Dataset Information

Mentoring Across Differences.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Effective mentoring can contribute to wellness and career growth and satisfaction. However, the same social forces and interpersonal dynamics affecting all relationships can compromise mentoring relationships. This is especially true when there are issues that are compounded by structural disadvantage due to racism, gender bias, social class, and other discriminatory factors. The Mentoring Across Differences (MAD) sessions are a workshop designed to develop and nurture skills, tools, self-awareness, and mindful practice in mentors and mentees. The workshop encourages participants to gain confidence in navigating differences across a variety of domains.

Methods

We designed interactive sessions for faculty as part of a nine-part training series on mentoring in an academic setting. Teaching methods drew from adult learning theory. We used cases distilled from real teaching and mentoring experiences to trigger discussion and activate emotion and intrinsic motivation. Participants' prior knowledge and experience were drawn on to cocreate knowledge through small-group peer learning.

Results

As part of a course, 167 participants completed the sessions; several hundred more people participated in them in faculty development venues. Participants highly rated the open discussions regarding differences and enhanced awareness of their assumptions, specifically highlighting knowledge and tools addressing bias in their roles as mentors and teachers.

Discussion

The MAD sessions function both as an important module in a comprehensive mentoring curriculum and as stand-alone sessions. They fill a critical need of faculty and training institutions to explore difference in order to foster diversity and inclusion.

SUBMITTER: Osman NY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6342437 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mentoring Across Differences.

Osman Nora Yusuf NY Gottlieb Barbara B

MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources 20180824

<h4>Introduction</h4>Effective mentoring can contribute to wellness and career growth and satisfaction. However, the same social forces and interpersonal dynamics affecting all relationships can compromise mentoring relationships. This is especially true when there are issues that are compounded by structural disadvantage due to racism, gender bias, social class, and other discriminatory factors. The Mentoring Across Differences (MAD) sessions are a workshop designed to develop and nurture skill ...[more]

PMID: 30800943

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Mentoring nurtures a mentee's personal and professional development. Yet conflation of mentoring approaches and a failure to contend with mentoring's nature makes it difficult to study mentoring processes and relationships. This study aims to understand of mentee experiences in the Palliative Medicine Initiative (PMI). The PMI uses a consistent mentoring approach amongst a homogeneous mentee population offers a unique opportunity to circumnavigate conflation of practices and the limitations posed by mentoring's nature. The data will advance understanding of mentoring processes. METHODS:Sixteen mentees discussed their PMI experiences in individual face-to-face audio-recorded interviews. The two themes identified from thematic analysis of interview transcripts were the stages of mentoring and communication. RESULTS:The 6 stages of mentoring are the 'pre-mentoring stage', 'initial research meetings', 'data gathering', 'review of initial findings, 'manuscript preparation" and 'reflections'. These subthemes sketch the progression of mentees from being dependent on the mentor for support and guidance, to an independent learner with capacity and willingness to mentor others. Each subtheme is described as stages in the mentoring process (mentoring stages) given their association with a specific phase of the research process. Mentoring processes also pivot on effective communication which are influenced by the mentor's characteristics and the nature of mentoring interactions. CONCLUSION:Mentoring relationships evolve in stages to ensure particular competencies are met before mentees progress to the next part of their mentoring process. Progress is dependent upon effective communication and support from the mentor and appropriate and timely adaptations to the mentoring approach to meet the mentee's needs and goals. Adaptations to the mentoring structure are informed by effective and holistic evaluation of the mentoring process and the mentor's and mentee's abilities, goals and situations. These findings underline the need to review and redesign the way assessments of the mentoring process are constructed and how mentoring programs are structured.

Project description:BackgroundDespite increasing recognition that mentoring is essential early in medical careers, little is known about the prevalence of mentoring programs for medical students. We conducted this study to survey all medical schools in Germany regarding the prevalence of mentoring programs for medical students as well as the characteristics, goals and effectiveness of these programs.MethodsA definition of mentoring was established and program inclusion criteria were determined based on a review of the literature. The literature defined mentoring as a steady, long-lasting relationship designed to promote the mentee's overall development. We developed a questionnaire to assess key characteristics of mentoring programs: the advocated mentoring model, the number of participating mentees and mentors, funding and staff, and characteristics of mentees and mentors (e.g., level of training). In addition, the survey characterized the mentee-mentor relationship regarding the frequency of meetings, forms of communication, incentives for mentors, the mode of matching mentors and mentees, and results of program evaluations. Furthermore, participants were asked to characterize the aims of their programs. The questionnaire consisted of 34 questions total, in multiple-choice (17), numeric (7) and free-text (10) format. This questionnaire was sent to deans and medical education faculty in Germany between June and September 2009. For numeric answers, mean, median, and standard deviation were determined. For free-text items, responses were coded into categories using qualitative free text analysis.ResultsWe received responses from all 36 medical schools in Germany. We found that 20 out of 36 medical schools in Germany offer 22 active mentoring programs with a median of 125 and a total of 5,843 medical students (6.9 - 7.4% of all German medical students) enrolled as mentees at the time of the survey. 14 out of 22 programs (63%) have been established within the last 2 years. Six programs (27%) offer mentoring in a one-on-one setting. 18 programs (82%) feature faculty physicians as mentors. Nine programs (41%) involve students as mentors in a peer-mentoring setting. The most commonly reported goals of the mentoring programs include: establishing the mentee's professional network (13 programs, 59%), enhancement of academic performance (11 programs, 50%) and counseling students in difficulties (10 programs, 45%).ConclusionsDespite a clear upsurge of mentoring programs for German medical students over recent years, the overall availability of mentoring is still limited. The mentoring models and goals of the existing programs vary considerably. Outcome data from controlled studies are needed to compare the efficiency and effectiveness of different forms of mentoring for medical students.

Project description:BackgroundMentoring's success in enhancing a mentee's professional and personal development, and a host organisations' reputation has been called into question, amidst a lack of effective tools to evaluate mentoring relationships and guide oversight of mentoring programs. A scoping review is proposed to map available literature on mentoring assessment tools in Internal Medicine to guide design of new tools.ObjectiveThe review aims to explore how novice mentoring is assessed in Internal Medicine, including the domains assessed, and the strengths and limitations of the assessment methods.MethodsGuided by Levac et al.'s framework for scoping reviews, 12 reviewers conducted independent literature reviews of assessment tools in novice mentoring in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ERIC, Cochrane, GreyLit, Web of Science, Open Dissertations and British Education Index databases. A 'split approach' saw research members adopting either Braun and Clarke's approach to thematic analysis or directed content analysis to independently evaluate the data and improve validity and objectivity of the findings.Results9662 abstracts were identified, 187 full-text articles reviewed, and 54 full-text articles included. There was consensus on the themes and categories identified through the use of the split approach, which were the domains assessed and methods of assessment.ConclusionMost tools fail to contend with mentoring's evolving nature and provide mere snap shots of the mentoring process largely from the mentee's perspective. The lack of holistic, longitudinal and validated assessments propagate fears that ethical issues in mentoring are poorly recognized and addressed. To this end, we forward a framework for the design of 'fit for purpose' multi-dimensional tools.Practice pointsMost tools focus on the mentee's perspective, do not consider mentoring's evolving nature and fail to consider mentoring holistically nor longitudinallyA new tool capable of addressing these gaps must also consider inputs from all stakeholders and take a longitudinal perspective of mentoring.

Dataset Information

Mentoring Across Differences.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Publications

Mentoring Across Differences.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets