Gentzon Hall, Leonor Corsino, Michelle Mack, Rasheeda K Hall, Richard Sloane, Beth Sullivan, Holly Hough, Kevin Thomas, Cathleen S Colón-Emeric
{"title":"Internal Consistency and Application of a Mentee Survey to Assess Mentor Competencies in an Academic Medical Center across Demographic Groups.","authors":"Gentzon Hall, Leonor Corsino, Michelle Mack, Rasheeda K Hall, Richard Sloane, Beth Sullivan, Holly Hough, Kevin Thomas, Cathleen S Colón-Emeric","doi":"10.62935/of1528","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The National Academies of Science stresses the importance of research mentoring. We assessed the internal consistency and application of a novel 33 item mentor evaluation survey and explored differences across subgroups. The survey was administered annually to mentees. The response rate was 17.8% for a sample of 710 respondents. The survey exhibited strong internal validity with Cronbach Alpha > 0.89 for each subscale. Overall scores across the three domains were high. Basic Science trainees scored their mentor significantly lower than those in Translational or Clinical Science across domains (0.11-0.25 points). Underrepresented Racial Ethnic Groups (UREG) trainee scores were significantly lower in academic guidance and personal communication. Women had lower scores in 4 out of 5 domains. The survey is a modified instrument to assess mentee experience, although further validation against mentee outcomes is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":74984,"journal":{"name":"The chronicle of mentoring & coaching","volume":"8 1","pages":"169-177"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11309027/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The chronicle of mentoring & coaching","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.62935/of1528","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The National Academies of Science stresses the importance of research mentoring. We assessed the internal consistency and application of a novel 33 item mentor evaluation survey and explored differences across subgroups. The survey was administered annually to mentees. The response rate was 17.8% for a sample of 710 respondents. The survey exhibited strong internal validity with Cronbach Alpha > 0.89 for each subscale. Overall scores across the three domains were high. Basic Science trainees scored their mentor significantly lower than those in Translational or Clinical Science across domains (0.11-0.25 points). Underrepresented Racial Ethnic Groups (UREG) trainee scores were significantly lower in academic guidance and personal communication. Women had lower scores in 4 out of 5 domains. The survey is a modified instrument to assess mentee experience, although further validation against mentee outcomes is needed.