560 likes | 661 Views
Faculty Mentoring Programs: Updates from the Field. Jeffrey Morzinski PhD, MSW Dept of Family & Community Medicine. Problems in Academic Health Sciences / Higher Education. Instability Uncertainty Leadership gaps Poor morale Missed opportunities Isolation Unfulfilled careers.
E N D
Faculty Mentoring Programs: Updates from the Field Jeffrey Morzinski PhD, MSW Dept of Family & Community Medicine
Problems in Academic Health Sciences / Higher Education • Instability • Uncertainty • Leadership gaps • Poor morale • Missed opportunities • Isolation • Unfulfilled careers
Mentoring: Hope & Challenge • Optimism / opportunity in mentoring / other forms of faculty development • Challenges include: Cultural fit, program design, cost, evaluation Greatness is not where we stand, but in what direction we are moving. -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
Session Objectives: • Describe five stages of mentoring program development • List and discuss several “lessons from the field”, based on experiences gained during a long-standing mentor program • Appreciate importance of a “colleague network” approach to optimize faculty development • Evaluate an emerging, four level categorization for mentoring programs • Discuss any & all mentoring program questions
Session Activities • Introduction • Describe five stages of our mentoring program • Answer your questions (at three specific transitions / others as needed) • Report findings of a study on Fac Dev features that advance mentoring • Review “lessons from the field” • Integrate & discuss your plans for mentoring practice
Speaker’s Interest and Setting • Biology + Social Welfare + Admin Leader • Rural Community Health + Faculty Dev + Mentoring, Evaluation & Leadership • Medical College of Wisconsin • Where we are • What we do
Mentoring Overview • Odysseus from Homer’s Odyssey • Recruited Mentor to guide Telemachus • Athene sometimes speaks through Mentor • Developmental relationship / transitions • A Learning relationship aimed at helping the mentee progress toward mutually defined goals* • Risks • Exploitation, careerism, favoritism • Benefits • Advancement, learning, succession planning, vitality, networking * Zachary L “Creating a Mentoring Culture”
Why Structured Mentoring? • Do mentors / proteges find each other? • Not frequent / not at right time • When it do - within social / cultural strata • Structured mentoring defined: A structure and series of processes designed to create effective mentoring relationships, guide the desired change of those involved, and evaluate the results for the protégé, the mentor and the organization. -- Murray & Owen
Structured / Assigned Mentor Programs • Comparable outcomes as with non-assigned mentoring* • Research variables to look for • Individual characteristics & training • Context (e.g., leader support, other Fac Dev) • How matching occurs • Objectives, monitoring & summative eval * Chao, Walz & Gardner. Formal and informal mentorships…
Published Mentor Program Outcomes (N=18)* * Morzinski & Fisher, Eval Practice
Myths of Mentoring • Can’t be effective if “matched” by a 3rd party • Personalities must match • Gender-ethnic-discipline must match • Frequent in-person meetings • “Just right” timing • De-emphasize other relationships • Protégé will have less work to do
Why Mentoring & Faculty Development • Isolation among junior faculty • Senior faculty - search for academic vitality • Rapid expansion and change in many fields (including my field in academic medicine) • Evidence that mentoring works
Integrated with Fac Dev: MCW’s Five-stage mentoring Program • Organizational readiness • Visibility and recruitment • Matching and orientation • Ongoing seminars, support & structure • Evaluation
Program Stages 1. Organizational readiness • Determine needs and interests • Gather input from leaders & Chair • Secure commitment of resources • Publicize goals • In our program, trainee / jr faculty goals are:* • Understand values, norms and expectations of academic medicine • Develop skills to proactively manage career • Develop / maintain a productive colleague network *Bland et al, Successful Faculty…
Program Stages (cont) 2. Visibility and recruitment • Mentoring as part of the culture • Clarify purpose of two-year program • Confirm chair recommendations for mentors • Promote a norm of participation • “Short bridge” approach to recruiting
Program Stages (cont) 3. Matching and orientation • Collect & distribute faculty biosketches • For any reason - is there anyoneyou could not work with? • Mentor approves match / gets 30 minute orientation • Inspirational reception • Mentor makes first 3-5 contacts
Program Stages (cont) 4. Ongoing seminars, structure & support • Blend of group / individual activities • Recommend a minimum of 2 contacts / month • Coordinator reminds and monitors • Keep up contacts…meet at naturally-occurring events
Program Stages (cont) 5. Evaluation & Reporting • Contact frequency and content • Social activities “count” • Public recognition at program end • Gather data to improve program and judge impact • Report results at appropriate venues
Internal Summary 1 • Reviewed mentor background & myths • Presented mentoring’s evolution to structured programs • Detailed 5 development stages that both guided & emerged from our program experience
Transition / Discussion • Mentoring Myths, Program Stages & Features • Q & A • Chat: Have you been “matched” in a mentoring program? Were you a… mentor… a protégé? • If you have been matched, name one factor that either helped the program’s effectiveness, or was a barrier to its overall effectiveness.
Mentoring & Faculty Socialization at Other Schools • Mentoring, or mentoring plus…? • Inspired by research in business / management The popular press has done a disservice by implying that the key to career success is finding a mentor. This is an oversimplification of a complex web of work relationships that could be made available to individuals in organizational settings -- K Kram
Colleagues in Academic Careers • Why Study / Foster Colleagues? • Individual benefits • Fac who often utilize C’s in res = 4 x pubs* • Increased creativity, happiness • Increased retention • Group benefits • Recruiting • Succession planning • If you were allowed only one line of inquiry to predict a faculty member’s future success… ** *Jones et al. J of Dental Ed **Hitchcock et al, Acad Med
Colleague Relationships & Fac Dev • Instructional features of Fac Dev may be associated with CR gains* • Because CRs are valued, we wondered if / how professional training helps to develop mentors and other CRs? • No one had asked learners to describe training experiences that influenced CR development • No studies of a national sample of Fac Dev * Bland et al, Successful Faculty…
Study Definitions • FDPs: 52 Health Professions schools received HRSA-BHPr FD grants* • FD Director: Each (52) identified in grant • Enrollee: Health professions faculty in FDP for at least 6 months. • Colleague Relationship (CR): career supportive relationships (e.g., mentors, peers) “initiated or strengthened” due to FDP participation. * See www.hrsa.gov
Study Design* Mail Surveys: Two Phases (’99-00) • FD Directors provided program descriptions and enrollee rosters • Enrollees provided data on • CR gains, socialization, products and achievements • Two key Study Questions: • How many career supportive colleagues did you initiate or develop during your FDP? • What FDP features contributed to your developing CRs? * Morzinski JA, Fisher. A nation-wide study...
Overview of Respondents • 37 of 52 (71%) FD directors • 351 of 543 (65%) enrollees • male 65%; non-white 16% • Average age at FDP start, • male 40; female 37 • Yrs as faculty at FDP start • male 4.5 years; female 2.7 years; non-white 1.9 years • Distribution from all 10 US regions
Descriptions of Colleague Types • Mentors • Often in advanced career stages • Foster academic identity, advancement & goals • Link to new opportunities, people • Peers • Often similar career stage • Collaborate, informal feedback and friendship • Academic Consultants • Provide specialized help in activities and projects • Aid efficiency and quality
Findings: Study Question 1* • Enrollees reported 9.1 CRs due to FDP enrollment • 2 mentors • 3 peers • 1 acad consultant • 3 “perceived” CRs • CRs were important to enrollees’ academic socialization and careers • Six CRs directly assisted with multiple career-important products / achievements • Three perceived to be “in the wings” if needed * Morzinski JA, Fisher. A nation-wide study on the influence of FDPs on colleague relationships. Acad Med.
CR Totals and Types Peers Mentors Junior Faculty Academic Consult. Perceived CRs
Details: FD Colleagues “Most Influential” • 74% were “well or very well connected” to a regional/national scholar network • 43% had primary affiliation external to subjects’ home institution • 41% had original meeting during training activities • 60% exchanged support & challenge • Stimulate avg of 2-3 products/achievements • Hands-on support most associated with products / achievements
Study Question 2: FDP Features • “What faculty development program features contributed to your developing Colleague Relationships?” • 269 of 351 enrollees (66%) made 624 usable text responses • Template approach resulted in 16 sub-categories in 4 main categories* • Inter-rater agreement 88%; Cohen’s Kappa 83% *Crabtree & Miller; Constas.
Sub-Analysis (continued) • We examined open-ended responses from FD enrollees with • Moderate to high CR gains • CRs important or very important • Final count of 335 text responses by 141 enrollees
Results: 335 Entries in Four Main Categories • Concrete interaction (n=127; 38%)* • “Presented our teaching to one another for feedback” • “Learned by group participation” • Learning context (n=105; 31%) • “A safe group… mutual respect” • “Meeting away from home and “pagers” *Also see: Morzinski, “Influence of Academic Projects…” Family Medicine
Results on FDP Features (cont) • Instructional Experiences (n=46; 14%) • “Frequently used participants’ programs to illustrate teaching points” • “Active instruction on learning styles” • Learners and Leaders (n=57; 17%) • “Being together with my peers at all the classes” • “Faculty were well-connected with national organizations”
Internal Summary 2 • Mentoring is a Faculty Development method • From a national sample of FDP enrollees and programs, we learned: • Positive career-impact of three types of CRs • Power of instructional activities that include hands-on help, concrete interaction & a respectful learning context
Transition Discussion • What about the study and its results? • Q & A: Colleague Relationships as extension of mentoring • Chat: If someone has a strong network of peers and acad consultants, do they still need one or more mentors? Why / why not?
Lessons from the Field: For Organizations • Mentoring programs need objectives * • Mentoring can’t be “window dressing” – need appropriate learning context • Promote “Small m” mentoring • Establish a code of institutional expectations and support for mentoring *Zachary L. “Creating a Mentoring Culture”
Lessons from the Field: For Mentors • Ok to start before you’re certain you are ready • Balance challenge with support** • Plan to be more directive / active early • Provide hands-on support** ** Bower, Diehr, Morzinski & Simpson.
Lessons from the Field: For Proteges • Proteges need objectives • Be ready emotionally – suspend judgment • Avoid mentor envy • Seek diversity – up to six to eight active, career-support members
Role of ColleaguesSupport and Challenge (Daloz) High Challenge Low High Support *Adopted from Daloz LA, Effective teaching and mentoring.
Support/Challenge High RETREAT GROWTH Challenge STASIS CONFIRMATION Low High Support
Support Types • Information. Aids decision-making; clarifies uncertainty; increases awareness of opportunities • Feedback. Fosters quality and confidence by offering comparisons or standards for judging the quality of projects, behaviors, performance.
Support Types (cont) • Emotional support. Builds trust, friendship. Could reduce beliefs of personal competence • Hands-on support.* Direct work, often tangible and/or visible, that moves a project toward completion. *Strongest association with junior faculty products & achievements
Examples of Challenge • Heat up dichotomies • Offer new language • Silence / give time • Dialogue on aims / purposes • Questions “Let’s assume..” / “What if…” • Set challenging tasks • Set and maintain high performance standards • Keep an eye on the clock / calendar
Tool for Reviewing CR Networks • List your active, career-supportive CRs: • Mentors ___________, ___________. • Peers __________, ___________, __________. • Academic consultants __________, _________. • Plan for adding diversity/filling gaps______ ____________________________________ • Reflect on exchanges with existing CRs: • Support / challenge balance? • How to improve balance___________________
Emerging Program Lesson: Levels of Formality • How Formal Should Y/our Program Be?
Tuxedos to Blue Jeans: Four Mentoring Levels* • Formal mentoring includes matching / monitoring • Facilitated mentoring the dept still arranges meetings and monitors (does not match) • Intentional mentoring, where chairs or directors recommend individual action, with no / limited follow-up • Coincidental mentoring relies on luck At MCW… all levels represented * Morzinski JA. STFM Messenger.
Internal Summary 3 • Lessons from the field • Mentors, protégé and organization • Support and challenge • Lesson for programs – mentoring level (formal, facilitated, intentional, coincidental) to fit different situations