A National Survey of Mentoring Programs for KL2 Scholars

Abstract

There is limited information on how academic institutions support effective mentoring practices for new investigators. A national semi-structured telephone interview was conducted to assess current “state of the art” mentoring practices for KL2 scholars among the 46 institutions participating in the Clinical Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Consortium. Mentoring practices examined included: mentor selection, articulating and aligning expectations, assessing the mentoring relationship, and mentor training. Telephone interviews were conducted in winter/fall 2009, with 100% of the CTSAs funded (n = 46) through 2009, participating in the survey. Primary findings include: five programs selected mentors for K scholars, 14 programs used mentor contracts to define expectations, 16 programs reported formal mentor evaluation, 10 offered financial incentives to mentors, and 13 offered formal mentoring training. The interviews found considerable variation in mentoring practices for training new investigators among the 46 CTSAs. There was also limited consensus on “what works” and what are the core elements of “effective mentoring practices. Empirical research is needed to help research leaders decide on where and how to place resources related to mentoring.

Developing Mentoring Competency: Does a One Session Training Workshop Have Impact?

“…Although substantial benefits have been ascribed to mentorship, it has been given surprisingly little support in the majority of academic and healthcare institutions [2]. In a national survey of mentoring programs, only 13 out of 46 institutions initiated various forms of mentor training ranging from half-day workshops to multisession curricula [3]. Given the importance of mentorship to individual faculty and departments as a whole, academic and healthcare institutions should provide a supportive environment that actualizes the institution's commitment to the role of mentorship by providing adequate resources for mentors to develop their competence.…”

Training Mentors of Clinical and Translational Research Scholars

“…1–11 Yet, despite its importance, mentoring is typically learned by example, trial and error, and peer observation. 12,13 Given this approach, mentor capabilities are highly variable. Current mentor development and training contrasts sharply with the contemporaneous rigor of instruction and assessment characteristic of competency-based and practice-centered health sciences education.…”

Early Career Mentoring for Translational Researchers: Mentee Perspectives on Challenges and Issues

“…6 In biomedical fields, variability is seen in the prevalence of faculty mentoring 7 and in the formality of mentoring relationships. 8 Furthermore, mentoring in academic settings may be compromised by competing demands for time, limited institutional support, lack of training or preparation for the role, and lack of alignment between the goals of the mentor and protégé. 9 …”