Re: FN-FORUM: Mentoring (was: Programmers)

date posted 15th May 2007 03:54

See below - reverted to "normal/desired" rather than top posting.

From: "Ben Johnson (Neogic) F" [EMAIL REMOVED]

Peter wrote:
> To go straight into contracting or freelancing with little or no
> experience or real commercial exposure must be very difficult, and
> perhaps it is our duty to mentor those with these limited experiences,
> helping to raise standards in return.

Mentoring is a great win-win arrangement. The mentor gains free/low-cost
assistance with work (depending on the trainee's experience and amount of
active training/support given), whilst the trainee benefits from new skills,
experience, work for their portfolio and industry advice/contacts.

We took on a part-time trainee early last year, whom I've trained in HTML,
CSS and basic JavaScript on a moderately paid contract basis. Luckily in web
development there is a nice fairly linear learning curve one can follow
(e.g., HTML > CSS > JavaScript/DOM > OO JavaScript > basic server-side
coding > DB interaction > AJAX/n-tier architecture).

The arrangement depends on commitment from the trainee and mentor alike. The
trainee must be prepared to put in a concentrated effort to absorb skills
(keeping notes and practicing skills in own time) and making the most of the
wealth of online training materials as directed by the mentor.

The mentor in turn needs to support the trainee's professional development,
supervising their training, providing suitable real-world projects to work
on, providing feedback to their work (and often corrections!). The mentor
should also have the decency to either increase the trainee's payment/reward
as their skills improve, or assist the trainee in pursuing future endeavours
rather than clinging to them as cheap labour!

It is important to realise, however, that the mentor *cannot* be expected to
provide full personal training, particularly if a basic wage is being
provided. If the trainee needs hand-holding in order to develop, I'd suggest
full-time employment would be more suitable, or a paid training course.

If mentors had to spend as much time training as is saved in project
assistance, the arrangement would be unfairly skewed. The idea is mutual
benefit, not charity, for both sides!

As usual, it would be useful to hear Mike A's input on the subject; I
understand he has a number of trainees on-board at UK Web Professionals, so
would be interested to hear his experience of what works (and what
doesn't!).

This forum is an ideal means of pairing potential trainees and mentors. I'd
suggest members interested in finding a mentor post a summary of their
background, current skills (and example work if possible) and what they are
currently doing to improve their skill set. No direct solicitations!

I'm guessing keen, self-motivated and proactive trainees with realistic
expectations will be snapped up by busy individuals here.


Mike A's input...

I applaud this thread (as changed). I particularly applaud and commend Ben's
deep insight into this subject matter. It is a subject matter of great
complexity.

Beware - what I say comes after a rather good night out!

To begin, and return to - think a few lyrics sung by Frank Sinatra.

How can I put it from my perspective (for it's difficult)? There's a "Holy
Grail" betwixt the person who would give time and a vast amount of both
experience and ability and the would-be student/apprentice (no matter how
keen or qualified). Concentrate on that word "apprentice".

To pay, or not to pay and apprentice or trainee is, in my view, irrelevant.
Nor is, at the outset, the ambitious/interested skill seeker's role.

Web development is complex. It is a multi-faceted role with multi-faceted
disciplines requiring multi-faceted experience. Accordingly, the entrant
cannot know any indication of a goal to be achieved. An idea and desire,
yes. Yet many would like to learn, and many good development houses would
want them - if, and only if, they have the potential.

During Summer 2006 I took on board three lovely, likeable, females of
different abilities but same interest. They were progressing well. Three
months later one of them took a particular like to me. I finished their
course because, no matter what, the need to become a Web professional can
become fatally flawed due to personal interests and opinions. The "human"
issue arose. Summary-in-brief: no matter how good the training or ability of
students, one cannot account for the human factor. If the learning base is
free or low-cost, students must have focus to achieve.

Another group, late 2006 and all postgraduates with ability and intelligence
to be dreamed of, decided they were too good. Training was so "easy" they
did not feel the need to produce a portfolio, although provided specific
(sometimes paid) projects. It would come later. These were the type to turn
up late or not attend.

The point of these two example is that whilst commitment from a mentor can
usually be guaranteed, for by nature such a person is altruistic, students
change - whether through group dynamics, personality, or personal
circumstances. A mentor, however, can never change what he/she implicitly or
explicitly states to the student what will be achieved. Although mercurial,
the objective of the mentor must be founded in the outcome that the student
will progress - regardless. It's an often frustrating exercise.

By contrast, I had since December two particular postgraduate students, both
Chinese. Their interest and focus was "reasonable", not excessive, from a
mentor's perspective. One of them now has a job starting in a complex
Web/networks position at a Scottish university, the other well on her way -
but now choosy. Both intend progress to PhD.

Back to the word apprentice. Frankly, a "mentor" can easily give £20k -
£100k worth of time (at only £200/hr) and personal effort to an interested
developer only for that effort to come to nought. A recipient apprentice is
different. Well, assuming they treat their trainer as credible and reliable.

First, an apprentice is paid. I suggest making the pay low, very low, but on
a realisable scale of achievement. In other words, their commitment and
ability will get rewarded according to results. Mistakes, nights out and
love periods allowed. Heads: progress according to results (achieved or
identified); tails: paid to do a job or out.

Background provided, I return to the principal issue.

The matter of mentoring an individual cannot have a planned outcome. Some
students, relatively few, will benefit and succeed, thus becoming a valuable
resource. Most, however, will fail - rarely for reasons of intelligence.
Also, one-year MSc students pay nearly £10,000 to the university and come
out way below my minimum standards for tuition by me.

Forums provide a magnificent asset for those of any qualification,
intelligence or ability to progress. Trainees can "listen", participate,
meet the crud of those in the "community" - suffer the slings and arrows.
Trainees can produce a "wonderful" all conquering inaccessible website in
puke green, red, yellow and violet on a black background - and receive in
abstract useful comments (we call flaming) and links. Little by little they
learn the simple things like missing links and 404 errors, and progress by
trial and error to SEO and postdata (code behind) issues. Frank Sinatra's
"High Hopes" understates the determination a budding developer needs - and
warns the mentor!

Little by little they adopt the true and skilled Web developer's persona.
And that without ever seeing a frown or hearing an adverse comment by their
mentor.

After a lot of trial and error I insist my students, all at least with MSc
credentials, must prove they are following at least three good forums. For
whatever I espouse, bark and dictate, I know that is the only way they will
progress according to their own ability, general understanding and ultimate
interests. I then become no more than a sounding-board, addressing real
thoughts and issues applicable to Web development - no longer a teacher but
a mentor. I cannot pay nor receive enough to achieve that result.

In my opinion, that's how mentoring should be - a consultative support to
interested students of the subject.

A student who meets the foregoing scenario, who is also an apprentice and as
such paid, is the one to get. Otherwise I suggest - don't waste time, mental
effort and stress of being a mentor! Just herd 'em to a good forum,
preferably one without seniors who whinge and bitch!

In summary - choose the right apprentice, guide them to good forum
resources, answer their questions in context with what they are doing, and
provide relevant projects (if only for their portfolio).

Perhaps shepherd is a better word than mentor!

As for duty to mentor - well, isn't that like a cross between wishful
thinking and Eutopia?

Reminder - I've had a good night out and more than a couple of beers, so
hope this first draft makes sense!

Mike A.