Five Approaches to Faculty Mentoring

Description

Benefits and Issues

Mentoring

Implementation and Practices

Definition:

• Informal mentoring arising spontaneously, as individuals interact during normal professional activities.

Assumptions:

• Formalized mentoring may be detrimental as it adds to faculty workloads.
• Natural interactions allow junior faculty to seek out advice in accord with their individual needs.
• The department is available as the definitive source of information, opportunities and resources.

Relationships:

Mentors are not formally assigned. Instead, mentoring arises as people interact during:

• Committee meetings
• Collaborations in research or teaching
• Casual encounters: lunches, coffees, hallway conversations, and social gatherings.
• Ad hoc meetings are initiated by senior or junior faculty (“open-door” policy).

Junior faculty are the usual initiators:                                                

• Junior faculty solicit advice from senior faculty that they select.
• Junior faculty develop their own interaction networks.
• Junior faculty interact with one another, for peer support and networking.
• Junior faculty seek information and advice from Department sources.

Benefits:

• Mentoring relationships are not imposed; instead, they develop naturally.
• Faculty become self-sufficient and interact without suffering from imposed formal arrangements.
• Mentoring strategies are flexible and thus are adaptable to each department.

Issues:

• The onus is largely on junior faculty to seek mentoring.
• Junior faculty may be reluctant to seek out senior colleagues.
• Junior faculty may not know their needs, be able to articulate their needs, or understand what resources are available to address their needs.
• Senior faculty may not view mentoring activity as an important component of their work or the department’s mission.
• Interactions may not develop naturally.

The unique needs of special faculty groups may be overlooked.

Description

Benefits and Issues

Mentoring

Implementation and Practices

Definition:

• In this system, mentoring is formally established as a one-on-one relationship between junior and senior faculty.
• Terms are variable and may include:
• Long-term commitments
• One-year terms
• Rotating assignments changed at regular intervals
• The mentoring may incorporate individual or departmental reviews.

Assumptions:

• The administration is committed to mentoring.
• A single mentor can best satisfy the needs of junior faculty.
• Senior faculty have the knowledge needed to serve as mentors.
• Junior faculty benefit from interactions with someone familiar with their work.
• Faculty have sufficient time to foster meaningful mentoring relationships.
• Mentors and mentees can find areas of compatibility.
• Both junior and senior faculty benefit from mentoring relationships.

Ways of assigning mentors :

• Formally assigned based on research interests.
• Junior faculty selects mentor.
• Senior faculty selects mentee.

Activities:

• Meetings are regular and periodic.
• Issues are defined jointly or arise from either the mentee or the mentor.
• Junior faculty needs, timeframe, and expectations are discussed formally.
• Research and publications are discussed formally.
• The mentor oversees progress towards tenure.
• The mentor aids networking in the research field.
• The mentor facilitates participation in professional activities, grant writing, and reviewing.
• The mentor and mentee may collaborate in research and teaching.

Benefits:

• This system can lead to long-term professional relationships and friendships.
• Junior faculty may gain an ally and advocate.
• Senior faculty may become reenergized or more invested in the department.

Issues:

• Dyads may be incompatible.
• Changing partners can be awkward.
• One mentor may not satisfy all needs.
• Time constraints may prevent regular interactions.
• Senior faculty may lack incentives to invest time in mentoring.
• Departments may have too few mentors who are knowledgeable and willing to serve.
• Competitiveness may hinder good mentoring.
• Interdisciplinary appointments can complicate mentoring arrangements.

Description

Benefits and Issues

Mentoring

Implementation and Practices

Definition:

• In this system, a group of senior faculty is formally assigned to each junior faculty member, to give advice on both personal and professional concerns.
• Mentees may meet with the entire committee, or with individuals.

 Assumptions:

• The administration is committed to mentoring.
• Senior faculty are preferred as mentors.
• Senior faculty may lack sufficient time to foster meaningful one-on-one interactions.
• No single individual possesses all the knowledge necessary for mentoring.
• Junior faculty need to receive multiple perspectives.
• Both junior and senior faculty benefit from mentoring relationships.
• Personal concerns can have an impact on professional development and are thus a valid issue for mentoring.

Implementation :

• The composition of the group may reflect the diverse needs of mentees.
• Committee members may be chosen based on research and teaching interests or other relevant experience.
• Assignments may be made yearly.
• Committees and junior faculty may be reviewed periodically.
  

 Activities:

• Meetings are regular and periodic.
• Meetings jointly define junior faculty needs, timeframe, and expectations.
• Research and publications are discussed.
• The committee oversees progress towards tenure.
• Committee members aid networking in the field and facilitate participation in professional activities.
• The mentors and mentee may collaborate in research and teaching.
• The committee addresses personal concerns such as balancing work and family obligations.
• The group serves as the gateway for unit, school/college, and university resources.

Benefits:

• Junior faculty can access the knowledge and resources of several senior faculty.
• The aggregate strengths and knowledge of several senior mentors provides a more holistic experience.
• Having multiple potential mentors makes it easier to schedule a one-on-one meeting with a mentor.
• If rapport is not established with one mentor, others are readily available.
• Group dynamics facilitate interactions that may enhance research and teaching of all committee members.

Issues:

• Senior faculty members may not interact well with one another.
• Conflicting advice may obscure what is important and confuse mentees.
• Oversight is needed to resolve conflicting advice.

Description

Benefits and Issues

Mentoring

Implementation and Practices

Definition:

• In oversight mentoring, the chair (or unit director), perhaps in consultation with a committee, mentors junior faculty and monitors their progress.
• Mentoring focuses on tenure and promotion.
• Existing tenure and promotion criteria provide specific guidelines.

  Assumptions:

• Administrative leadership symbolizes departmental interest in junior faculty development.
• Focusing on tenure and promotion is the most appropriate framework for mentoring.
• The chair is the most appropriate individual to mentor.
• The chair is the most accurate and relevant source of information for mentoring.
• Junior faculty benefit from ongoing interactions with the chair.
• Junior faculty can access campus resources as needed.

Ways of assigning mentors:

• The mentor is the unit chair.
• The chair may mentor in conjunction with a standing or ad hoc committee.

Activities:

• Meetings are regular and periodic.
• Research and publications are discussed.
• The chair and mentee jointly define junior faculty needs, timeframe, and expectations.
• The chair oversees progress towards tenure, grant writing and teaching.
• The chair aids networking in the field and facilitates participation in professional activities.
• The chair may provide assistance with personal concerns such as balancing work and family obligations.
• The chair serves as the gateway for unit, school/college, and university resources.

Benefits:

• Chairs are actively engaged in junior faculty development.
• Junior faculty receive feedback and information pertinent to their own unit.
• The emphasis on tenure and promotion keeps the mentee focused on activities that support professional development.

  Issues:

• Linking mentoring to tenure and promotion could marginalize unassociated career development activities.
• Chairs may have a heavy burden if they are wholly responsible for the professional guidance of all junior faculty members.
• Other issues, such as personal concerns, may be ignored.

Description

Benefits and Issues

Mentoring

Implementation and Practices

Definition:

In network mentoring, the culture supports continuous mentoring, so that people within the unit serve as mutual resources for one another.

• This system blends administrative leadership, departmental involvement, and junior faculty initiative.
• This system is not an explicit mentoring program; instead, mentoring arises through ongoing academic work.

  Assumptions:

• Junior faculty mentoring is a unit responsibility.
• No one individual possesses all the knowledge needed for mentoring.
• Senior faculty may have insufficient time to foster meaningful mentoring relationships on their own.
• Junior faculty are expected to take advantage of resources that are available.
• Senior faculty and administrators are expected to readily assist junior faculty.

Implementation:

• A collaborative system arises through normal departmental activities.
• Junior and senior faculty work together on projects, committee work, and in professional societies.
• Structures can be flexible:

Particular faculty may be responsible for providing particular types of information.

An “open-door” policy can facilitate junior faculty willingness to seek advice.

Senior faculty can periodically check up on the progress of junior colleagues.

Chairs and directors can oversee junior faculty progress.

  Relationships:

• Interactions can range from traditional dyads to collaborative partnerships with multiple colleagues.
• This system also promotes peer support and interactions among junior faculty.
• This system seeks to build a culture that incorporates mentoring into natural departmental functions.

Benefits:

• Mentoring becomes viewed as a collective responsibility.
• This system fosters greater collegiality among all members.
• Junior faculty become socialized to embrace collegial development and to serve in turn as mentors.
• Junior faculty receive multiple perspectives on professional issues, rather than relying on a single individual or group for guidance.
• All faculty make connections across a broader spectrum of professional interests.

  Issues:

• Junior faculty must be willing to initiate contact.
• Senior faculty and administrators must be committed to continually participate in mentoring.
• Senior faculty commitment may be hampered by a lack of incentives.
• Responsibility for tracking progress of junior faculty may become too diffused.