The Delaware-CTR ACCEL
Mentoring, Education, & Career Development (MED) Core Retreat
“Best Practices in Mentoring”
4/29/15
Mentoring Strategies for Faculty
Career Development
Helen E. Pearson, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Anatomy and Cell Biology
Associate Dean For Faculty Affairs
Temple University School of Medicine
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
I have no financial conflicts of
interest to disclose.
Outline for this Presentation
• Overview of faculty mentoring
• 5 Specific Examples of ‘Best Practices’:
 Departmental program at TUSM for junior faculty
 3 School – wide programs at TUSM
 Targeted program for new members in a AAMC
affinity group using mentoring circles
What is Mentoring?
Berk et al (2005) attempt a broad definition of faculty
mentoring as when “..faculty with useful experience,
knowledge, skills, and/or wisdom offers advice,
information, guidance, support or opportunity to
another faculty member …for that individual’s
professional development”.
Berk RA, Berg J, Mortimer R, Walton-Moss B, Yeo TP. Measuring the
effectiveness of faculty mentoring relationships. Acad Med. 2005;
80(1): 66-71.
Impact of Faculty Mentoring
•
•
•
•
Improved job satisfaction
Enhanced sense of “fit”
Greater faculty productivity
Higher retention rates
Dandar VM, Corrice AM, Bunton SA, Fox S. Why Mentoring Matters: A Review
of Literature on the Impact of Faculty Mentoring in Academic Medicine and
Research–based Recommendations for Developing Effective Mentoring
Programs. Poster presented at the 2011 First International Conference on
Faculty Development in the Health Professions in Toronto, Canada.
Evidence-Based Guidelines
Developed by Dandar et al (2011) through literature review for
establishing or refining a structured faculty mentoring program
most likely to result in positive outcomes for faculty and their
institutions.
• Setting up the program for success
• Establish ground rules for participation
• Train and incent mentors
• Conduct a careful matching process
• Hold a mentor-mentee orientation session
• Clarify the program’s process steps and outcomes
• Incorporate program into existing human capital systems
Types of Mentoring
• Formal (structured) or informal
• One-on-one or one mentor per group of mentees
• Traditional ‘senior’ mentor/ ‘junior’ mentee or peermentoring
• Single mentor or multiple mentors
• Assigned mentor or mentee-selected
• Short-term mentoring or sustained
• Targeted mentoring (new hires, leadership
development, URM) or open for all
Multiple Mentors
• Most faculty members “wear more than one hat”,
and are evaluated on more than one area of
expertise.
• Responsibilities include research, teaching,
clinical/patient care, administration.
• One mentor can’t do it all, or have the time to.
• Different mentors can help with different aspects of
a faculty member’s job.
Mentoring URM Faculty
Numbers of underrepresented minority faculty lag
far behind the increasing numbers of URM
undergraduate students.
High turnover and attrition of URM faculty undercut
the proactive work being done by universities to
diversify their faculty.
Mentoring URM Faculty
Using in-depth interviews and focus group data, a study of URM
faculty at research-extensive institutions by Zambrana et al
(2015) shows three main themes:
• Practices to promote effective mentoring for the academic
life course (K-20 and beyond) of URM faculty are critical
• Major barriers are linked to undervaluing the research
interests and community-engaged scholarly commitments
of URM faculty
• Connection with mentors who understand struggles of
URM faculty at predominantly white institutions can assist
with retention and success.
Mentoring URM Faculty
Zambrana et al (2015) also show that the most frequent
mentor-facilitated activities by mentored URM faculty were:
• Opportunities for collaboration
• Coauthoring papers and books
• Invitations to attend conferences
• Annual career review
Zambrana et al. “Don’t Leave Us Behind”: The Importance of Mentoring for
Underrepresented Minority Faculty. Amer. Educational Res. J. , February
2015, 52: 40-72, doi:10.3102/0002831214563063
Barriers to Effective Mentoring
Lack of :
• Effective mentors
• Mentor incentives
• Mentor training
• Mentee appreciation for value of
mentoring
Mentor Incentives
• Release time from other responsibilities
(teaching, clinical, research, administrative)
• Financial (stipend)
• Mentoring awards (recognition)
Mentor Training
Few national or institutional programs exist (or at
least are publicized!)
– One example: Faculty Mentoring Leadership
Program at Brigham & Women’s Hospital
http://bwhmentoringtoolkit.partners.org/facultymentoring-leadership-program-fmlp-sample-curriculumguide/
Mentor Training
BWH FMLP Mentor Training Curriculum: Nine
Monthly Interactive Meetings
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Orientation: Creating a Culture of Mentoring & Developing Mentoring
Networks
Structuring the Mentoring Relationship: Expectations and Boundaries
Difficult and/or Complex Mentoring Situations
Life Course of Mentorship: Stages, Evolution and Transitions
Mentoring Across Differences I
Mentoring Across Differences II
Giving and Receiving Feedback & Lessons Learned and Future Steps
Mentoring for Leadership Development
Mentoring for Innovation in Academic Medicine
Mentoring vs Sponsorship
“A sponsor: a senior-level champion who
believes in your potential and is willing to
advocate for you as you pursue that next raise or
promotion”.
Forget a Mentor, Find a Sponsor: The New Way to FastTrack Your Career by Sylvia Ann Hewlett, Harvard Business
Review Press, 2013.
SPONSOR
Mentor/Sponsor as Advocate
Progress in a faculty career depends entirely on
having an advocate – someone who will put their
mentee’s name forward to:
• Journal editors looking for manuscript reviewers
• Meeting planners looking for speakers or session
moderators
• SROs at NIH looking for study section members
• Colleagues at other institutions looking for
seminar/grand rounds presenters
Examples of Best Practices in
Mentoring
1. TUSM Department of Biochemistry Mentoring
Program
2. TUSM Programs:
i.
ii.
iii.
Internal Grant Review Program
Dean’s Mentoring of Tenure-Track Faculty
Women Faculty Mentoring Award
3. AAMC GFA new members mentoring circles
Example 1: TUSM Department of
Biochemistry Mentoring Program
Program designed and implemented in 2008
by department faculty, who:
• Constituted a Mentoring Oversight
Committee
• Created a Faculty Mentoring Handbook
• Coordinated with Dept Chair to assign
mentors to tenure-track faculty.
Example 1: TUSM Department of Biochemistry Mentoring Program
Program’s Successes and Benefits
• The handbook was developed into an
excellent resource for tenure-track faculty.
• Some mentees ‘clicked’ with their assigned
mentor and the relationship was positive.
• Even mentees who didn’t ‘click’ with their
assigned mentor were nudged to find another
mentor or mentors.
Example 1: TUSM Department of Biochemistry Mentoring Program
Program’s Pitfalls and Challenges
• Sustainability of the program through a
change in Dept Chair, and when the main
author of the mentoring handbook left TU.
• Mixed success with assigned mentors.
• Unrealistic expectation for one mentor to
oversee/monitor all mentoring activities for
the mentee.
Example 2: TUSM Internal Grant
Review Program
• New program developed by Larry Goldfinger, PhD,
Associate Professor, Department of Anatomy & Cell
Biology
• Will provide a formal mechanism for internal grant review
by TUSM research faculty, as an optional resource for
faculty preparing grants prior to submitting for extramural
funding. The goal of this program is to increase success in
obtaining research funding, as well as greater integration
of the research enterprise at TUSM by connecting faculty
with each other’s research.
Example 2: TUSM Internal Grant Review Program
• The faculty member/PI submits a draft of the grant
application to Larry, who identifies a committee of 2 - 3
reviewers from within the School of Medicine.
• The reviewers provide written critiques of the draft and
are available for discussion with the PI.
• Reviewers are awarded points towards their individual
annual Faculty Performance Matrix.
Example 3: Annual TUSM Women in
Medicine Mentoring Award
• Ongoing program in 4th year to provide mentor
recognition.
• This award recognizes and honors a faculty member,
male or female, whose outstanding efforts and
achievements have promoted the professional success
and/or overall quality of life of women at Temple
University School of Medicine.
• Several nominations received each year, including for
men and women, basic science and clinical faculty.
Example 3: Annual TUSM Women in Medicine Mentoring Award
• All TUSM faculty in any faculty track (Tenure, ClinicianEducator, Research), in any department and of any
rank are eligible for nomination. Emeritus faculty are
also eligible for nomination.
• Nomination Packet includes:
 A nominating letter detailing the relevant
accomplishments of the nominee
 One additional letter of support
 A copy of the candidate's curriculum vitae
Example 3: Annual TUSM Women in Medicine Mentoring Award
• The TUSM Committee on the Status of Women Faculty
reviews the nominations and selects the award
winner.
• The award is presented by the Dean during the
Annual Women in Medicine Professional
Development Program and is announced to the
entire TUSM community.
• The award includes a plaque and a prize of $250.
Example 4: Dean’s Mentoring of
Tenure-Track Faculty at TUSM
• New initiative, started this past academic year.
• Intent is to provide annual feedback from the Dean
following TU-mandated mid-tenure review.
• Includes 30-minute face-to-face meeting (March/April)
with Dean and Assoc Dean for Faculty Affairs –
opportunity for faculty to provide update on their
progress since TUSM review of dossier (Nov).
• Mid-tenure review rubric used to highlight strengths and
weaknesses, in research, teaching and service, relative to
standards required for granting of tenure.
Example 4: Dean’s Mentoring of Tenure-Track Faculty at TUSM
TUSM Mid -Tenure Performance Review Rubric, page 1
Office of Faculty Affairs, Temple University School of Medicine
Mid -Tenure Performance Review Rubric
Name: _____________________________________________
Year on Tenure Clock: ____________
Department: ________________________________________
Contract Renewal Length: ____________
The purpose of this review is to assist you, the faculty member, in understanding the performance standards required for achieving tenure within the
School of Medicine. The rubric is designed to help you identify strengths and weaknesses in your academic credentials, and to develop a plan to
address any weaknesses before you must be reviewed for tenure.
Performance Standard
Outstanding
(Clearly on track to meet
or surpass requirements
for tenure by time of
tenure review)
Satisfactory
(On track to meet
requirements for tenure
by time of tenure review
with continued effort)
Unsatisfactory
(Not on track to meet
requirements for tenure
by time of tenure review,
yet shows promise)
 More than one R01 or
equivalent grant funded.
 One R01 grant or
equivalent funded.
 No major grant funding.
 Grant renewed or
continuous funding.
 More than 2 peerreviewed papers per
year in journals with
good impact factors.
 Additional grant
applications submitted.
 2 peer-reviewed papers
per year in journals with
good impact factors.
 Grant applications
submitted.
 Fewer than 2 peerreviewed papers per
year in journals with
low impact factors.
 Most papers do not
include PhD or
postdoctoral advisors as
senior authors.
 Less than half of all
papers include PhD or
postdoctoral advisors as
senior authors.
 Most or all papers
include PhD or
postdoctoral advisors as
senior authors.
1. RESEARCH
Extramural funding
obtained
Publication record
Comments
Example 5: The GFA Mentoring Program
– Helping New Members On Board
In 2014, the Membership and Nominations Subcommittee of the
AAMC’s Group on Faculty Affairs surveyed GFA members to
assess their interest in a new member mentoring program and
to solicit suggestions about the structure of a mentoring
program.
Survey responses demonstrated widespread support. The
mentoring program was developed to achieve two goals: 1) to
orient new GFA members to the GFA and the AAMC; and 2) to
educate GFA members about available resources.
Example 5: The GFA Mentoring Program – Helping New Members On Board
• The year-long mentoring program is administered
through six mentoring circles which consist of two
mentors and six to eight mentees.
• Each mentoring circle holds one in-person meeting
at the GFA’s Professional Development Conference
(PDC) and eight meetings by teleconference.
• The teleconferences include a structured
curriculum on GFA and AAMC resources, including
the AAMC website, the GFA listserv, GFA
subcommittees and other relevant programs.
Example 5: The GFA Mentoring Program – Helping New Members On Board
• During the 2014 GFA Professional Development
Conference (PDC) we sponsored an orientation session
for participants who had signed up for the mentoring
program as either a mentor or mentee through a preconference e-mail survey.
• Those participants were pre-assigned by the M&N
subcommittee to 4 mentoring circles.
• In response to interest and attendance by new members
who had not participated in the pre-conference survey,
we created 2 additional mentoring circles ‘on-the-fly’ at
the beginning of the orientation session.
Example 5: The GFA Mentoring Program – Helping New Members On Board
The orientation session clarified the goals and
expectations of the mentoring program and
facilitated interpersonal connections within
each mentoring circle.
Agenda
I. Introductions: M&N Subcommittee
II. Overview of the Mentoring Program
III. Ice Breaker
IV. Getting Started: Expectations
V. Making the most of the GFA meeting
VI. Summary: Questions and Comments
Example 5: The GFA Mentoring Program – Helping New Members On Board
Orientation Agenda Item II.
Overview: The GFA Pilot Mentoring Program has three
main goals to be achieved over the year-long program
Mentoring program goals
Monthly phone meetings
Phone meeting time
greetings
engage with colleagues
learn about GFA
get involved with GFA
expectations
build group
operations
GFA topic of the month
resources
research sc
plan/dev sc
open questions
PDC
M&N sc
comm sc
wrap-up
data
FF program
wrap-up
Example 5: The GFA Mentoring Program – Helping New Members On Board
Orientation Agenda Item III.
Ice Breaker: TELL ME ABOUT…
• Your first job
• An accomplishment that
you are especially proud of
• A hobby
• A major project that you
are doing
Example 5: The GFA Mentoring Program – Helping New Members On Board
Orientation Agenda Item IV.
Getting Started: Expectations
Clarity of Expectations is a critical aspect of
effective mentoring relationships
• State expectations
• Clarify meaning
• Reality check - Determine which
expectations are reasonable for this year
• Reach agreement
Dissatisfaction results from unmet
expectations
Example 5: The GFA Mentoring Program – Helping New Members On Board
Examples of Expectations
• Everyone in the group gets time to contribute
• Our conversations should be productive
• I expect to make connections as a result of my
participation
• I expect to get personal coaching for challenges
at my office
• I expect to learn about resources helpful to my
institution’s goals
At your tables, discuss your expectations for the
Mentoring Program and how to make the most
from the mentoring experience
Example 5: The GFA Mentoring Program – Helping New Members On Board
GFA Pilot Mentoring Program Orientation - July 17, 2014
Evaluation Responses
1=Poor
1
2=Below Avg.
3=Avg
4=Above Avg
5=Excellent
Please rate the quality of your overall experience during this GFA Pilot Mentoring Program orientation session
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neither Agree nor Disagree
4=Agree
5= Strongly Agree
Averaged Score (n=30)
4.3
Averaged Score (n=30)
2
The session helped me understand the goals of the GFA Mentoring Program
4.5
3
The session helped me understand the proposed schedule of topics for the GFA Mentoring Program
4.3
4
The session allowed sufficient time for me to meet the mentors and mentees in my Mentoring Circle
4.2
5
I understand the expectations of me in the GFA Mentoring Program for the coming year
4.4
6
The session helped me express my hopes and expectations for the GFA Mentoring Program for the coming year
4.4
7
The session was helpful in providing strategies to make the most of the GFA Professional Development Conference
4.3
Example 5: The GFA Mentoring Program – Helping New Members On Board
Follow-Up Surveys
• We surveyed mentors and mentees six months after the PDC.
• The survey responses:
• indicate a high level of participation by a majority of the
mentees in 5 out of the 6 mentoring circles.
• reflect new members’ appreciation for having a mechanism
to actively engage at their first GFA meeting.
• suggest that these mentees plan to continue to be engaged
in GFA activities for at least the coming year.
• We will survey mentors and mentees again at the end of the
program.
Example 5: The GFA Mentoring Program – Helping New Members On Board
AAMC GFA M&N Subcommittee Members and
Coauthors on Pilot Mentoring Project
Steve Block, Wake Forest school of Medicine
Heather Brod, The Ohio State University Medical Center College
of Medicine
Barbara Chadwick, Association of American Medical Colleges
Laura Fentem , Oklahoma University Health Sciences Center
Elena Fuentes-Afflick, University of California San Francisco
School of Medicine
Jennifer Hagen, University of Nevada School of Medicine
Helen Pearson, Temple University School of Medicine
Craig Porter, Medical College of Wisconsin
Luanne Thorndyke, University of Massachusetts Medical School
Conclusions
• Effective mentoring strategies can take many forms.
• Some strategies are easily transferable between
institutions and types of programs, whereas others are
less so.
• Mentoring strategies for women and URM may be
different.
• A big challenge is always sustainability of a mentoring
program.
A note of caution: “The effectiveness of mentoring in
promoting the professional growth of junior faculty is
based more on assumption that on demonstrated
empirical evidence” (Berk et al. , 2005)
Wishing you the best of luck in your
mentoring endeavors!
Thanks for your attention!