Developing faculty research mentors: Influence of experience with diverse mentees, gender, and mentorship training.

IF 2.8 1区 哲学 Q1 MEDICAL ETHICS
Louie C Alexander, Elise Demeter, Katherine Hall-Hertel, Lisa M Rasmussen
{"title":"Developing faculty research mentors: Influence of experience with diverse mentees, gender, and mentorship training.","authors":"Louie C Alexander, Elise Demeter, Katherine Hall-Hertel, Lisa M Rasmussen","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2280234","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Effective mentoring is crucial for early-career researchers, and formal mentor training programs have demonstrated benefits for participating faculty. To determine how mentor training generalizes to different contexts and populations, we delivered mentor training and evaluated its impact on faculty's self-perceived mentoring skills. We also assessed whether mentor experience with diverse mentee populations or mentor gender influences mentors' self-perceived skills and if training interacted with these self-perceptions. We found mentors with more experience with diverse mentees were more likely to rate their mentoring skills higher than mentors with less experience across most areas assessed. Women rated themselves more highly than men at addressing diversity within the mentoring relationship. Mentors with less experience with diverse mentees gained the most training-related benefits in fostering independence skills. Training improved faculty self-perceived mentoring skills in all areas assessed. These results suggest while mentor training can benefit all involved, it can be especially useful for those newer to mentoring.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"318-340"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2023.2280234","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Effective mentoring is crucial for early-career researchers, and formal mentor training programs have demonstrated benefits for participating faculty. To determine how mentor training generalizes to different contexts and populations, we delivered mentor training and evaluated its impact on faculty's self-perceived mentoring skills. We also assessed whether mentor experience with diverse mentee populations or mentor gender influences mentors' self-perceived skills and if training interacted with these self-perceptions. We found mentors with more experience with diverse mentees were more likely to rate their mentoring skills higher than mentors with less experience across most areas assessed. Women rated themselves more highly than men at addressing diversity within the mentoring relationship. Mentors with less experience with diverse mentees gained the most training-related benefits in fostering independence skills. Training improved faculty self-perceived mentoring skills in all areas assessed. These results suggest while mentor training can benefit all involved, it can be especially useful for those newer to mentoring.

发展教师研究导师:不同学员、性别和导师培训经验的影响。
有效的指导对早期职业研究人员至关重要,正式的导师培训项目已经证明对参与的教师有好处。为了确定导师培训如何推广到不同的环境和人群,我们提供了导师培训并评估了其对教师自我感知的指导技能的影响。我们还评估了导师与不同学员群体或导师性别的经历是否会影响导师的自我感知技能,以及培训是否与这些自我感知相互作用。我们发现,在大多数评估领域,与经验较少的导师相比,与不同学员打交道经验较多的导师更有可能对自己的指导技能给予更高的评价。在处理师徒关系中的多样性方面,女性对自己的评价高于男性。与不同学员打交道经验较少的导师在培养独立技能方面获得的培训相关好处最多。培训在评估的所有领域提高了教师自我感知的指导技能。这些结果表明,虽然导师培训可以使所有参与者受益,但它对那些刚接触导师的人尤其有用。
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
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
14.70%
发文量
49
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance is devoted to the examination and critical analysis of systems for maximizing integrity in the conduct of research. It provides an interdisciplinary, international forum for the development of ethics, procedures, standards policies, and concepts to encourage the ethical conduct of research and to enhance the validity of research results. The journal welcomes views on advancing the integrity of research in the fields of general and multidisciplinary sciences, medicine, law, economics, statistics, management studies, public policy, politics, sociology, history, psychology, philosophy, ethics, and information science. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor, and if found suitable for further consideration, to peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees.
×
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