Value of peer mentoring for early career professional, research, and personal development: a case study of implementation scientists

Dickson, Kelsey S.; Glass, Joseph E.; Barnett, Miya L.; Graham, Andrea K.; Powell, Byron J.; Stadnick, Nicole A.

doi:10.1017/cts.2021.776

Cited by 21 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Being part of a K community also promotes peer mentoring, an important component of career growth and team building [16]. This sense of community was facilitated by a shared administration that continued to bring the different training programs together [4].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building an institutional K awardee program at UC Davis through utilization of CTSA resources

Guo

Rainwater

Neves

et al. 2021

J. Clin. Trans. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

NIH offers multiple mentored career development award mechanisms. By building on the UC Davis Clinical and Translational Science Center (CTSC) from its initial NIH funding in 2006, we created an institution-wide K scholar resource. We investigated subsequent NIH funding for K scholars and to what extent CTSC research resources were used. Using NIH RePORTER, we created a database of UC Davis investigators who obtained K01, K08, K23, K25, or K99, as well as institutional KL2 or K12 awards and tracked CTSC research resource use and subsequent funding success. Overall, 94 scholars completed K training between 2007 and 2020, of which 70 participated in one of four institutional, NIH-funded K programs. An additional 103 scholars completed a mentored clinical research training program. Of 94 K awardees, 61 (65%) later achieved NIH funding, with the majority receiving a subsequent individual K award. A higher proportion (73%) of funded scholars used CTSC resources compared to unfunded (48%). Biostatistics and Biomedical Informatics were most commonly used and 55% of scholars used one or more CTSC resource. We conclude that institutional commitment to create a K scholar platform and use of CTSC research resources is associated with high NIH funding rates for early career investigators.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building an institutional K awardee program at UC Davis through utilization of CTSA resources

Guo

Rainwater

Neves

et al. 2021

J. Clin. Trans. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies have shown that peer review as a form of mentoring and support may be a critical mechanism for increasing the retention and success of early-career academics. Peer review offers not only mentoring and professional development but peer support in general also offers unique psycho-social benefits of emotional support from colleagues with shared experience and/or career stage (Cree-Green et al 2020, Dickson et al 2021. This unique benefit is particularly important for individuals from marginalized or under-represented groups in academia (Blackford 2018, Brommer & Eisen 2007, Eisen & Eaton 2017, Yadav & Seals 2019.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They engage in reciprocal constructive commentary in a supportive and encouraging manner with the ultimate desire of seeing each other attain an independent faculty position. Peer review programs are most well-known from their use in manuscripts (Rennie 2016, Tennant et al 2017, Tennant & Ross-Hellauer 2020, but see Haffer et al 2019, Murray et al 2018) and grant application review (Azoulay & Li 2020, Demicheli et al 2007, Marsh et al 2009 but see Lauer & Roychowdhury 2021, Witteman et al 2019, but have been successfully implemented in many other contexts for purposes of professional development and community building, especially for postdocs and early career researchers (Dickson et al 2021, Eisen & Eaton 2017, Kulage et al 2017.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The power of peer networking for improving STEM faculty job applications: a successful pilot program

Guardia

Kane

Tebo

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to successfully obtain a faculty position, postdoctoral fellows or postdocs, must submit an application which requires considerable time and effort to produce. These job applications are often reviewed by mentors and colleagues, but rarely are postdocs offered the opportunity to solicit feedback multiple times from reviewers with the same breadth of expertise often found on an academic search committee. To address this gap, this manuscript describes an international peer reviewing program for small groups of postdocs with a broad range of expertise to reciprocally and iteratively provide feedback to each other on their application materials. Over 145 postdocs have participated, often multiple times, over three years. A survey of participants in this program revealed that nearly all participants would recommend participation in such a program to other faculty applicants. Furthermore, this program was more likely to attract participants who struggled to find mentoring and support elsewhere, either because they changed fields or because of their identity as a woman or member of an underrepresented population in STEM. Participation in programs like this one could provide early career academics like postdocs with a diverse and supportive community of peer mentors during the difficult search for a faculty position. Such psychosocial support and encouragement has been shown to prevent attrition of individuals from these populations and programs like this one target the largest leak in the pipeline, that of postdoc to faculty. Implementation of similar peer-reviewing programs by universities or professional scientific societies could provide a valuable mechanism of support and increased chances of success for early-career academics in their search for independence.

show abstract

“…Apart from being gender-skewed, their study did not reveal the extent to which ECRs' productivity was influenced by mentorship support. Other studies on mentorship and ECRs have looked at areas such as the mentorship needs of ECRs (Marino, 2021), the implementation of long-distance mentorship (Obi et al, 2021), and the value of peer mentorship (Dickson et al, 2021). While the academic employment opportunities worldwide are limited, two international surveys conducted in 2015 (Ghaffarzadegan et al, 2015) and 2017 (Woolston, 2017) found that approximately 78% and 75% of Ph.D. applicants wanted to work in academia, respectively.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although it is claimed that mentorship has a favorable effect on a variety of outcomes, including the number of publications, academic advancement, faculty loyalty, and job happiness (Choi et al, 2019;Dickson et al, 2021), these claims are often not backed up with empirical research evidence. To date, the current literature reveals just one study (Olayide et al, 2021) that attempted to establish a connection between mentorship and research productivity.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mentorship Practices and Research Productivity Among Early-Career Educational Psychologists in Universities

Okon¹,

Owan²,

Owan³

2022

EDUPIJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/purpose -This study analyzed the contribution of three mentorship practices relatively and cumulatively to the research productivity of early-career academics in the field of educational psychology in universities. The study was conducted in the South-South region of Nigeria.Materials/methods -The research method adopted was the quantitative approach, following the ex-post facto research design. The study's population covered 723 early-career researchers (ECRs) in educational psychology distributed across 19 universities located in South-South Nigeria. The "Mentorship Practices and Research Productivity Questionnaire" (MPRPQ) was the instrument used for data collection. The questionnaire was designed by the researchers and then validated by three experts. Reliability analysis was performed using the Cronbach approach with estimates of .80, .79, .87, and .91 obtained for the four clusters. Primary data were collected from the field after copies of the instrument had been administered to respondents.Results -Mentorship practices were generally revealed to significantly contribute to the research productivity of ECRs in educational psychology in universities. Specifically, the adoption of cloning and apprenticeship approaches to mentorship contributed substantially to the ECRs' research productivity. However, the study highlighted that nurturing contributed only negligibly to the ECRs' research productivity.Conclusion -Mentorship practices are important determinants to the research productivity of early-career educational psychologists. In order to boost the productive research capacities of ECRs, there is a need for institutions to strengthen their mentorship practices.

show abstract

Value of peer mentoring for early career professional, research, and personal development: a case study of implementation scientists

Abstract: This version may be subject to change during the production process.

Cited by 21 publications

References 28 publications

Building an institutional K awardee program at UC Davis through utilization of CTSA resources

Building an institutional K awardee program at UC Davis through utilization of CTSA resources

The power of peer networking for improving STEM faculty job applications: a successful pilot program

Mentorship Practices and Research Productivity Among Early-Career Educational Psychologists in Universities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About