1. Introduction: Mentor Interviews

  2. Participant 1: JORDAN JEFFERSON

  1. Who initiated the mentoring relationship—the Mentor or the Mentee?

  2. When and where do you meet?

  3. How is the time spent? (Format, accountability, confidentiality, evaluation, closure).

  4. What is the most difficult aspect of the relationship?

  5. What is the most significant result of the relationship?

  1. Participant 2: Rev. Hooker

  1. Who initiated the mentoring relationship—the Mentor or the Mentee?

  2. When and where do you meet?

  3. How is the time spent? (Format, accountability, confidentiality, evaluation, closure).

  4. What is the most difficult aspect of the relationship?

  5. What is the most significant result of the relationship?

  1. Summary



Thisappendix contains the participant interviews that the researcher usedin his report. When the researcher began his interview process,questions concerning the nature of mentoring were addressed to twodifferent participants (mentors). These questions led to thedevelopment of significant insights into the importance ofmentorship.


EMAIL:[email protected]

1.Who initiated the mentoring relationship—the Mentor or the Mentee?

Throughmy local church, we assign respectable men within the congregation asmentors. These men are usually fathers or people of honorableoccupation. These people must be kind hearted and caring men fortheir families, communities, and church family. For my case, thementor initiated the mentoring relationship.

2.When and where do you meet?

Generallywe meet at the church. Often, we meet with our mentees at communityevents such as concerts, games, and special programs. The programtargets single mothers and widowed women within our church. The mensometimes perform simple tasks such as taking them to be fitted for atuxedo, or find an outfit for students who want dress up. So,ventures can extend to the mall and local restaurants.

3.How is the time spent? (Format, accountability, confidentiality,evaluation, closure)

Menmeet with mentees at church for formal mentor meetings. The entirementorship program meets and men teach different tasks to theirmentees. Changing car battery, spark plug tips, grilling, and cookingare just a few of the topics that some men have covered with theirstudents.

4.What is the most difficult aspect of the relationship?

Ibelieve that the most difficult aspect of the relationship is tryingto expose the mentee to different experiences. Depending on thestudent`s background, they have divergent views on the events andpractices shared with them. Besides, when students have not had afather figure, it is hard for them to talk men and form a bondingrelationship.

5.What is the most significant result of the relationship?

Intimes past, students have been encouraged to attend college insteadof joining the workforce. Many times, we find that students need thatsupport system. Some of them do not get it at home. We try doing ourbest to afford that experience to them.


EMAIL:[email protected]

  1. Who initiated the mentoring relationship—the Mentor or the Mentee?

Mycurrent mentoring relationship as a mentor is with two seminarianswho are working on an MDiv. At ITC in Atlanta. The students are AME,and they initiated the relationship for a single semester as a partof a class assignment.

  1. When and where do you meet?

Weonly met once, but our usual meeting is over the phone on Thursday`snights at 8:45 pm. This is an ideal time for all three of us.

  1. How is the time spent? (Format, accountability, confidentiality, evaluation, closure)How is the time spent? (Format, accountability, confidentiality, evaluation, closure)

Wespend two minutes in prayers, ten minutes in class work, ten minutesin questions and answer forum, and another ten minutes in follow upfor their class lecture, 10 minutes going over the current readingassignment, and then we close with over with questions, person lifeissues, and prayer.

  1. What is the most difficult aspect of the relationship?

Keepingto the hour we have set, that is, starting on time and ending on time

  1. What is the most significant result of the relationship?

Ithought this would be an excellent opportunity to teach these personsmore about Wesley and improve my knowledge of some of the currenttrends. The surprise has been how the discussions have flown into mypreaching and teaching at my local church.


Whenthe researcher began his interview process, questions concerning thenature of mentoring were addressed to two different participants(mentors). The participant brought many issues to light. Thequestions raised led to the advancement of significant insights intothe importance of mentorship.

1.0Why Spiritual Mentoring is Important

Thedifference between mentoring and other approaches to learning is thedepth and concern that is attached to vocation and connection withGod. The mentor models the Christian life of a student and answershis questions. Through mentoring, a student receives an outlet thathe can use to express himself and develop a positive outlook on theissues that affect him. In essence, mentoring helps one buildconnections around what he believes in and extend his understandingof Jesus Christ and ministry to other people. Thus, the spiritualteacher may provide knowledge to his student, but this knowledge isnot the ultimate goal. Depending on what a student needs at aparticular point in time, the mentor may teach a lot or nothing tohelp his student gain a deeper understanding of the essence of histrue nature.

Consideringthe above, a spiritual teacher, as opposed to the traditionalteacher, does not focus on providing specific knowledge, but in areaswhere the student understands. For example, mentors help studentsfeel God`s presence in their daily lives, in addition to cultivatingpractices for vibrant and fulfilling lives. In fact, Anderson andRandy (1999)1contend that mentoring brings together the fragmented lives ofmentees into a fruitful life. Thus, students mature and embody thelife of Christ, making the world a better place. Over the course oftheir mentorship training, students are endowed with a betterunderstanding of how to approach various situations. For instance,students learn the importance of helping the poor, bringing togetherbroken relationships, and training people to lead abundant lives.

2.0Comparing and Contrasting the 2 Mentoring Interviews

Iinterviewed Rev. Jordan Jefferson and Rev. Hooker separately tocompare and contrast their views on mentorship and to gain furtherinsight into the strengths and weaknesses of their approaches. Atfirst, I thought that the principles that underpin the decisions maderegarding choosing mentors, and mentorship strategies would besimilar this was not the case. The two trainers implemented theprogram very differently. Nonetheless, in spite of the differencesinherent in their approaches, there were some similarities.

Myfirst interview question was, who initiated the mentoringrelationship? Rev. Jordan Jefferson was somewhat vague on answeringthe type of students that he was mentoring. I did not know whether hewas mentoring undergraduate or graduate students. However, he wasvery specific on who the church mentors were. In this case, thementors initiated the mentorship program. On the other hand, Rev.Hooker was very particular regarding the students he mentored. Hesaid that he was mentoring two seminarians undertaking an MDiv. atITC in Atlanta. However, Hooker was somewhat vague on the type ofmentors that the church preferred assigning to students. Hookerasserted that the mentees initiated the mentorship relationship withthe church. Upon listening to both approaches, I realized that Rev.Hookers` mentees were in better hands since he, personally, mentoredhis students, as opposed to Rev. Jefferson, who contended that thechurch chose respectable men from the congregation to mentorstudents.

Mysecond question was, where and when do you meet? Re. Jordan Jeffersontold me that the mentors usually meet mentees at the church. However,the two groups may also meet at events such as special programs,concerts, and games. Jefferson also asserted that the programprimarily targets widows and single mothers affiliated with thechurch. Conversely, Rev. Hooker told me that he only met his menteesone and that he only meets them over the phone on Thursdays at 8:45p.m. since this was the most convenient time for all three parties. Ifound Jefferson`s approach more inclusive since meeting outdoors gavehis mentees the opportunity to ask questions that related to the realworld. Hooker`s approach was somewhat aloof since the three partiesdid not engage in activities that brought the workings of the realworld into perspective.

Third,I asked, how is the time spent? Rev. Hooker said that men meet theirmentees in church, and teach them various tasks. For example, thegroup can engage in activities such as grilling, changing carbatteries, spark plug tips, and cooking. Rev. Hooker`s approach wasentirely different. He told me that, during meetings, they spend twominutes praying. The next ten minutes are used in engaging inclasswork. Then ten minutes participating in a question and answerforum. Another ten minutes following up the class lecture. Tenminutes reviewing the students` reading assignment, and, lastly,finalize the meeting with questions, personal life issues, andprayer. I found Mr. Jefferson`s approach more ideal, in terms ofmentoring students. In essence, mentoring should not be more aboutknowledge acquisition, but rather about helping the student find anavenue through which he can express himself and develop a freshoutlook on the world. Rev` Hooker`s approach, to a large extent, fellshort of this aspect. Nonetheless, Hooker managed to bring togetherthe theoretical aspect of religion and mentoring, an aspect that Rev`Jefferson`s approach lacked.

Fourth,I enquired, what is the most difficult aspect of the relationship?Rev. Jefferson told me that he found exposing mentees to diverseexperiences most perplexing. He contended that, due to differences inperception, mentees view events differently. On the contrary, Rev.Hooker asserted that he found sticking to the set time limit (onehour) was the most confounding aspect of the relationship. Bothmentors complained about the time element impeding effectiveimpartment of knowledge. However, to some degree, Rev. Jefferson`sapproach was more comprehensive. Reason being, exposure to the eventsthat take place in the real world offered students immenseopportunities to learn. Nevertheless, Rev. Hooker`s limit to one hourgave mentees more time to study the world and then ask questionsregarding the aspects that they failed to understand.

Lastly,I posed the question, what was the most significant result of therelationship? Rev. Jefferson told me that, often, students have beenadvised to consider joining college as opposed to joining theworkforce immediately after high school. Being able to providementees with such a support system, according to Rev. Jefferson, hasbeen a good experience. Conversely, Rev. Hooker contended that thementorship program offered him an opportunity to teach his menteesabout Wesley and nourish his knowledge of the current trends. Also,he said that the experiences gained from his interaction withstudents had flowed into his teaching and preaching in churchservices. Although the perceptions of Rev. Jefferson and Rev. Hookerdiffer distinctly, their interpretation of the mentorship program ispositive. The two mentors believed that program had a positive impacton them and the students.

3.0The Top Three Lessons Learnt on Mentoring

Thementoring interviews offered me significant insights into variousaspects of daily life, as discussed below.

  1. Patience

Ihave mastered how to deal with many issues without losing my calm.Previously, I did not know how to empathize with people. I wonderedwhy people could not just put the issues that affected themnegatively aside, and continue with their lives. After interviewingthe Rev. Jefferson and Rev. Hooker, I began viewing issues such ashandling problems and situations, bullying, and relationshipsdifferently. I am now patient and can talk with students about theissues that affect them. This knowledge will help me groom studentsto develop a better view of the world.

  1. Accessibility

Duringmy interview, I learned that the mentors, in spite of their busyschedules, found time to interact with their students and impartknowledge. I also realized that accessibility was key to the learningprocess if these mentors were not available, at any one point, nolearning would have occurred. Thus, I also intend to find time tosupport events, engage in relevant activities such as games, andattend functions such as graduation ceremonies. I believe that bybeing accessible, I will offer students the opportunity to confide inme, in case they have any questions.

  1. Relevance

Inthe course of engaging with my two interviewees, I realized that theyfocused on being relevant to their students. By participating inactivities that concerned students, for example by attending games,talking about class assignments, and allocating time that wasconvenient for all parties to the mentoring program. In the same way,I intend to engage in activities that interest my students andorganize events that will open up the students to me. I will alsoensure that my students and I set schedules that consider all ourpriorities.


Anderson,Keith and Randy D Reese. SpiritualMentoring.Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999.

1 Keith Anderson and Randy D Reese, Spiritual Mentoring (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999).