Search results

Industry mentoring has been repeatedly called out in sector reports on research training in Australian Universities as an effective way to develop PhD capacity and capabilities during research degrees (ACOLA, 2016; NOUS, 2017). Despite the understood importance of this type of experiential development, there is little published evidence on how effective mentoring is to develop the capabilities linked to improved employability. The University of South Australia developed the industry mentoring network in STEM (IMNIS) Impact Evaluation Instrument (IIEI) to capture advanced self-assessed data from mentees and demonstrate what impact the IMNIS program has on developing industry-relevant knowledge and skills in PhD participants. In 2017, the three universities in South Australia implemented a state-wide study using the IIEI to understand the impact of the national IMNIS scheme on the South Australian cohort.

This paper presents a case study on the impact of mentoring on PhD students during the IMNIS program. A self-assessed, competency-based study design has been used to collect pre, mid and post experience data, which measures the extent to which objectives of the IMNIS program are met. The evaluation of the results, using the Vitae Impact Framework (Vitae, 2012), seeks to understand the development of mentees’ skills and knowledge as a result of their mentoring experience to support program development and build an evidence base of impact.

This paper presents the 2017/2018 results from the South Australian IMNIS impact evaluation. Through analysis of the three data sets, findings show that skills and knowledge have been developed in mentees as a result of the program.

This study provides an extended approach to the existing evaluation undertaken in the national IMNIS program. The IIEI is now available for other universities to use as a method for extended evaluation of their IMNIS program or potentially other WIL opportunities, providing an opportunity for institutional and national benchmarking.

The purpose of this paper is to explore an informal interdisciplinary peer-mentoring relationship between two early career researchers.

A case study approach, using autoethnography, was employed to explore the relationship from a complex adaptive systems (CAS) perspective.

Informal peer-mentoring relationships may improve the work effectiveness and quality of the doctoral student and early career researcher experience. CAS can be an effective overarching theory for expanding understandings about mentoring.

This case study is limited to two early career researchers.

Informal peer mentoring may help to overcome challenges encountered by doctoral students, early career researchers and university staff members. CAS accounts of mentoring have the potential to open new possibilities for future mentoring research.

This paper provides unique insights into the experiences of doctoral students postgraduation and a long-term informal peer-mentoring relationship. Explorations of mentoring relationships from a CAS perspective are innovative.

The present study examines leader development as one of the potential outcomes for mentors and investigates whether the provision of mentoring contributes to developing mentors' leader identity and leader self-efficacy.

Relying on a quasi-experimental design, data were collected at four points in time over eight months from a mentor (n = 46) and an equivalent nonmentor group (n = 25). Participants in the mentor group were volunteer mentors from a doctoral mentoring program that was implemented at a large Canadian university.

Participants in the mentor group experienced a more positive change in leader identity and leader self-efficacy, compared to the participants in the nonmentor group. Further analysis of the participants in the mentor group suggests that the extent to which mentors provide career and psychosocial support explains the growth rate in the development outcomes.

By documenting benefits of mentoring for mentors, program administrators may be able to recruit mentors who are more engaged in the process. In addition, they can encourage their members to volunteer as mentors to gain leader development outcomes.

This longitudinal study connects the areas of mentoring and leadership development. While the majority of mentoring studies focus exclusively on mentoring outcomes for protégés, the present study shows that mentoring can benefit mentors as well.

A psychosocial, developmental perspective was used to examine the mentoring experiences of scientists. Little is known about the timing of when mentors first appear, the quality of these relationships, the specific mentoring support behaviors, or how scientists typically learn to mentor. The paper aims to discuss the above issues.

The author conducted 23, semi-structured interviews with Australian scientists. Questions focussed on mentor-like support scientists received and provided. Interviews were analyzed and themes were coded using Dedoose software.

Scientists who had mentors as undergraduates were more likely to report long-lasting relationships with their mentors and more positive interactions with their protégés. Scientists reported the following career mentoring behaviors: modeling how to do science, sponsorship, collaboration, and practical supervision. Important psychosocial mentoring behaviors were being approachable, building confidence and providing encouragement. Almost half of the scientists never had a mentor. Most (n=14) scientists learned to mentor by emulating their mentors. Findings highlight the prevalence of dysfunctional behaviors, even in supportive relationships.

The findings suggest that graduate program managers might consider investing resources to improve mentoring experiences of doctoral students as this is a critical period for their professional development. Further, activities involving collaboration deserve emphasis in mentoring relationships.

The study identified a “window” when mentoring support is important for scientists; highlighted specific behaviors that support career development in science; and clarified how some scientists learn to mentor others. Results add to the literature on dysfunctional mentoring relationships.

Mentoring postdocs is a shared responsibility and dynamic process that requires a mutual commitment between the faculty mentor and postdoc. The purpose of this study is to understand how minoritized science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) postdocs view and engage in mentoring exchanges with their faculty mentors. In the context of this study, minoritized postdocs include women, people of color, and individuals with international status; faculty mentors include postdocs’ Principal Investigators (PIs).

Three researchers and 31 data sources (i.e., interview transcripts) were used to construct the case. Researchers first deductively and independently coded the data sources using Molm’s (2006) social exchange framework to identify examples of direct, generalized, and productive mentoring exchanges. Researchers then used thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006) to identify emergent themes among coded examples of direct, generalized, and productive mentoring exchanges.

Data analyses revealed three emergent themes: (1.1) postdocs valued regular meetings and communication with mentors to clarify responsibilities and role expectations, (1.2) postdocs found more value in their interactions with junior faculty PIs who were flexible and open to innovative ideas, and (1.3) postdocs appreciated conversations about short- and long-term career goals and advice with mentors.

Findings offer implications for faculty and postdocs’ approaches to mentoring relationships, and for approaches to cultivating supportive scholarly communities in STEM higher education. Recommendations include flexibility in research assignments, increased awareness of non-academic careers, and opportunities for informal interactions and intra/interdepartmental community building.

Much of the extant research, practice and policy in engineering education has focused on the limited persistence, waning interest and lack of preparation among Black students to continue beyond the post-secondary engineering pipeline. However, this research suggests that many Black PhD students persist and succeed in engineering, fueled by various motivational strengths. To better understand the motivations of Black students in engineering doctoral programs, this study aims to explore the factors that influence their decision to enroll in either an engineering or a computing doctoral program.

This paper uses an intrinsic and extrinsic motivational framework to investigate the inspiration of 44 Black engineering doctoral students in PhD engineering programs in 11 engineering schools across the country.

Results show that the participants’ motivation to pursue a PhD in engineering comes from several distinct factors, including the following: an unyielding passion for their particular discipline, a sense of responsibility to serve marginalized peoples and society, a path toward autonomy, pre-PhD mentorship and research opportunities and family and prior work experience.

Based on this study’s findings, a reconceptualization of graduate engineering education that incorporates the importance of “being Black” and its relationships with motivating and, potentially, retaining Black science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) students is also offered.

This paper seeks to expose particular constructs and behaviors surrounding Black students’ motivation to learn and achieve in engineering at the highest academic levels, offering a more nuanced perspective than currently is found in traditional engineering education literature.

Recent educational initiatives by the Obama Administration have highlighted the need for more racial and ethnic diversity in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields (The White House, 2011). While African Americans are underrepresented in faculty positions nationally, accounting for only 5.2% of all academic faculty across all disciplines (Harvey, W. B., & Anderson, E. L. (2005). Minorities in higher education: Twenty-first annual status report. Washington, DC: American Council on Education), the underrepresentation of African Americans in STEM fields such as computing science is even more severe. According to a recent Computing Research Association (CRA) Taulbee Survey, African Americans represent just 1.3% of all computing sciences faculty (CRA, 2006).

This paper examines the benefits of one program that specifically seeks to fulfill the Obama Administration’s initiatives by addressing this disparity in higher education.

The program helps prepare doctoral students for the academic job search process in an effort to increase the ranks of African American faculty in computing sciences.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the design, implementation and evaluation of a small UK case study of a mentoring style pilot intervention integrating a specially trained police officer alongside mental health professionals to support highly intensive service users of emergency services.

The development of the conceptual framework informing the mentoring intervention is described and its implementation evaluated using a range of qualitative and quantitative outcome measures.

The four high intensity service users involved in the pilot had internalised the need to participate in recommended recovery pathways. Mental health nurses reported improved compliance with treatment. Although the sample was small, the number of police mental health crisis detentions was reduced by 66 per cent after one year and by 100 per cent after 18 months. Usage of other emergency public services had also drastically reduced, or been eliminated altogether.

Limited time and resources and the need for a solution that could be implemented as soon as possible meant a pragmatic design, implementation and evaluation.

The study indicated that a wider roll out of the new multi-agency mentoring model would be beneficial.

This is the first intervention to integrate mental health professionals and a trained police officer directly into the care pathway of repeated users of emergency public services with complex mental health needs.

The purpose of this paper is to expand the conversation about mentoring and policy and provides a detailed analysis of empirical research on mentoring polices in education, with a focus on adult mentoring in primary and secondary schools.

Articles in peer-reviewed journals were examined using a systematic content analysis. In total, 405 abstracts/articles were reviewed, and 37 articles were subjected to an in-depth analysis.

Although very few articles dealt specifically with mentoring policy in any substantial way, a major finding that emerged was that to be effective, policy development should include not only the stakeholders who have the power to create it, but also those who must implement it.

Although the authors acknowledge that the systematic search process may not have captured all the relevant articles, and that other books or resources on this topic might not have been accessed in the search process, serious research on the topic of mentoring policy and its implications for primary and secondary school contexts nevertheless seems to be limited.

The findings have implications for practice and future research, and point towards the need for a comprehensive research agenda on this topic.

The paper has value for the directions of future research.