, as did the small number of people in each breakout room. Mentees were able to share their screens allowing other people in the room to see examples and benefit from feedback’. This approach not only promoted engagement but also ensured that feedback was relevant and tailored to each participant’s context.

The circles provided a space for professional reflection and support. One participant commented on the value of the circles in addressing the isolation often felt in teaching:

I also think that teachers are often, ironically, quite isolated in their practice. We often do many things, but we have a very limited time to share or reflect on what we do or achieve, so these circles provide precious time to reflect on our professional work, achievements, and also celebrate which could be a strategy to enhance teachers’ sense of pride, job satisfaction, and wellbeing.

This resonates with the broader goal of the mentoring circles to provide a space for reflection, celebration, and professional connection, promoting a positive sense of professional identity.

The response of the mentors was also positive, with comments indicating that they felt more connected to their colleagues across the institution and appreciated the opportunity to share experiences and insights in a supportive, collaborative environment. One participant shared the impact of their experience: ‘Serving as a mentor in the Senior Fellowship application process has had an impact on my own practice, particularly in refining my ability to provide constructive feedback, facilitate meaningful discussions, and adapt my support to the individual needs of mentees’. This highlights how the process not only benefits mentees but also enhances the mentor’s reflective practice and ability to engage with different perspectives.

In summary, the mentoring circles were highly regarded for their ability to foster collaborative learning, reflect on practice, and offer opportunities for meaningful feedback. Participants felt empowered and better equipped to reflect on their professional growth and take ownership of their development.

How Is This a Form of Active Learning?

Mentoring circles are a form of active learning because they promote direct engagement with the material and ideas shared within the group. Active participation is central to the structure of the circles, where participants are not passive recipients of information but active contributors to the learning process. As Bonwell and Eison (1991) suggest, learning is most effective when students are involved in doing things and applying knowledge, which is exactly what happens in these circles.

Through discussions, peer feedback, and collaborative problem-solving, participants apply knowledge to real-world scenarios, reflecting on their practice and sharing solutions to challenges they face. This process mirrors Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning cycle, where participants move through stages of concrete experience, reflection, conceptualisation, and experimentation. The peer mentoring nature of the circles ensures that all participants are engaged and responsible for their learning, fostering a deeper understanding of the concepts discussed.

Furthermore, the focus on reflective practice and metacognition encourages participants to think critically about their own learning processes. This aligns with Brookfield’s (2017) argument that peer discussion enhances reflection by allowing participants to challenge assumptions and broaden their perspectives.

Our Inclusive Approach

Inclusivity was a central consideration in the design of the mentoring circles. Several strategies were implemented to ensure that the scheme was accessible to all staff, regardless of their work schedules or caregiving responsibilities. The decision to hold online, twilight sessions was made to ensure that participants could engage without being constrained by traditional office hours. This approach was particularly beneficial for staff with caregiving responsibilities or those working across different campuses or locations.

The flipped learning model further supported inclusivity by allowing participants to prepare for the sessions at their own pace, ensuring that everyone had the opportunity to engage meaningfully in the discussions. As Boud et al. (2013) note, flipped learning promotes equity by giving all participants the chance to engage with the material in a way that fits their individual circumstances.

Additionally, the peer mentoring structure of the circles ensured that all participants had an equal opportunity to contribute. This model encourages a sense of shared ownership and responsibility, which fosters an inclusive and supportive environment where all voices are valued.

Sustainability

Sustainability was ensured through a combination of factors. First, the use of an online platform and twilight sessions made the scheme scalable and accessible, allowing for participation across multiple locations without the need for significant logistical resources. As Fletcher and Mullen (2012) suggest, flexible scheduling is key to ensuring that professional development opportunities are accessible to a diverse range of staff.

The flipped learning model also contributed to the sustainability of the scheme by enabling participants to prepare for sessions in their own time. This approach reduced the time demands on participants, making it more feasible for them to engage in the scheme over the long term. Boud et al. (2013) argue that the flexibility of flipped learning helps maintain engagement without placing undue pressure on time.

Previously, a 1:1 mentoring model relied on individual mentor capacity, which was not sustainable; the mentoring circle centralised support and reduced reliance on individual facilitators. Internal mentoring creates a self-sustaining cycle of learning, where those who benefit from the scheme can step into mentoring roles themselves, contributing to the ongoing development of the community (Irby et al., 2022).

Finally, the sense of community built within the mentoring circles was crucial for sustaining engagement. As participants formed networks and built relationships, they were more likely to remain committed to the scheme and encourage others to participate in future sessions. This community-based approach helps ensure that the mentoring circles continue to thrive and evolve, fostering long-term professional development.

How Can Others Adapt Our Approach?

The mentoring circle model can be adapted to other contexts by focusing on key elements such as flexibility and collaborative learning. For institutions looking to address student-facing challenges, the model can be adapted to include discussions on effective teaching strategies, student engagement, and supporting diverse learning needs. For example, teaching staff could use mentoring circles to share strategies for using active learning to improve engagement in large classes or developing more inclusive teaching practices. By adopting a flipped learning approach, staff could reflect on student feedback or case studies before coming together to discuss strategies for improving student retention or supporting at-risk students.

Key Takeaways

• Peer mentoring enhances colleagues’ own engagement with active learning as a means for their own professional development: Mentoring circles provide an inclusive space for reflection, knowledge sharing, and collaborative problem solving, deepening learning and professional growth.
• Flexibility supports inclusivity and sustainability: Online twilight sessions and a flipped learning model make the circles accessible and maintain engagement across campuses and professional roles.
• Communities of practice can foster long-term development’ : Mentoring circles build lasting professional networks where participants evolve into future mentors, creating a self sustaining cycle of learning.

References

Advance HE. (2023). Professional Standards Framework for teaching and supporting learning in higher education 2023 [Resource]. Advance HE. https://www.advance‑he.ac.uk/teaching‑learning/professional‑standards‑framework

Bintz, G., & Hajovsky, D. B. (2024). Components of the flipped classroom in higher education. Frontiers in Education, 9, Article 1412683. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/education/articles/10.3389/feduc.2024.1412683/full.

Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 1. The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED336049

Brookfield, S. D. (2017). Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Sampson, J. (2013), Peer Learning in Higher Education: Learning from and with Each Other. Abingdon: Routledge.

Fletcher, S. and Mullen, C. A. (2012), The Handbook of Mentoring in Education. Sage.

Irby, B. J., Pashmforoosh, R., Tong, F., Lara-Alecio, R., Etchells, M. J., Rodriguez, L., Prickett, C., & Zhao, Y. (2022). Virtual Mentoring and Coaching for School Leaders Participating in Virtual Professional Learning Communities. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 11(3), 274-292.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.

Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.

About the authors

Rose Childs is Head of Education at the University of Greater Manchester. Professor Geoff Baker is CEO of True Learning Partnership and Emeritus Professor of Education at the University of Greater Manchester.