Building a Sustainable National Infrastructure to Expand Research Mentor Training

BUILDing Engaged Mentors: Examining the Efficacy of BUILD-led Mentor Training

The practice of mentorship is a critical focus in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) disciplines. This quasi-experimental study investigated the efficacy of undergraduate mentor training in biomedical sciences programs in the NIH-funded Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) initiative comprised of research-rising institutions. We used data from the Higher Education Research Institute's Faculty Survey (2016-17 and 2019-20). In cross-sectional comparisons of 379 BUILD-trained faculty with 755 colleagues who were not BUILD-trained, those who participated in BUILD mentor training reported more engagement with mentees. Utilizing propensity score matching of 314 with longitudinal cases, mentoring confidence and engagement were stronger over time for BUILD-trained faculty. Findings suggest BUILD mentor training yields positive results for undergraduate mentors at research-rising institutions.

Mentoring up for early career investigators: Empowering mentees to proactively engage in their mentoring relationships

Introduction

Effective mentorship is recognized as critical for the professional development of clinical and translational investigators. Evidence-based mentorship training prompted the development of training for mentees at early career stages who are navigating both mentor and mentee roles. The curriculum titled, Mentoring Up for Early Career Investigators, recognizes the importance of building mentee self-efficacy across proactive mentorship skills and competencies.

Methods

Mentoring Up for Early Career Investigators curriculum is based on the research mentor training approach in Entering Mentoring. Pilot implementations of Mentoring Up at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and University of Pennsylvania had positive training outcomes for KL2 Scholars. Subsequently, Mentoring Up was implemented and evaluated at several other institutions. For 26 implementations longer than 4 hours, data were collected on trainee demographics, satisfaction with training, skill gains across mentorship competencies, and the intent to change mentoring behaviors following training.

Results

88% of participants rated the mentee training as valuable. Significant skill gains were reported across all mentorship competencies following training. 77% reported specific plans to change or augment their mentoring behaviors because of the training. The majority aligned with mentorship skill competencies (aligning expectations, effective communications) or mentoring up strategies (voicing needs, setting boundaries, communicating proactively).

Conclusion

Mentoring Up training is effective in advancing mentee skills and promoting strategies to be more proactive in getting their mentoring needs met. Mentoring Up offers an expansion to the suite of mentorship education and resources to support the career advancement of all in the translational science workforce.

Training in the art and science of facilitation to scale research mentor training in low and middle income countries

Advancing biomedical research in low and middle income countries (LMICs) to expand the capacity for LMICs to integrate biomedical research into their health care systems and education has been the focus of many programs in global health over the past two decades. Central to the success of these programs is effective research mentoring, characterized by academic, career and psychosocial support through culturally appropriate practices. Research mentoring is a learned skill, developed through training, mutual discussions, practice and feedback. The majority of extant training programs are designed and delivered by US partners, so the next stage in building capacity is to train facilitators within the LMIC partner institutions to contextualize and advance mentoring specifically within their cultural and institutional norms by co-developing, delivering and evaluating semi-annual research mentoring training. To this end, we describe the development, delivery and outcome evaluation of a 5-week course in the art and skill of facilitation. Care was taken to explicitly distinguish between concepts of "teaching" and "facilitation," since "teaching" is closely connected to a transmission or banking model of education, which is characterized by "top-down," hierarchical relationship. The course discussed power and positionality, themes that resonate with partners in Nigeria and Tanzania. These themes provided unique entry into deeper conversations core to advancing mentoring practice away from the traditional dyadic power structure that remains from colonization. Evaluation findings indicate significant advances in awareness of differences between teaching and facilitating, increased confidence in facilitation skills, especially in the area of structured planning and organization, as well as improved communication and interpersonal skills. All respondents felt that students in Nigeria and Tanzania would respond well to the facilitation approach conveyed during the course and they found value in participating in the course as a cohort.

Engaging the Entire Learner: Pathway Program Administrators' Experiences of Providing Students with Research Experiences in Academic Medicine

Objective

Pathway programs designed to recruit and retain students from groups historically excluded from science and medicine have focused on providing academic and social support through programs that provide mentored experiences. However, for students in science, technology, engineering, math, and medicine (STEMM) majors, students from underrepresented groups tend to leave science-oriented programs at higher rates than students who are not underrepresented. As such, they are also underrepresented in medical fields, including academic medicine. Insight into how pathway programs contribute to addressing this issue is critical.

Methods

This study took a qualitative approach to investigating the experiences of pathway program administrators in academic medicine. Interviews were conducted with 12 program administrators working on 8 different programs throughout the country. Interviews were analyzed using directed content analysis while also allowing for the development of new themes based on the data.

Results

The codes were organized into 6 overarching themes: mentorship, student engagement, determining program success, administrative time and program logistics, diversity and inclusion, and transition to virtual learning (due to COVID-19). Within each of these themes, program administrators described challenges along with some strategies programs employed to overcome these challenges.

Conclusions

The greatest overall challenge described was finding and sustaining relationships with faculty and nonfaculty mentors. To address this issue, many programs have worked within their institutions to incentivize this work. For student engagement, program administrators reported issues with tailoring to skill sets and interests of multiple students while still fostering community. Program administrators have also expanded definitions for determining program success. Program administration is a challenge, and more support staff or time to devote to these programs is often needed. Diversity challenges encompass recruiting faculty and students from groups underrepresented in STEMM and the logistics of getting all necessary accommodations for students. Finally, transition to virtual learning, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, brought about challenges and opportunities.

Attitudes of Newly Hired Medicine Faculty Regarding Mentorship and Developmental Networks

Prior research shows that most Schools of Medicine faculty consider mentorship the most crucial factor in faculty development and retention. Many faculty are establishing developmental networks in lieu of hierarchical dyadic mentoring relationships. Clinicians are less likely than other newly hired faculty groups to seek mentorship despite having assigned mentors. The study's purpose was to determine the attitudes of newly hired faculty at the University of New Mexico School of Medicine (UNM SOM) regarding mentorship and developmental networks. Within their first year of hire, all newly hired faculty at UNM SOM are required to participate in a two-day orientation to the institution event called 'Quikstart.' During seven such events, new faculty [N=131] were surveyed anonymously on six single-response questions about their attitudes regarding mentorship and developmental networks, administered via online polls between September 2018 and July 2022. In this descriptive study, summary characteristics were analyzed. Newly hired faculty mentees reported that creating a developmental network was hampered by difficulties finding multiple mentors (55.3%), receiving conflicting advice from multiple mentors (22.4%), and gathering many mentors at the same location at the same time (11.8% ). Lack of clarity regarding faculty mentee needs (55.5%), mentors' unavailability (17.6%), and failure to find mentors (14.3%) were the most often mentioned difficulties during the initiation stage of mentorship (Hitchcock et al., 1995). Although the literature advocates moving from hierarchical dyadic mentoring relationships to developmental networks, this transition for Medicine faculty mentees will likely be hindered by a shortage of adequately trained mentors. Institutions need to identify and train mentors, incentivize and support mentorship, and encourage the creation and maintenance of self-selected development networks, possibly under the leadership of a transitional mentor.

Comparing the Outcomes of Face-to-Face and Synchronous Online Research Mentor Training Using Propensity Score Matching

In this study, propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to examine differences in the effectiveness of research mentor training (RMT) implemented using two modes-face-to-face or synchronous online training. This study investigated each training mode and assessed participants' perceived gains in mentoring skills, ability to meet mentees' expectations, and overall quality of mentoring, as well as intention to make changes to their mentoring practices. Additional factors that may contribute to participant outcomes were also examined. In total, 152 mentors trained using a synchronous online platform and 655 mentors trained in in-person workshops were analyzed using the PSM method. Mentors were matched based on similar characteristics, including mentee's career stage, mentor's title, mentor's prior mentoring experience, mentor's race/ethnicity and sex, and mentor's years of experience; results show that both face-to-face and synchronous online modes of RMT are effective. Findings indicated that the training mode did not significantly impact the mentors' perceived training outcomes. Factors associated with the reported training outcomes included dosage (hours of training), facilitator effectiveness, race/ethnicity, and previous mentoring experience. The results of this study demonstrate that mentors' perceived training outcomes are comparable regardless of the training modality used-online versus face-to-face.

Evaluation of a Culturally Responsive Mentorship Education Program for the Advisers of Howard Hughes Medical Institute Gilliam Program Graduate Students

Effective mentorship is critical to the success of trainees in research career pathways, significantly impacting their research productivity, academic and research self-efficacy, and career satisfaction. Research faculty may be unaware of or unprepared to address mentor-mentee dynamics in mentoring relationships, especially those that go beyond traditional scientific skill development. Addressing mentorship dynamics can be even more challenging for mentors from well-represented backgrounds working with mentees from historically excluded racial/ethnic groups. The Howard Hughes Medical Institute supports programmatic interventions, like the Mentorship Skills Development (MSD) course, an innovative program that aims to advance the mentorship competencies and cultural diversity awareness of mentors. Between 2015 and 2020, more than 200 faculty mentors participated in the MSD. Quantitative and qualitative data reveal significant gains in mentorship skills and cultural awareness, with mentors reporting increases in their confidence to have conversations around race and culture with their mentees. More than 85% reported actual or intended changes to their cultural responsiveness or mentorship behaviors. Importantly, behavioral changes were also observed by their mentees. These data indicate that culturally responsive mentorship education can increase knowledge and efficacy in effective mentorship practices and improve mentorship experiences of both mentors and mentees.

A system-wide health sciences faculty mentor training program is associated with improved effective mentoring and institutional climate

Introduction:

Mentorship is critical for faculty success, satisfaction, and engagement. However, many faculty, particularly underrepresented racial/ethnic (UR) faculty, lack access to high-quality mentoring. In an effort to improve mentoring for all faculty, we developed and implemented a formally structured faculty mentor training program (FMTP) across UC San Diego Health Sciences, which included institutional support, mentorship training, and department/division mentorship programs.

Methods:

FMTP impact was evaluated using three primary outcome variables: mentoring quality, mentoring behaviors, and institutional climate. Participants’ self-assessed mentoring competencies were measured using validated instruments.

Results:

A total of 391 (23%) of Health Sciences faculty participated in FMTP. Participation rate was higher for women than men (30% versus 17%) and highest for UR faculty (39%). FMTP was implemented in 16 of 19 departments. Self-reported mentoring improved for FMTP participants with mentoring quality (p = 0.009) and meeting mentees’ expectations (p = 0.01) continuing to improve for up to 2 years after training. However, participants were unsure if they were meeting UR mentees’ expectations. FMTP participants were significantly more satisfied with mentoring quality (p < 0.001) compared to non-participants, with the greatest increase in satisfaction reported by UR faculty (38–61%). UR faculty reported improved overall morale (51–61%) and a perception that the environment was supportive for UR faculty (48–70%).

Conclusion:

The implementation of a system-wide formal structured FMTP was associated with improved faculty satisfaction, quality of mentoring, and institutional climate, especially for UR faculty.

Practical advice for mentoring and supporting faculty colleagues in STEM fields: Views from mentor and mentee perspectives

In 2020, the American Society of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (ASBMB) Women in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Committee introduced the ASBMB Leadership Awards to recognize individuals with a strong commitment to advancing the careers of women in biochemistry and molecular biology along with demonstrated excellence in research, discovery, and/or service. This innovative award recognizes efforts to mentor and support trainees and colleagues at all levels. Such a leadership award provides the opportunity to focus briefly on the important role of mentoring within the STEM disciplines. The goal of this commentary, which brings together perspectives from a senior scientist and recent recipient of the ASBMB Mid-Career Leadership Award as well as two junior faculty, is to highlight approaches for purposeful support of colleagues, with an emphasis on going beyond formal mentoring committees. The commentary primarily focuses on mentoring within the academic arena of extramural funding and publication, highlighting the reality that multiple mentors with diverse expertise and perspectives are critical to support success within STEM careers.

The BUILD Mentor Community at CSULB: A Mentor Training Program Designed to Enhance Mentoring Skills in Experienced Mentors

The BUILD Mentoring Community (BMC) at California State University Long Beach (CSULB) was developed to enhance mentoring skills among our already experienced research faculty mentors. Designed in alignment with the published "Entering Mentoring" program, the 2015-2019 BMC trained 93 research mentors across 24 departments. Mentors discussed best practices in mentoring in a hybrid format during the first semester and completed a second semester independent project where refinements to their mentoring were piloted. Mentors were surveyed following BMC completion with a Qualtrics survey, and BMC-trained mentors (BMCT), BUILD non-BMC trained mentors (BNT), and non-BUILD (NB) faculty mentors and their students were surveyed using the Higher Education Research Institute (HERI) and Diversity Program Consortium (DPC) instruments. BMCT mentors found that the workload of the BMC was reasonable, and 86% of mentors would recommend the BMC. Most (97%) BMCT mentors stated that they were likely to make a change in their mentoring as a result of BMC participation. Both BMCT and BNT mentors rate mentoring undergraduates more highly, and present work with undergraduates more frequently, than NB mentors. Students perceive BMCT mentors as providing a better mentoring experience and being better at increasing motivation and confidence, setting expectations, and acknowledging contributions compared to the ratings of students without BMCT mentors. While students rated BMCT mentors better on many key skills taught in the BMC, some learning goals did not produce a difference, including discussing and valuing diversity, using active listening and constructive criticism, and employing communication strategies. Therefore, many aspects of mentor training at CSULB can improve. Overall, instituting online/hybrid mentor training enhanced mentoring skills even among experienced mentors, particularly when mentors were asked to apply and assess new mentoring practices as part of the program.

Interventions to Optimize Mentoring Relationships for Diverse Biomedical Researchers

The articles in this special issue provide insights from a variety of mentoring interventions that were implemented across the NIH Diversity Program Consortium (DPC). Many of the articles highlight examples of how the Entering Mentoring and Entering Research curricular materials, available through the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN), were adapted and implemented for research mentors and research trainees at Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) institutions. Other articles report the outcomes of programs developed and offered more broadly by the NRMN. This overview provides background information on NIH DPC-wide efforts and the Entering Mentoring and Entering Research curricula.

Framework for advancing rigorous research

There is a pressing need to increase the rigor of research in the life and biomedical sciences. To address this issue, we propose that communities of 'rigor champions' be established to campaign for reforms of the research culture that has led to shortcomings in rigor. These communities of rigor champions would also assist in the development and adoption of a comprehensive educational platform that would teach the principles of rigorous science to researchers at all career stages.

A randomized controlled pilot study of the University of Minnesota mentoring excellence training academy: A hybrid learning approach to research mentor training

INTRODUCTION

Research mentor training is a valuable professional development activity. Options for training customization (by delivery mode, dosage, content) are needed to address the many critical attributes of effective mentoring relationships and to support mentors in different institutional settings.

METHODS

We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial to evaluate a hybrid mentor training approach consisting of an innovative, 90-minute, self-paced, online module (Optimizing the Practice of Mentoring, OPM) followed by workshops based on the Entering Mentoring (EM) curriculum. Mentors (n = 59) were randomized to intervention or control arms; the control condition was receipt of a two-page mentoring tip sheet. Surveys (pre, post, 3-month follow up) and focus groups assessed training impact (self-appraised knowledge, skills, behavior change) and participants' perceptions of the blended training model.

RESULTS

The intervention (∼6.5 hours) produced significant improvements in all outcomes, including skills gains on par with those reported previously for the 8-hour EM model. Knowledge gains and intention-to-change mentoring practices were realized after completion of OPM and augmented by the in-person sessions. Mentors valued the synergy of the blended learning format, noting the unique strengths of each modality and specific benefits to completing a foundational online module before in-person engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this pilot trial support the value of e-learning approaches, both as standalone curricula or as a component of hybrid implementation models, for the professional development of research mentors.