Faculty at research institutions play a central role in advancing knowledge and careers, as well as promoting the well-being of students and colleagues in research environments. Mentorship from experienced peers has been touted as critical for enabling these myriad roles to allow faculty development, career progression, and satisfaction. However, there is little information available on who supports faculty and best ways to structure a faculty mentorship programme for early- and mid-career academics. In the interest of advocating for increased and enhanced faculty mentoring and mentoring programmes, we surveyed faculty around the world to gather data on whether and how they receive mentoring. We received responses from 457 early- and mid-career faculty and found that a substantial portion of respondents either reported having no mentor or a lack of a formal mentoring scheme. Qualitative responses on the quality of mentorship revealed that the most common complaints regarding mentorship included lack of mentor availability, unsatisfactory commitment to mentorship, and non-specific or non-actionable advice. On these suggestions, we identify a need for training for faculty mentors as well as strategies for individual mentors, departments, and institutions for funding and design of more intentional and supportive mentorship programmes for early- and mid-career faculty.
Faculty mentorship and research productivity, salary, and job satisfaction
Studies have shown that mentorship is critical to the career and professional development of workers, including postsecondary faculty. Evidence from the literature on faculty-to faculty mentorship have generally focused on the medical field or on the higher education institution where the study was conducted. This study extends the literature by examining data from faculty across multiple institutions and across fields using the Early Career Doctorates Survey (ECDS). Guided by a theoretical framework adapted from Higgins and Kram (2001), multiple linear regression models are applied to investigate which factors are associated with mentorship attainment, and how mentorship of faculty is associated with faculty productivity and job satisfaction. In contrast to previous literature, results indicate that women and racially minoritized faculty have similar likelihood of reporting having a formal/informal mentor compared to men and White colleagues, respectively. Furthermore, receiving mentorship does not appear to be associated with increased productivity or job satisfaction, but is associated with a 10% higher salary for faculty who reported having a mentor. These results, however, are limited to observable outcomes, and the benefits to mentoring may extend beyond that to include well-being, sense of belonging, and other variables not measured in the dataset. Overall, research findings contribute to existing efforts and ongoing conversations on faculty mentorship by offering additional evidence from a nationally representative sample, providing a benchmark for individual institutions to evaluate their professional development programs for faculty.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1653378
- PAR ID:
- 10319344
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference Proceedings
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
-
Trube, Mary B (Ed.)Postdoctoral scholars have traditionally received mentoring from a single mentor (creating a “dyad”), limiting the psychosocial support they receive, which is particularly challenging for minoritized scholars (Deanna et al., 2022; Ransdell, et al., 2021). The AGEP Promise Academy Alliance (APAA) (Cresiski et al., 2022) provides multiple mentors for postdoctoral fellows to expand their academic, professional, and support networks. This mixed-method case study involves postdoctoral fellows in the APAA faculty conversion program to identify the extent to which these multiple mentoring opportunities occurred and benefited the APAA fellows. Surveys administered to participants and their non research mentors elucidate the mentorship experience. The findings provide insights for implementing a multi-mentor network within a state university system. This study explores the broader ecosystem of mentorship and its influence on the advancement of minoritized postdocs in biomedical sciences, particularly those who may experience social isolation within their departments. It recognizes that mentorship extends beyond the formal research mentor-mentee relationship and encompasses a network of support that can positively impact the career trajectories and professional development of minoritized individuals. Scholars report benefits from having multiple mentoring opportunities within their institution, within the university system, and from external scholars through our mentors in residence program. “Just in time” mentoring on time-sensitive issues supplemented sustained mentoring. The inclusion of inter-institutional peers, administrators and faculty mentors enhanced this multiple mentor model. Minoritized postdoctoral scholars often have limited opportunities to receive mentorship (Yadav et al., 2020). Mentoring in dyads remains pervasive, though multiple mentors have been proposed (Deanna et al., 2022). We demonstrate that state university systems can be leveraged to provide a unique ecosystem of both short and sustained mentoring interactions that benefit minoritized postdocs without overburdening already over-worked faculty mentors.more » « less
-
Though mentoring is associated with faculty productivity, career success, and satisfaction, barriers to effective mentoring such as time and resources persist. At UNC-Chapel Hill, mentoring climate surveys revealed uneven access to mentoring, with majority of faculty securing mentors on their own. Targeting Equity in Access to Mentoring (TEAM) ADVANCE (NSF Award#1760187) launched a facilitated peer mentoring circles program in fall 2019 to provide support for early career faculty in itsmultilevel intervention. TEAM ADVANCE Peer Mentoring Circles provide a semi-structured, facilitated peer mentoring model. Open to all early career faculty, each circle supports up to 6 mentees, facilitated by 2 senior faculty. A goals/values survey enabled formation of groups that include tenure-track and fixed-term faculty from a variety of disciplines. Circles meet monthly. Facilitators debrief between circles meetings. A concurrent professional development workshop series provides resources and topics for circle discussions. Circles also address individual and shared goals. A total of 168 faculty participated in the program over 3 academic years. Qualitative analysis of focus group data and open-ended responses on mentoring climate surveys from program participants revealed themes of safe spaces for conversations, access to senior faculty, access to career development resources, and networking with peers/similar social identities. Mentoring Climate Survey data from all faculty respondents indicated an increase in satisfaction with peer mentoring from fall 2019 to spring 2020, statistically significant for women (p < 0.05). The TEAM ADVANCE Peer Mentoring Circles program shows promise and scalability in supporting early career faculty across a wide range of social identities. Senior mentor-facilitators were appreciated. The semi-structured approach with access to workshops/content on professional development topics (e.g., negotiation, promotion/tenure, annual reviews) provides a base for Circles conversations to unfold to directly support peer mentees. The has been delivered in-person and virtually. Administrative support is the primary cost.more » « less
-
There is little literature exploring the needs of engineering faculty and the resources available at engineering colleges to support faculty development. Engineering deans are key stakeholders within institutions well-positioned to discuss trends and practices in faculty development within engineering colleges, however their perspective has not been captured in the literature. The purpose of this exploratory qualitative study was to learn about the state of faculty development within engineering colleges through the perspective of engineering deans. A particular focus was placed on identifying salient faculty needs and resources available to support faculty development within engineering colleges. Semi-structured interviews were completed with 23 engineering deans representing three types of institutions: R1 public (n = 8), R1/R2 private (n = 6), and primarily undergraduate-focused (n = 9). A rigorous thematic analysis process was completed until a final codebook emerged with strong interrater agreement. According to the deans the primary needs for incoming faculty involved teaching, research, understanding expectations, time management, and connectivity. There were variances in the approaches and resources available at each institution especially in relation to mentorship. This study indicates that further investigating effectiveness of faculty development programs especially mentorship across the various stages of a faculty’s career would be fruitful contributions to the engineering education community.more » « less
-
This phenomenological study (Moustakas, 1994) explores the mentoring needs of 11 engineering postdoctoral scholars of color with an adaptation of the ideal mentoring model (Zambrana et al., 2015) used as the conceptual framework. A critical theory lens (Morrow & Brown, 1994) is applied to Moustakas’ (1994) four-stage process of phenomenological data analysis to examine the interview data: epoché, horizontalization, imaginative variation, and synthesis. The essence of the phenomenon is engineering postdoctoral scholars of color have primary and secondary mentoring needs pertaining to their immediate career acquisition of a tenure-track faculty position. Primary mentoring needs include expanding professional networks for the tenure-track faculty job search and receiving guidance on work-life balance and enhancing technical skills. Secondary needs consist of refining research directions and research expertise promotion, as well as acquiring political guidance on matters of race/ethnicity in academia. These findings reveal the importance of higher education institutions and postdoctoral supervisors assuming greater responsibility for ensuring postdoctoral scholars receive the mentorship and career support they desire, which may require a systematic change in the postdoctoral training environment.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/https://peer.asee.org/37183
