Mentoring in a Post‐Affirmative Action World

Girves, Jean E.; Zepeda, Yolanda; Gwathmey, Judith K.

doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2005.00416.x

Cited by 137 publications

(120 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

115

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Programs that aim to address deficits are not unusual and, though wellintentioned as support, have been of particular concern to women and minorities. Boice (1993 p306) found that "women were more inclined to see offers of help as problematically manipulative or intrusive" and Girves, Zepeda and Gwathmey (2005) felt that "[w]omen and minorities... may feel uncomfortable with the concept of being groomed or cloned fearing they must give up their own identities. ... [mentees] may be reluctant to seek out mentors out of fear that they will be perceived as being too dependent" (Girves et al 2005 p456).…”

Section: An Individualised Process For Menteesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Looking for Professor Right: mentee selection of mentors in a formal mentoring program

Bell

Treleaven

2010

High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Finding a suitable mentor is crucial to the success of mentoring relationships. In the mentoring literature, however, there is conflicting evidence about the best ways to support the pairing process in organisational mentoring programs. This paper presents a detailed analysis of the pairing process in an academic mentoring program that has implications for building a mentoring culture in higher education. The program which began with a pilot and has continued for five years with one hundred and twenty one participants, was conducted with mentees selecting their own mentor from a pool of mentors who volunteered to be part of the program. In the pilot program, where mentors and mentees first met as one group, some mentees reported that the process of selecting and approaching a mentor was uncomfortable and intimidating. Nine of twenty-three potential mentees did not form mentoring relationships. Analysis of subsequent program evaluation data pointed to the importance of two factors in the pairing process: personal connections and facilitation of the selection process. This study at a research-intensive university demonstrates that when the pairing process is tailored to individual mentees, they are comfortable selecting a mentor and to then develop a successful mentoring relationship.

show abstract

Section: An Individualised Process For Menteesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Looking for Professor Right: mentee selection of mentors in a formal mentoring program

Bell

Treleaven

2010

High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Personal challenges include work/life balance [6][7][8] and childbearing and child rearing decisions. Workplace issues include lack of mentoring [9][10][11], feelings of marginalization or isolation [16,[20][21][22], and the lack of sponsorship by senior colleagues [12,13]. While the findings of the self-study are in line with other findings regarding women faculty in STEM, the current AdvanceRIT project seeks to disrupt the existing sluggish processes and practices on campus to accelerate and increase the attainment of project goals.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 79%

AdvanceRIT Connect Grants: Driving Momentum for Disruptive Change for Women STEM Faculty

Mason¹,

Bailey²,

Dell³

et al.

2015 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Women faculty are underrepresented in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) disciplines. The ADVANCE Institutional Transformation project at a large private technical university (supported by NSF Award No. 1209115), referred to as AdvanceRIT, aims to increase the representation and advancement of women STEM faculty (which includes social and behavioral sciences, SBS, faculty) by removing barriers to resources that support career success and by creating new interventions and resources.This paper reports on the development of efforts to activate change for STEM faculty in the form of an internal grant program, Connect Grants, as part of the AdvanceRIT project. The grants support leadership and career development for all tenured and pretenured faculty. The Connect Grants are outside of the normal processes and procedures as defined by the university. Support for the grants is also outside of the normal budgetary resourcing that is defined for the divisions, colleges, and departments. By providing a framework for the activities outside of the defined university processes and budget allocations, the AdvanceRIT project aims to support creative, innovative, and disruptive efforts toward reaching its end goals.The grant program has two distinct funding tracks: one for faculty and one for department heads. The Faculty/Faculty Group Connect Grants are designed to broaden faculty opportunities and enhance plans of work associated with tenure and promotion preparation, as well as overall career advancement. Department Connect Grants support creative, innovative, and disruptive department-level efforts to guide and manage faculty through various career stages and project-oriented work to facilitate institutional transformation. Programming supported by Connect grants includes peer-to-peer mentoring, gendered citation disparities in philosophy of science, and post-tenure mentoring and leadership initiatives. Using evidence to support institutional transformation is critical; hence, the results of quantitative and qualitative data analyses informed the development of the Connect Grants program. This paper demonstrates how faculty climate and mentoring surveys, NSF Indicator objective data, and focus group results informed the development of this internal grants program. Additionally, it describes the framework for implementing this internal grants program and the outcomes of the awarded grants.

show abstract

“…Other studies have confirmed the relationship of having a network of mentors compared to just a single mentor will enhance career success and personal well-being (de Janasz, 2004;Girves, 2005;Johnson, 2007). In a study by van Emmerik (van Emmerik, 2004), it was found that having multiple mentors is not a substitute for a single mentor but should be held in addition to a core relationship.…”

Section: B Mentoring Constellationsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Virtual Graduate School Mentoring Using Embodied Conversational Agents

Gosha¹,

Gilbert²,

Middlebrook³

2015

JCSIT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been a major goal of the United States government to increase the participation of Americans in the fields of Science & Engineering (S&E), especially in under-represented groups. This research examines the use of an embodied conversational agent (ECA) as a virtual mentor to African American undergraduates who are interested in pursuing a graduate degree in computing. Mentoring advice was collected from a group of experts and programed within the ECA. A between-group, mixed method experiment was conducted with 37 African American male undergraduate computer science majors where one group used the ECA mentor while the other group pursued mentoring advice from a human mentor. Results showed no significant difference between the ECA and human mentor when dealing with career mentoring functions. However, the human mentor was significantly better than the ECA mentor when addressing psychosocial mentoring functions.

show abstract

Mentoring in a Post‐Affirmative Action World

Cited by 137 publications

References 38 publications

Looking for Professor Right: mentee selection of mentors in a formal mentoring program

Looking for Professor Right: mentee selection of mentors in a formal mentoring program

AdvanceRIT Connect Grants: Driving Momentum for Disruptive Change for Women STEM Faculty

Virtual Graduate School Mentoring Using Embodied Conversational Agents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About