When the Mentor and the Teacher Disagree
Lena's external mentor, a small-business owner, wants her project to produce a marketing plan for his shop. Her teacher insists the project must be driven by Lena's own inquiry and identity exploration, not by an adult's commercial brief. Lena has 8 weeks left. The mentor offers real data and a real audience; the teacher controls the grade. Lena has already spent 2 weeks on the mentor's brief and feels loyal to him. She worries that pivoting will waste her work and damage the relationship, but she also sees the teacher's point that she has been following instructions rather than shaping her own question.
1. How should Lena resolve the conflict between her mentor's brief and her teacher's requirement?
Read the worked answer
Lena should not simply obey one adult over the other; she should find a design that satisfies the learning requirement while keeping the mentor's value.
Diagnose the conflict: The mentor's brief supplies an authentic audience and data (valuable), but it locates the question in his goals. The teacher requires the question to originate in Lena's inquiry and identity (non-negotiable for the grade).
Resolution:
- Lena reframes the project so she owns the question, using the shop as a case study. For example: 'How do small local businesses communicate value to younger customers, and what does this reveal about my own interest in marketing?'
- The mentor's data becomes evidence, not the purpose.
- She documents the negotiation itself as part of her decision-making.
Judgement: This preserves the mentor's contribution, protects the teacher's requirement, and converts a conflict into evidence of self-direction. The 2 weeks are not wasted - they become context she can reflect on.
2. What should Lena say to her mentor, and what risks should she manage?
Read the worked answer
What to say:
- Be direct and appreciative: explain that the project must be driven by her own inquiry to meet school requirements, and that she wants to keep working with him.
- Propose the reframed question and show how his shop still benefits (real audience, useful findings).
- Clarify what she will still deliver for him versus what is now her own research.
Risks to manage:
- Relationship risk: the mentor may feel used or rejected. Framing the change as a shared refinement, not a rejection, reduces this.
- Scope risk: trying to serve both the shop and her inquiry could overload 8 weeks. She should agree a minimum viable deliverable.
- Evidence risk: if she keeps following his instructions, the folio will again look adult-directed. She must record her own decisions in writing.
Judgement: Honest negotiation plus a written record of her reasoning protects both the relationship and the integrity of her evidence.