Mentoring trainee psychologists: learning from lived experience

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine service-users’ experiences of mentoring trainee clinical psychologists as part of an involvement initiative on a doctoral training course. Design/methodology/approach Seven service-users were paired with trainee clinical psychologists. Pairs met for one hour monthly over six months. Meetings were unstructured, lacked a formal agenda and were not evaluated academically. All seven mentors were interviewed. They were asked about positive and negative experiences, as well as about the support provided. Transcripts were subject to thematic analysis and themes were reviewed by mentors in a follow-up meeting. Findings Overall, the results demonstrate that service-users can be involved in training in a way that they find meaningful and contribute to their recovery. Seven themes were identified: giving hope and optimism; making a difference; personal and professional development; the process; practicalities/logistics; support (positives); and support (areas for improvement). Practical implications The importance of designing involvement initiatives in a way which implicitly supports service-user values was highlighted. Recommendations for designing effective support structures are given. The authors were also involved in the scheme which could have introduced bias. Originality/value The research exploring service-users’ experiences of involvement in training health professionals is limited. This was the first study to explore in depth service-users’ perspectives of involvement in a scheme such as the mentoring scheme. If initiatives are to seriously embrace the values of the service-user movement then seeking service-users’ perspectives is vital.

Something special, something unique: Perspectives of experts by experience in mental health nursing education on their contribution

“…To date, most research has explored the perspectives of students and academics from the health professions (Horgan et al, 2020; Stacey & Pearson, 2018). The limited research utilizing EBE as participants has primarily focused on the experience of the role which has generally been rated positively (Happell et al, 2019; McKeown et al, 2012; Prytherch et al, 2018; Speers & Lathlean, 2015). This process was considered as effective in reducing stigma and encouraging students to see service users as people rather than diagnoses (Bocking et al, 2019).…”

“…A strength of the current study is co‐production. Given other research has no apparent (Prytherch et al, 2018; Speers & Lathlean, 2015) or limited service user involvement (Happell, Bennetts, et al, 2019; McKeown et al, 2012), the conduct and focus of the research may not adequately reflect what service users consider important and may have failed to capture vital information. The collaboration between nurse academics and EBE is likely to have strengthened the relevance and authenticity of these findings.…”

“…EBE teaching is described as at least as effective as teaching by clinicians (Gordon et al, 2020). EBE involvement enables a different sort of learning (Prytherch et al, 2018) and provides an essential source of new knowledge (Prytherch et al, 2018). This reflects experiential authority of EBE (Jones & Pietilä, 2020), which brings a unique authenticity to teaching (Winn & Lindqvist, 2019).…”

“…In both studies, service users found the experience extremely positive. The need for greater support from academic staff was identified in one study (Prytherch et al, 2018). From the authorship list, it appears this work was designed, conducted and disseminated by academics with no visible input from EBE which could considerably impact the relevance and fidelity of the process and findings.…”

They are a different breed aren’t they? Exploring how experts by experience influence students through mental health education

“…To date, the research into the impact of EBE generally has primarily explored the perspectives of students (Arblaster et al., 2015; Kang & Joung, 2020; Ridley et al., 2017), and to a lesser degree EBE (Bocking et al., 2019; McKeown et al., 2012; Prytherch et al ., 2018; Speers & Lathlean, 2015). Research has also examined the perspectives of nurse academics regarding EBE involvement in mental health nursing education (Happell et al., 2019a; Happell et al., 2015c); however, the majority of nurse participants had not worked closely with EBE in substantial academic roles.…”