4.5 Article

Does mentoring matter: results from a survey of faculty mentees at a large health sciences university

期刊

MEDICAL EDUCATION ONLINE
卷 15, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

CO-ACTION PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.3402/meo.v15i0.5063

关键词

mentoring; faculty development; program evaluation; self-efficacy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: To determine the characteristics associated with having a mentor, the association of mentoring with self-efficacy, and the content of mentor-mentee interactions at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), we conducted a baseline assessment prior to implementing a comprehensive faculty mentoring program. Method: We surveyed all prospective junior faculty mentees at UCSF. Mentees completed a web-based, 38-item survey including an assessment of self-efficacy and a needs assessment. We used descriptive and inferential statistics to determine the association between having a mentor and gender, ethnicity, faculty series, and self-efficacy. Results: Our respondents (n = 464, 56%) were 53% female, 62% white, and 7% from underrepresented minority groups. More than half of respondents (n = 319) reported having a mentor. There were no differences in having a mentor based on gender or ethnicity (p >= 0.05). Clinician educator faculty with more teaching and patient care responsibilities were statistically significantly less likely to have a mentor compared with faculty in research intensive series (p<0.001). Having a mentor was associated with greater satisfaction with time allocation at work (p<0.05) and with higher academic self-efficacy scores, 6.07 (sd = 1.36) compared with those without a mentor, 5.33 (sd = 1.35, p<0.001). Mentees reported that they most often discussed funding with the mentors, but rated highest requiring mentoring assistance with issues of promotion and tenure. Conclusion: Findings from the UCSF faculty mentoring program may assist other health science institutions plan similar programs. Mentoring needs for junior faculty with greater teaching and patient care responsibilities must be addressed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据