Danielle X. Morales, Sara E. Grineski, Timothy W. Collins
{"title":"Inadequate mentoring in undergraduate research experiences: Exploring protective factors","authors":"Danielle X. Morales, Sara E. Grineski, Timothy W. Collins","doi":"10.1111/nyas.15186","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study examines instances of negative mentoring among undergraduate researchers within STEM education, and specifically, the common yet subtle issue of inadequate mentoring characterized by a faculty mentor's failure to provide their mentee with adequate research, educational, career-related, or emotional support. Using data from the Mentor-Relate survey of 514 participants in the National Science Foundation Research Experiences for Undergraduates program, we identify prevalent patterns of inadequate mentoring and examine protective factors against it. Results indicate that inadequate research support is the least prevalent form, while inadequate educational and career guidance is more common, and inadequate emotional support is the most prevalent. Enhanced faculty mentoring skills emerge as a protective factor, with culturally responsive mentoring and gender concordance also playing significant protective roles. Less hierarchical mentoring structures, such as multiple faculty mentors, offer better emotional support. These findings underscore the importance of comprehensive mentor training and culturally sensitive practices to mitigate inadequate mentoring in undergraduate research experiences. By promoting inclusive and supportive mentoring environments, institutions can maximize the transformative potential of undergraduate research experiences for all participants.</p>","PeriodicalId":8250,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nyas.15186","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study examines instances of negative mentoring among undergraduate researchers within STEM education, and specifically, the common yet subtle issue of inadequate mentoring characterized by a faculty mentor's failure to provide their mentee with adequate research, educational, career-related, or emotional support. Using data from the Mentor-Relate survey of 514 participants in the National Science Foundation Research Experiences for Undergraduates program, we identify prevalent patterns of inadequate mentoring and examine protective factors against it. Results indicate that inadequate research support is the least prevalent form, while inadequate educational and career guidance is more common, and inadequate emotional support is the most prevalent. Enhanced faculty mentoring skills emerge as a protective factor, with culturally responsive mentoring and gender concordance also playing significant protective roles. Less hierarchical mentoring structures, such as multiple faculty mentors, offer better emotional support. These findings underscore the importance of comprehensive mentor training and culturally sensitive practices to mitigate inadequate mentoring in undergraduate research experiences. By promoting inclusive and supportive mentoring environments, institutions can maximize the transformative potential of undergraduate research experiences for all participants.
期刊介绍:
Published on behalf of the New York Academy of Sciences, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences provides multidisciplinary perspectives on research of current scientific interest with far-reaching implications for the wider scientific community and society at large. Each special issue assembles the best thinking of key contributors to a field of investigation at a time when emerging developments offer the promise of new insight. Individually themed, Annals special issues stimulate new ways to think about science by providing a neutral forum for discourse—within and across many institutions and fields.