|
2004 IPFW Mentoring Symposium Report
Friday, March 26, 2004
Presented by: IPFW FACET Members
Twenty-nine faculty members from the IPFW, IUE, and IUN campuses attended the Mentoring Symposium on the IPFW campus on March 26, 2004. Outlines of the day's activities with group responses to the main questions of interest are provided below.
Main Questions Evaluation Results
Objectives: While we recognize the importance of other mentoring relationships, this symposium will focus on the mentoring of faculty members by other faculty members.
· Understand current practices of mentoring at various campuses
· Explore issues related to mentoring
· Learn best practices for mentoring
What makes a good mentor? Participants were asked to identify what makes a good mentor, both in terms of the characteristics and the tasks that they perform. The results were:
Characteristics of a good mentor:
* Understands the perspective of the mentee
* Is familiar with and good with the student audience the mentee faces
* Can establish a good rapport with mentee
* Aware of resources and support available
* Reflective listener
* Knows the ropes of the institution
* Willing to share advice
* Has a good record of achievement
* Is good at interpersonal relationships
* Possesses a magnetic personality
* Willing to spend time with the mentee
* Non-judgmental
* Trusted
* Model for research
* Calm demeanor
* Supportive
* Is willing to be vulnerable
What the mentor does:
* Provides encouragement
* Helps deal with the "fear factor "
* Can help with "damage control"
* Shares advice
* Provides constructive criticism
* Models the student/faculty interaction
* Challenges the mentee
back to top
What would the ideal mentoring program look like (if resources were unlimited)? You have been given unlimited resources to create a mentoring program for your institution or school or department. What would your ideal mentoring program look like?
The report for each of the three groups to several questions is provided below:
What is the purpose of the mentoring process?
Smooth transition to new role (administration too)
Reputation as a faculty friendly campus
Retention of desired faculty (RP&T success, higher moral)
Foster excellence teaching & research
Skill & professional development
Who are the faculty to be mentored?
All! Adjunct, visiting, administration too
All faculty-divisions for experienced/new/administrator
What are the needs of the faculty being mentored: Teaching? Research? Leadership? Stewardship?
-Broader growth (Res., Teach, Service)
-Strategy development
-Peer teaching evaluations
-Balance => Needs/demands of organ.
-Beyond R,P&T
How can a mentoring program serve the needs of very different departments or programs within the university?
Formalize the informal needs
More than one mentor
Specialized areas
Hire mentor according to needs (master teacher)
How do we prepare a faculty member to be a mentor?
Stipend for mentors
Training program
Get others together
Training appropriate to goal (research, teaching, service)
Training appropriate to institution (goals, rules)
Offer positive & negative examples of advice
Match personalities-comfort level/learning style
Increased greater success
Offering opportunities to experience interdisciplinary training ->allows mentees to see a variety of learning styles & perspectives
How are the mentor and faculty member being mentored paired?
Mentor chosen, match & trained
Flexibility in forming /changing (firing mentor/mentee)
How do you assess and document the effectiveness of the mentoring? What do you do if it isn't working?
Mentee assesses outside evaluation of mentee progress
Examining productivity
Accolades
Self assessment & reflection
Identification of goals/success of mentoring program
How is mentoring valued? How is a good mentor rewarded?
Stipend & awards
Prestige-annual report
Written thank you (i.e. Documentation)
Other recognitions
Stipend-mentor/mentee
Course release
Parties/functions
Accolades
Course releases/position/stipend
What support does the institution provide for the mentoring program?
Money, responsible person to serve as MOM-mentor of mentors
*Unrestricted funds
Financial support
Travel
Campus workshops
Teaching learning center
Clearly identified mentors/mentees
Full time TLC employees to orient faculty to campus amenities
Provide funding for mentoring orientation
What should be the relationship between the mentoring program and the institution's mission and values?
Mentoring in key areas
Ties to strategic plan
Peer Review Presentation, Yvonne Zubovic, IIPFW
· Discussion of Formative versus Summative Review
· Overview of the Reciprocal Peer Review Process
· Relationship between Peer Review and Mentoring
· Identify features of this program that were brought out in the discussion on ideals
Keynote by William Plater, IUPUI: The Role of Mentoring in the Faculty Career Odyssey
Discussion of Best Practices in Mentoring
Gwen Mettetal, IUSB
T.J. Rivard and Laverne Nishihara, IUE
Leni DeFonso, David Legg, and Kathy Pollock, IPFW
Paul Wilder, IIT, Models on Mentoring for Leadership and Stewardship
back to top
Evaluation Results
Individual Sessions
The number of evaluations returned was relatively small (n = 7), but typically 5 or 6 respondents found each session to be either "excellent" or "good", and 1 or 2 found each session of "average/acceptable quality, but less useful/interesting to me". No "below average" or "very poor" responses were received for any session. Comments associated with each session were generally positive.
Symposium Overall
Responses to the open-ended questions are provided below.
1. What was the most valuable aspect of this symposium for you?
-Accumulation of points and thoughts-not one big thing
-Having a forum to talk and brainstorm with others on this topic
-To see different levels of mentoring and how formal the process has been.
-Networking, brainstorming
-Dr. Plater's comments provided much food for thought.
-Hearing a variety of mentoring stories
-Yvonne's morning presentation and Wilder's presentation.
2. Suggest topics that you would like to see offered on this subject.
-Topics-(1) The Peer Review Process, one year later. Look at who (faculty level) participated and what has happened to them. What is the overall impact? (2) Do a compare and contrast of mentored and non-mentored.
-Group mentoring. Also, interested in use of technology that Dr. Plater mentioned. Provide Web resources or other mentoring resources. How to mentor.
-More depth into how to mentor scholarship, move depth into mentoring for faculty post-tenure.
-Dealing with difficult situations. Finding resources for mentoring.
-Mentor training, guideline formation
Summary Comments
The planners feel that the symposium was successful because it brought faculty from different campuses together to talk about these important issues and to learn from each other. Clearly, faculty from different departments and campuses are in very different places in terms of their mentoring programs and practices. We were also encouraged at least some individuals showed up in the morning intending not to stay, then became so engrossed in what was being discussed that they did stay. We believe that what we had to say was very worthwhile and that we should find a way to involve more people next time. Dr. Plater's keynote was worthwhile because he discussed a different direction, namely group mentoring, which many of us had not thought much about. IPFW's VCAA, Dr. Susan Hannah, was very taken by Dr. Plater's remarks and will probably bring them to the deans.
Report submitted by Yvonne Zubovic, FACET Liaison, IPFW Campus 5/7/04
back to top
2004 Mentoring Symposium Report
back to top
|
