Short-Term Impact of Faculty Mentor Development on Mentees' Scholarly Productivity.

X Shore, O Myers, B Wiskur, N Dominguez, B Tigges, A Sood
{"title":"Short-Term Impact of Faculty Mentor Development on Mentees' Scholarly Productivity.","authors":"X Shore, O Myers, B Wiskur, N Dominguez, B Tigges, A Sood","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mentoring and mentor development, while interconnected, serve distinct purposes within the academic community. Although the effects of mentoring programs for mentees are well-documented, the impact of mentor development programs on mentee outcomes is less explored. This study investigates the effect of a faculty mentor development program on mentee scholarly productivity. The study was a randomized controlled trial involving four academic and health science institutions in the United States Southwest and Mountain West regions. This study included 94 mentees randomly assigned to the intervention or control arm. The intervention group comprised 56 mentees whose mentors participated in a comprehensive development program featuring combined virtual synchronous plus online asynchronous components. The control group, consisting of 38 mentees, had mentors who only engaged in the online asynchronous component. Mentee outcomes, extracted from curriculum vitaes, included the count of publications, presentations, and grants over the prior year, assessed at baseline, and 12- and 24-months following randomization. The primary outcome was total scholarly productivity, calculated as the sum of these three counts. Our analysis, which accounted for repeated measures, revealed no significant differences in total scholarly productivity between the intervention and control groups at 12- and 24-month intervals. These findings suggest that mentor development programs do not significantly enhance mentee scholarly productivity in the short term. Such programs may require more than 24 months to show effectiveness in improving mentee scholarly outcomes or may require studying alternative career or psychosocial outcomes. Therefore, mentor development programs may not be optimal for achieving immediate gains in mentees' scholarly output and may need to be complemented with mentee professional development programs targeting scholarly outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":74984,"journal":{"name":"The chronicle of mentoring & coaching","volume":"8 3","pages":"755-761"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11671139/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The chronicle of mentoring & coaching","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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

Mentoring and mentor development, while interconnected, serve distinct purposes within the academic community. Although the effects of mentoring programs for mentees are well-documented, the impact of mentor development programs on mentee outcomes is less explored. This study investigates the effect of a faculty mentor development program on mentee scholarly productivity. The study was a randomized controlled trial involving four academic and health science institutions in the United States Southwest and Mountain West regions. This study included 94 mentees randomly assigned to the intervention or control arm. The intervention group comprised 56 mentees whose mentors participated in a comprehensive development program featuring combined virtual synchronous plus online asynchronous components. The control group, consisting of 38 mentees, had mentors who only engaged in the online asynchronous component. Mentee outcomes, extracted from curriculum vitaes, included the count of publications, presentations, and grants over the prior year, assessed at baseline, and 12- and 24-months following randomization. The primary outcome was total scholarly productivity, calculated as the sum of these three counts. Our analysis, which accounted for repeated measures, revealed no significant differences in total scholarly productivity between the intervention and control groups at 12- and 24-month intervals. These findings suggest that mentor development programs do not significantly enhance mentee scholarly productivity in the short term. Such programs may require more than 24 months to show effectiveness in improving mentee scholarly outcomes or may require studying alternative career or psychosocial outcomes. Therefore, mentor development programs may not be optimal for achieving immediate gains in mentees' scholarly output and may need to be complemented with mentee professional development programs targeting scholarly outcomes.

教师导师发展对学员学术生产力的短期影响。
指导和导师发展虽然相互联系,但在学术团体中服务于不同的目的。虽然师徒计划对徒弟的影响是有据可查的,但导师发展计划对徒弟结果的影响却很少被探索。本研究旨在探讨教师导师发展计划对学生学术生产力的影响。该研究是一项随机对照试验,涉及美国西南部和西部山区的四家学术和卫生科学机构。这项研究包括94名学员随机分配到干预组或对照组。干预组由56名学员组成,他们的导师参与了一项综合发展计划,该计划结合了虚拟同步和在线异步组件。控制组由38名学员组成,他们的导师只参与在线异步组件。学员的结果从他们的简历中提取,包括前一年的出版物、演讲和资助的数量,在基线和随机分组后的12个月和24个月进行评估。主要结果是总学术生产力,计算为这三项指标的总和。我们的分析表明,在12个月和24个月的间隔中,干预组和对照组之间的总学术生产力没有显著差异。这些研究结果表明,导师发展计划在短期内并不能显著提高学生的学术生产力。这样的项目可能需要超过24个月的时间来显示在提高学员学术成果方面的有效性,或者可能需要研究其他职业或心理社会结果。因此,导师发展计划可能不是获得学生学术产出的直接收益的最佳方案,可能需要与以学术成果为目标的学生专业发展计划相辅相成。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信