The proliferation of online graduate programs, and more recently, higher education institutions’ moves to online interactions due to the COVID-19 crisis, have led to graduate student mentoring increasingly occurring online. Challenges, strategies, and outcomes associated with online mentoring of graduate students are of primary importance for the individuals within a mentoring dyad and for universities offering online or blended graduate education. The nature of mentoring interactions within an online format presents unique challenges and thus requires strategies specifically adapted to such interactions. There is a need to examine how mentoring relationships have been, and can best be, conducted when little to no face-to-face interaction occurs. This paper undertook a literature review of empirical studies from the last two decades on online master’s and doctoral student mentoring. The main themes were challenges, strategies and best practices, and factors that influence the online mentoring relationship. The findings emphasized the importance of fostering interpersonal aspects of the mentoring relationship, ensuring clarity of expectations and communications as well as competence with technologies, providing access to peer mentor groups or cohorts, and institutional support for online faculty mentors. Within these online mentoring relationships, the faculty member becomes the link to an otherwise absent yet critical experience of academia for the online student, making it imperative to create and foster an effective relationship based on identified strategies and best practices for online mentoring.
Instructional designers (IDs) play a crucial role in higher education institutions' teaching and learning endeavors. This review of literature on IDs in higher education between 2000 and 2020 found that their roles, responsibilities, and challenges are well-described, but little is known about what supports them. As ID roles evolve in response to new challenges while helping faculty and institutions adapt to changes during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a rapidly emerging need to focus on additional areas of research, such as faculty perspectives, what it means to be an ID, and how IDs are--or can be--supported. MethodsThe literature search was conducted in ERIC, Google Scholar, and a US university library-provided combined search tool that accessed EBSCO, DOAJ, JSTOR, and SpringerLink. The following terms were searched: instructional designers, instructional designer, higher education, college, university, IDs, educational technologists, course designers, learning design, learning designer. These were combined in various ways to cast a wide net. Results included peer-reviewed journal articles, book chapters, dissertations, white papers, and other sources that were collected and cataloged in a spreadsheet. The spreadsheet highlighted key information: author(s), year of publication, study context, publication type, publication name (if applicable), focus, main findings, type of research (qualitative/quantitative/mixed), methodology (when available), and data sources. Additional chain searching and collection was conducted as articles cited potentially relevant studies that had not appeared within search results. The following inclusion criteria were applied to the 76 sources collected:Literature that focused on the experiences and/or activities of IDs in their professional roles rather than on design outcomes, training students to be IDs, student learning, or technological implementations was included. Faculty perspectives on working with IDs, though rare, were included. Sources that specifically referred to a higher education context for at least half the study participants were included. Only peer-reviewed articles, peer-reviewed conference proceedings, peer-reviewed books, and dissertations were included; non-peerreviewed books and non-peer-reviewed articles were excluded. In addition to empirical research, literature reviews, conceptual, and position papers in peerreviewed journals were included.
Aim t any one time, approximately 10% of the junior doctor workforce (∼5000 doctors) take time out of training. Following the Bawa Gaba case, and with trainees shielding during the COVID pandemic, there is greater scrutiny and demand to support trainees returning to the frontline. Supported Return to Training (SuppoRTT) is a Health Education England Program designed to improve the Return-To-Training (RTT) experience. For surgical specialties there are additional challenges of reintroducing trainees to practical skills. Method e designed and facilitated the first regional SuppoRTT course for Orthopaedic Specialist Registrars, which consisted of peer and consultant-led clinical updates, forum discussions and externally commissioned professional coaching. A pre-course survey established participants’ concerns and expectations about RTT and formed the basis of discussions. A post-course survey assessed value of the course and impact on participants. Results Eight participants (6 female) attended. Grade of training on return ranged from ST3 to ST8. Main areas of concern related to colleague perception, reduced confidence with decision-making, operative skill fade, and frustrations with organisational elements of managing work-life balance. There was an overwhelmingly positive response to the support offered on our course, particularly to the discussions around RTT concerns and returning to on-calls. All respondents strongly agreed that sharing their concerns and hearing about peer experience was valuable. Conclusions High numbers of trainees take approved time out of training. RTT is associated with anxiety around performance and safety. Surgical trainees can be supported with a targeted course that offers clinical update, peer support and professional coaching.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.