BEST PRACTICES IN FORMAL FACULTY
MENTORING PROGRAM
CFI Roundtable Discussion
Linda Hulton, RN, PhD
Professor of Nursing
OUTCOMES OF TODAY’S ROUNDTABLE
“THINK ABOUT; WRITE ABOUT; TALK ABOUT”
• Learn about an evidence-based model of formal
mentoring program designed by faculty for faculty
within a department
• Gain insights into the challenges and benefits of
deploying a formal mentoring program
• Engage other faculty about ideas and possibilities for
formalized mentoring within their own departments.
HOMER’S CLASSIC WORK “THE ODYSSEY”
• Mentor provided important
guidance for Telemachus and
was portrayed as a wise advisor
and consistent supporter.
• Faculty mentoring is a
collaborative relationship that
proceeds through purposeful
stages over time. The goal is to
help mentees acquire the
essential competencies and
constructive work relationships
needed for their continued
career vitality (Bland et al.,
2009)
For a friend with an understanding heart is worth
no less than a brother” Homer, The Odyssey
BENEFITS OF MENTORING
Mentees
Scholarship Productivity
Job and career satisfaction,
intention to stay
Socialization to a profession’s
norms
Salary levels and promotion
Mentors
Personal satisfaction
Career rejuvenation
Professional Recognition
Organization
Higher levels of productivity
Higher levels of creativity
Higher levels of satisfaction
Increased commitment to the organization
Decreased turn-over and higher levels of retention
THE NEED
• Nursing education will have to increase the number of new nurse graduates by
30% a year over the next decade to meet the growing demand for registered
nurses (Council on Physician and Nurse Supply, 2010).
• One of the most important factors contributing to this crisis is insufficient
numbers of qualified nursing faculty (Daly et al, 2008; Rukholm et al., 2009)
• In 2012, JMU Nursing doubled the size of it’s undergraduate class, expanded
it’s master programs, and prepared to begin a doctoral program in nursing.
Subsequently, the department added 11 new nursing faculty positions. The
majority of the new faculty were “early career” nursing educators.
Summer 2012 Project Journey:
Design a Faculty Mentoring Program
MEETING THE NEEDS:
EARLY CAREER, MID CAREER, LATE CAREER
FACULTY
• Early Career: those within 1 st 7 years of
appointment to a faculty position or those
who have not yet received tenure
• Mid-Career: Period starting from the end
of probationary period until preparation for
retirement
• Late-Career: Years in Academia; preparing
for retirement
THINK ABOUT:
• What are the needs of Early Career Faculty?
• What are the needs of Mid-Career Faculty
• What are the needs of Late Career Faculty?
• How are their needs different?
“ A man who has been through bitter experiences and
travelled far enjoys even his sufferings after a time.”
Homer, the Odyssey
NEEDS OF MIDCAREER AND LATE CAREER
FACULTY
“SNOW ON THE ROOF – FIRE IN THE FURNACE”
Needs
Characteristics
•
Relative stability, but “career recycling”
(Super, 1986).
•
Continually developing and reinventing
themselves.
•
Work life and activities are different
than early career faculty (Baldwin,
Lunceford, & Vanderlinden, 2005)
• Article productivity is higher in
early/middle years
• Book productivity is higher in later
career
•
Motivation and satisfaction, stress, and
retirement plans (Berberet et al., 2005).
•
Intellectual stimulation in one’s
discipline and opportunity to make
an impact on one’s institution
•
“ranked intellectual inquiry at the
top, followed by desire for
membership in a meaningful
academic community, to have
institutional impact, and to be
recognized by one’s work” (p. 87)
Senior faculty would likely retire earlier
than expected if they were dissatisfied
with their work environment, not
performing their job up to their
expectations, feeling unappreciated by
their department of colleagues, facing
increased workload and productivity
expectations at their institution.
MENTORING STRATEGIES FOR MIDCAREER AND
SENIOR FACULTY
• Group mentoring
• Peer mentoring
• 4 questions (A. Rolfe, 2006) :
• Where am I now? (Current Reality)
• Where do I want to be? (Reflection)
• How do I get there? (Informed Decisions)
• How am I doing? (Action)
A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTATION, & EVALUATION
OF FORMAL MENTORING PROGRAMS
•Needs assessment
(Matching)
•Needs Assessment
(Broader Faculty
Development)
Additions:
•Peer mentoring
•Group mentoring
•Pods
•Book discussions
(Planned after needs
assessment)
2 weeks before
school starts
SeptemberApril
April/May
Adapted from Gaskill, 1993
NUTS/BOLTS
• Mentor/Mentee
Interest/strengths inventory
• Partnership agreement (opt
out policy)
• Mentoring process was
reflected in the annual
evaluation materials and
credited as service to the
department and profession
• Recommendations:
• Minimum of 3 meetings
each semester: 1 st to
establish goals
• Contract was signed
that outlined
confidentiality, specific
goals, skill
development, and
expectations
• Group mentoring by
Department Head
(once/semester)
• Evaluation procedure
in place
NURSING FACULTY DEVELOPMENT SPECIAL EVENTS
• Mentor/Mentee “Brown
Bags”
• Ex: “Things you won’t
find in the Faculty
Handbook”
• “Celebrate Benner” Week
Book Discussion
• Peer Orientation and
Development Groups
(PODS):
• Creative Clinical
Conferencing
• Team-based Learning
• Using Clinical Apps on
your smart technology
• Faculty Service Project
“HARTs”
• Portfolio lockdowns for 1 st
year evaluations
• Creation of a Faculty
Development space/library
in Burruss Hall
WRITE ABOUT:
WHAT DO YOU THINK ARE SOME ESSENTIALS
OF SUCCESSFUL FACULTY MENTORING?
“Each man delights in the work that suits
him best” Homer, The Odyssey
PROGRAM ESSENTIALS (BLAND, 2009)
• Clearly stated purpose and
goals
• Support of faculty and
administrative leadership
• Positioned appropriately
within the larger organization
• Program evaluation
• Program is linked and
coordinated with other
similar (no duplication)
• Needed resources are
identified and acquired
• Program design
• Formal initiation and
ending; Training;
systematic contract
• Mechanism for
matching
mentor/mentees
• Clear expectations
• Mentoring agreement
• Activities to support
mentor/mentees
EVALUATION
• IRB approval
• Mixed methods design
• Cross sectional online
survey using Dillman
method (2007).
• Data Collection occurred
during the final month of
Spring 2013 semester .
• Scale: Quality and Learning
of Mentoring Relationships
(Allen & Eby, 2003)
• 10 declarative statements
incorporating 6 point Likert
scale
• 2 Focus Groups
Results of the Quality and Learning of
Mentoring Relationships (Allen & Eby, 2003).
N = 21 (95% RESPONSE RATE)
Mentee Mean
Mentor Mean
1.
My mentor/mentee and I enjoyed a high quality relationship.
5.33
4.73
2.
Both my mentor/mentee and I benefited from the mentoring relationship.
5.0
4.6
3.
I effectively utilized my mentor/mentee.
4.11
4.0
4.
The mentoring relationship with my mentor/mentee was very effective.
4.89
4.45
5.
I am very satisfied with the mentoring relationship developed with my mentor/mentee
5.0
4.73
6.
I learned a lot from my mentor/mentee.
4.56
4.0
7.
My mentor/mentee gave me a new perspective on many things.
5.0
3.73
8.
My mentor/mentee and I were "co-learners" in the mentoring relationship.
4.67
4.0
9.
There was reciprocal learning that took place between my mentor/mentee and I.
4.67
4.0
10.
My mentor/mentee shared a lot of information with me that helped my own 4.89
professional development.
3.45
The results of the focus groups are still
being analyzed, but preliminary themes are:
•
1). Challenges with matching up schedules, especially when mentor/mentee’s
offices were on different floors or teaching in different programs;
•
2). Slow start due to overwhelming schedules at the beginning of the year;
mentee’s didn’t know what questions to ask
•
3) Many questions on Faculty Activity Reports/Faculty Anticipated Activity
Reports and 1st semester evaluation processes;
•
4). Mentors didn’t always know what to do or how to help. They didn’t see how
it benefitted them professionally. Felt that some mentee’s were resistant to
needing mentored.
•
4). Ideas for quality improvements for year 2 of the program.
ANECDOTAL EVALUATION
Everybody stayed!
“Budget Neutral”
TALK ABOUT:
SO WHAT NOW?
• Where are there holes in your current mentoring
programs?
• What is your disciplinary lens of mentoring needs?
• Reflect on opportunities
“Urge him with truth to frame his fair replies; And surely he
will; for wisdom never lies”
Homer, The Odyssey