Doctoral Mentoring Research Articles

Evaluating the feasibility, utility, and impact of engaging in mentorship assessment to improve doctoral mentoring relationships

AbstractThis article describes a mentorship assessment structure designed to improve doctoral student‐research advisor mentoring relationships. We report the experiences of students and advisors as they completed the process to assess the feasibility, utility, and impact of engaging in mentorship assessment.

Transforming doctoral mentoring expectations and culture: An action model approach

AbstractThis article examines one large online university's action model approach to transforming doctoral faculty expectations, support, and practices through internal research studies, community conversation, and planning. Research findings, progress, and recommendations are shared.

Daryl Siedentop’s Enduring Legacy in PETE and D-PETE

ABSTRACT In this article a cadre of Daryl’s former doctoral students and/or close colleagues from The Ohio State University offer their personal descriptions/interpretations of Daryl’s vision for physical education, physical education teacher education (PETE) and doctoral programming (D-PETE). Daryl mentored over 80 doctoral students at Ohio State, many of whom went on to be productive researchers, teachers, scholars and doctoral mentors themselves, allowing many of his seminal ideas to endure for more than four decades, and which are still considered “best practice” today in physical education and physical education teacher education around the world.

Producing Planning Knowledge: How Professional PhD Candidates Bridge Research–Practice Divides

This paper addresses an important, but under-studied, pathway for knowledge production in the field of urban planning: the practitioner engaging with academia through the writing of a PhD. Drawing on our own experiences of doctoral mentoring, in dialogue with PhD candidates, we reflect on the questions and challenges this form of knowledge production raises. The paper aims to extend planning theory’s recognition of ‘multiple epistemologies’ (Sandercock, 2003) through a deeper understanding of how planning professionals as authors lead the translation of experiential knowledge into academic knowledge. Understanding why this is so difficult to actually (co)produce should lead us not only to better mentoring, but also to critical reflection on how rigorous and relevant knowledge is defined within planning academia.

Student and Faculty Perceptions of Social Work Doctoral Mentoring: Navigating Academic, Non-academic and Diversity & Inclusion Issues

ABSTRACT Purpose The Group for the Advancement of Doctoral Education in Social Work (GADE) conducted an online survey of faculty and students in social work doctoral programs to explore and compare their perspectives on students’ academic and non-academic needs and stressors, diversity and inclusion issues, and helpful mentoring practices. Method The study collected data via Qualtrics from 183 doctoral students and 129 faculty members using a cross-sectional survey, and conducted descriptive statistics and tests comparing student and faculty responses. Results Students were generally somewhat satisfied with their mentoring and students and faculty shared similar perceptions overall, though there were notable differences regarding perceptions of financial stress, nonacademic support, and interdisciplinary opportunities. Students generally felt safe and welcome in their programs, although 40% reported witnessing or experiencing discrimination in their doctoral program. Discussion and Conclusion The findings highlight mentoring trends and practices, challenges faced in mentoring, and areas warranting additional attention.

Positive Leadership Theory for Online Dissertation Mentoring

A number of theoretical models have been suggested for how to mentor doctoral students. However, they tend to rely on hierarchical and authoritarian relationships between the faculty and students. Such models tend to create dependency and fear of the faculty, resulting in a reluctance in coming to the mentor for guidance. Such models do not tend to work well with online adult doctoral students with jobs and families. This paper proposes a model of positive leadership for online doctoral mentors, where mentors are accessible and create an environment where success is assumed and social support is provided by both the mentor and peers. In this model of mentorship, students are encouraged to problem solve their deficiencies and work out a plan to address them. Gratitude is expressed by the mentor and encouraged in students to recognize those who have helped them to progress. The paper includes suggestions, examples, and methods to aid the mentor in positive leadership of doctoral students.

Academic Identity and Communities of Practice: Narratives of Social Science Academics Career Decisions in Taiwan

Academic identity is an important aspect of organizing an academic career. An academic identity is distinct and unique and can be defined as the core attitudes that determine how individuals approach the concept of work. In the current era of neoliberalism, changes to university governance in Taiwan have transformed working conditions and hiring practices in academia. Inevitably, role conflicts have emerged, and work stress within higher education institutions has increased. The current study summarizes the narratives of nine academics from the social sciences. The study is anchored in the concept that academic identity formation is rooted in the doctoral education stage. Using a qualitative narrative inquiry lens, interactions between different communities of practice during the doctoral education stage are analyzed, along with later career decisions and the role communities of practice play in those decisions. The findings show that doctoral mentors and fellows all contributed to the formation of a core academic identity, while later career decisions were equally affected by neoliberal policies. It is hoped that by recognizing the role of academic identity, administrators may be able to influence how academics adapt amidst the competing pressures within the academe.

Multifaceted mentorship community: resisting historical mentoring to create mentee-initiated and sustained mentorship for women doctoral students

ABSTRACT In the absence of an institutionally sponsored doctoral mentoring program, a small group of women doctoral students developed a new model of mentoring by initiating and sustaining a multifaceted mentorship community (MMC). Using an autoethnographic approach, we present the development of this new model and insights into a mentee-initiated, multifaceted mentorship community that supports doctoral students. Our findings indicate the MMC helped doctoral students understand and navigate the politics of the university, created a collaborative culture that crowded out isolation, and provided sustainable mentorship. This study offers guidance for doctoral students and faculty in need of alternatives to traditional mentoring models. The MMC model may also be useful in educational and business environments outside of higher education.

STEM doctoral mentoring: a call for a conscious, culturally responsive journey

PurposeThe purpose of this research study was to explore U.S. STEM faculty’s perceptions of culturally responsive mentoring underrepresented doctoral students in STEM programs. The research question that guided this study was “How do STEM doctoral faculty mentors engage in culturally responsive mentoring?Design/methodology/approachA case study research design was used and included findings from an embedded case drawn from a larger ongoing study. Six STEM faculty participants provided in-depth insights into the dynamic nature of the culturally responsive mentoring journey through semi-structured interviews that were analyzed using thematic analysis. The theoretical framework for this research study was grounded in the ideas posited by culturally responsive pedagogy.FindingsThe findings revealed three themes related to the mentoring journeys experienced by the faculty fellows: an academic journey, an intentional journey, and a subliminal journey.Research limitations/implicationsThe findings of this research provide significant contribution to the current literature on mentoring and point to the importance of continuous, structured research efforts to increase the quality of mentoring for URM students in doctoral STEM programs.Practical implicationsSTEM faculty could benefit from participating in mentor training framed by culturally responsive pedagogy. Future research is needed to explore the mentor training needs of STEM faculty in other environments, including contexts outside the United States.Originality/valueThis study extends understanding of STEM faculty's knowledge, dispositions, and abilities of culturally responsive mentoring and emphasizes the need for ongoing professional development training in this area.

“PUTTING YOUR POWER ON THE LINE”: TOWARD EMBODIED ALLYSHIP IN MENTOR-MENTEE AND PEER RELATIONSHIPS

Although relational and multicultural feminist mentoring models have interrogated the role of relationships and power in graduate mentor-mentee relationships, less work has examined graduate student mentoring within psychology in the context of social justice and equity goals, and the processes by which ally and accomplice actions might emerge in doctoral mentoring and peer relationships, in particular. Using Collaborative Autoethnography (CAE), we examined the ways that doctoral mentors, mentees, and peers navigate power, privilege, and allyship in the academy, and how relationships and ally actions are connected. Our data was generated through individual autoethnographic writing and subsequent dialogue among the four authors. Qualitative analyses generated three action-oriented themes that illustrate a mutually constituted and interactive process by which we, as collaborators, strive for allyship within the confines of the academic status quo, and where resistance, authenticity, and identity-affirming relationships are integral to equity-based action and change.

Reading routines: strategies of recall in graduate education

Purpose This study aims to explore how graduate students in the social sciences develop reading and note-taking routines. Design/methodology/approach Using a professional socialization framework drawing on grounded theory, this study draws on a snowball sample of 36 graduate students in the social sciences at US universities. Qualitative interviews were conducted to learn about graduate students’ reading and note-taking techniques. Findings This study uncovered how doctoral students experienced the shift from undergraduate to graduate training. Graduate school requires students to adopt new modes of reading and note-taking. However, students lacked explicit mentorship in these skills. Once they realized that the goal was to enter an academic conversation to produce knowledge, they developed new reading and note-taking routines by soliciting and implementing suggestions from advanced doctoral students and faculty mentors. Research limitations/implications The specific requirements of the individual graduate program shape students’ goals for reading and note-taking. Further examination of the relationship between graduate students’ reading and note-taking and institutional requirements is warranted with a larger sample of universities, including non-American institutions. Practical implications Graduate students benefit from explicit mentoring in reading and note-taking skills from doctoral faculty and advanced graduate students. Originality/value This study uncovers the perspectives of graduate students in the social sciences as they transition from undergraduate coursework in a doctoral program of study. This empirical, interview-based research highlights the centrality of reading and note-taking in doctoral studies.

Filling the gaps: how the non-faculty mentor role contributes to the doctoral program support structure

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate mentors' and mentees' perspectives of the mentor role within an education doctoral mentoring program at a mid-sized public institution.Design/methodology/approachData from individual interviews with mentors and mentees were collected as part of a larger case study of a doctoral mentoring program. Mentees were doctor of education (EdD) students in their first and second years of the program. Mentors were identified as individuals who graduated from or are further along in the doctoral program. Five (N = 5) mentees and seven (N = 7) mentors participated in interviews, which were then transcribed and coded to identify emergent themes, along with transcripts of presentations given by the mentors.FindingsFour themes emerged within the data: differentiating support roles, mentoring as a way to identify gaps in doctoral student needs, mentoring as support for doctoral student success and ways to provide suggestions for mentoring program improvement. Results indicated that mentors and mentees viewed the mentor role as being unique from the roles of faculty advisor and dissertation chair. Mentors and mentees alike responded positively to virtual mentoring.Research limitations/implicationsParticipation by mentors and mentees was limited to first- and second-year doctoral students; thus, dissertation-stage students' perceptions of mentoring could not be determined. Implications include the value of mentoring in filling the gaps of support for doctoral students and the capability of mentoring programs to be adapted to unexpected circumstances such as the COVID-19 pandemic.Originality/valueThis study targets scholar-practitioner students in an EdD program, who are often overlooked by mentoring literature, and distinguishes research between faculty mentoring and mentoring performed by other students/recent graduates. Additionally, the pandemic gave the authors an opportunity to explore adapting mentoring to virtual formats.

Starting Doctoral Dissertation Journey with a Solid Research Problem Statement – A Four Stage Framework

Aim/Purpose: Provide methodology suggesting steps to doctoral mentors to work with students in constructing their research problem statement in their dissertation. Background: Doctoral students face difficulties writing their dissertation and they begin by writing the research problem statement. Methodology: This paper uses a framework widely used to describe student adjustment to graduate studies in general and to doctoral program in particular. Contribution: This study provides a framework to mentors/advisors that is helpful in guiding the students to writing their research problem statement. Findings: Writing a research problem statement is difficult by itself. Following a methodological approach suggested in this study could help with writing it. Recommendations for Practitioners: A methodological approach in writing the dissertation is helpful to mitigate the difficulties of writing the dissertation. Our study tackles difficulties with writing the research problem statement. Recommendations for Researchers: More research needs to be done on methodological approach to writing the other sections in the dissertation. Impact on Society: Our findings in this research will help doctoral mentors/advisors as they guide students in completing the writing of their research problem statement Future Research: Intention for future research is to follow similar methodological approach in guiding students in writing the other sections of the dissertation

A Four Stage Framework for the Development of a Research Problem Statement in Doctoral Dissertations

Aim/Purpose: Provide methodology suggesting steps to doctoral mentors to work with students in constructing their research problem statement in their dissertation. Background: Writing a doctoral dissertation is a long journey, and it typically starts with writing the research problem statement. Students face challenges in articulating the research problem statement. Clearly articulating the research problems statement influences the success of the entire dissertation. Methodology: This paper uses a widely used framework to describe student adjustment to graduate studies in general and to doctoral programs in particular. Contribution: This study provides a framework for mentors and advisors to assist them in guiding students in writing their research problem statement. Findings: Writing a research problem statement is difficult by itself. Following the methodological approach suggested in this study will help students with the task of writing their own. Recommendations for Practitioners: A methodological approach to writing a research problem statement is helpful in mitigating the difficulties of writing the dissertation. This study tackles the difficulties with writing the research problem statement. Recommendation for Researchers: More research needs to be done to expand the use of a methodological approach to writing in other sections of the dissertation. Impact on Society: The findings of this research will help doctoral mentors/advisors as they guide students in completing the writing of their research problem statement Future Research: Future research should follow a similar methodological approach in guiding students in writing the other sections of the dissertation

Mentor support systems in a doctoral mentoring program

PurposeEducation doctoral (EdD) students (mentees) typically hold full-time leadership positions in education-related fields while completing their degree. The types of support these scholar-practitioners need is unique because of their focus on balancing full-time work, academic, and personal needs. This study aims to explore mentor support systems for mentees in their first and second year of the EdD program through a group mentoring program, which is designed to provide resources and access to mentors to promote successful degree completion in five years or less.Design/methodology/approachMentors participated in monthly presentations and discussions with mentees throughout the 2018–2019 academic year, which were video recorded. At the end of the academic year, mentors partook in an interview or focus group meeting.FindingsThemes emerged related to mentors’ focus on the dissertation process; emphasis on outreach for support; discussions and work/life balance; selection of presentation topics; perceptions of networking opportunities with mentees; desire to build stronger connections with mentees; and concerns/opinions about the mentoring format.Research limitations/implicationsThe design of a mentoring program for EdD mentees varies throughout the doctorate degree pathway. Mentors support mentees in their doctoral journey through presentations and discussions about relevant topics during their first two years in the doctoral program. Additional studies are needed regarding EdD mentoring programs for students in the third year to the completion of the degree.Originality/valueFew studies exist related to mentoring programs for scholar-practitioners in EdD programs. Results from this research provide EdD faculty and advisors insights to group mentoring and discussion topics for first and second year EdD students, based on the mentors’ perspectives.

Online doctoral mentoring in a pandemic: help or hindrance to academic progress on dissertations?

PurposeThe author's purpose is to identify and analyze the progress of proposals and dissertations after mentor–mentee relationships rapidly transitioned to intensive online doctoral mentoring as a result of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19).Design/methodology/approachAn exploratory pedagogic research design was implemented in 2020 to examine the COVID-19 Dyadic Online Mentoring Intervention, a four-month individualized approach to mentorship. A survey was completed by mentees in an educational leadership cohort that revealed the benefits and drawbacks of technology for learning within online doctoral mentoring contexts. Additional sources of data were published literature, mentor's notes, email exchanges, and scholarly enrichment products.FindingsData analysis yielded three themes: (1) mentoring strategies were utilized; (2) the pandemic unsettled reality and (3) personal professional development opportunities were evident. Although life challenges were exacerbated by the pandemic, the online doctoral mentoring intervention met dissertation-related needs and supported academic progress in a Doctorate in Education degree program.Practical implicationsTechnology-mediated mentoring during crises involves more than modality changes. Faculty mentors should not be solely responsible for mitigating program and dissertation disruption. Academic cultures must support the adoption of pedagogic innovations like high-quality online doctoral mentoring.Originality/valueOnline doctoral mentoring structures utilizing synchronous and asynchronous technologies can help mentees make academic progress in a crisis, not only in “normal” times.

From mentors to leaders: leader development outcomes for mentors

PurposeThe present study examines leader development as one of the potential outcomes for mentors and investigates whether the provision of mentoring contributes to developing mentors' leader identity and leader self-efficacy.Design/methodology/approachRelying on a quasi-experimental design, data were collected at four points in time over eight months from a mentor (n = 46) and an equivalent nonmentor group (n = 25). Participants in the mentor group were volunteer mentors from a doctoral mentoring program that was implemented at a large Canadian university.FindingsParticipants in the mentor group experienced a more positive change in leader identity and leader self-efficacy, compared to the participants in the nonmentor group. Further analysis of the participants in the mentor group suggests that the extent to which mentors provide career and psychosocial support explains the growth rate in the development outcomes.Practical implicationsBy documenting benefits of mentoring for mentors, program administrators may be able to recruit mentors who are more engaged in the process. In addition, they can encourage their members to volunteer as mentors to gain leader development outcomes.Originality/valueThis longitudinal study connects the areas of mentoring and leadership development. While the majority of mentoring studies focus exclusively on mentoring outcomes for protégés, the present study shows that mentoring can benefit mentors as well.

The Validation of Using Assessment Tools and a Theory to Mentor Doctoral Students with Integrity and Trustworthiness

Aim/Purpose: The primary aim of this study was to reveal the assessment tools and a theory preferred to mentor doctoral students with integrity and trustworthiness. The connection between mentors’ feelings of trustworthiness and protégé success were explored. Background: This study examines the concept presented in 1983, 1985, and 1996 by Kram of mentor relations (MR) theory, which illustrates that graduation rates can improve with effective mentoring. In the United States, doctoral programs have low graduation rates. Scholars and researchers agree that doctoral programs must develop ways and means to improve their graduation rates. This researcher examined an extension of Kram’s mentor relations theory by employing the Mentor Integrity and Trustworthiness (MIT) theory, which depicts that mentors with a strong sense of integrity and trustworthiness provide a safe haven for protégés to succeed. As supported by Daloz, a trustworthy mentor provides a safe haven for protégés to take the intellectual risks required to produce an original contribution to the canon of scholarly knowledge in the form of a doctoral dissertation. Methodology: A quantitative research methodology of data collection ensued including the researcher generated MIT scale and the mentors’ perceptions of protégés’ independence (MPPI) scale, a survey to establish acceptable levels of internal consistencies for items on the two scales, a supported evidence of the content validity of the two scales, the researcher’s analysis of the validity of the MIT theory, and a multi-stage sampling method to recruit a research sample of 50 mentors from four universities in the eastern part of the United States from several education-related doctoral programs. The doctoral programs were diverse in terms of selectivity, type of degree, and mentors’ years of experience. Contribution: This research study contributes to existing literature knowledge by generating the relationship between mentors’ feelings of trustworthiness and protégés’ success as measured by graduation rate and the number of awards won by protégés. The validation of the mentor integrity and trustworthiness (MIT) scale and the mentor perceptions of protégé independence (MPPI) scale, and the supported evidence of content validity and reliability for both scales will deepen and extend the discussion of doctoral mentoring in higher education. Findings: Results indicated that mentors’ feelings of trustworthiness were correlated with the number of dissertation awards won by protégés and with graduation rates. Graduation rates and dissertation awards rates were not measured directly, but were reported by the mentors. In addition, the researcher found that mentors perceived their protégés to be independent scholars, in general, however, minimally in the area of writing the research methods section of their dissertation. Recommendations for Practitioners: The researcher discussed the practical implications for mentors’ professional development in trustworthiness and integrity. The researcher also provided the Right Angle Research Alignment table to help protégés organize and manage the research methods section of their dissertation. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should continue to explore MIT theory with experimental methods to attempt to improve the internal validity of the theory. Impact on Society: The researcher encourages scholars to test the MIT theory in mentoring relationships that go beyond doctoral studies such as mentoring in business and in the arts. The researcher also encourages scholars to test whether the MIT theory is relevant in other kinds of teaching relationships such as coaching and tutoring. Future Research: Further research questions that arise from this study are as follows: What can mentors do to improve their integrity? What can mentors do to improve their feelings of trustworthiness? How can the MIT and MPPI instruments be refined and improved?

Facilitating a Mentoring Programme for Doctoral Students: Insights from Evidence-Based Practice

Aim/Purpose: One approach to helping doctoral students deal with the many challenges they face is the provision of a structured mentoring programme to complement the more traditional doctoral curriculum and supervisor relationship. This paper reports a mentoring programme containing such activities as individual consultations and peer-mentoring workshops, introduced at one of the non-public universities in Poland and discusses the development of a model of support. In developing the model, two evaluation studies were conducted seeking to discover how participants perceived the mentoring programme, what needs the mentoring programme addressed, and what benefits it provided for doctoral students. Background: With reference to a new paradigm proposed by Kram and Higgins, mentoring emerges in the context of many developmental networks, where the more junior mentors and peer-mentors together discover new roles involved in doctoral education. Methodology: Case study methodology is utilized to gather perceptions of a doctoral mentoring programme. The conceptual framework for a two-part programme is presented and the results of two evaluation studies conducted on-line using a mix-method approach are reported. In total, 42 doctoral students participated in the studies, representing social sciences and the humanities disciplines. Contribution: This paper discusses a novel doctoral mentoring programme which finds its basis in evidence-based practice. This research goes beyond previous studies by undertaking an analysis of doctoral students’ needs, then considering relationships between those needs and structuring a programme to meet them. Findings: Findings showed three main areas of need for doctoral students: the need for social interaction at university; the need for structure in the doctoral journey, and the need for psychological support. Participants distinguished two perspectives that influenced the assessment of programme activities: (a) the meaningfulness of the mentoring programme to the individual; (b) the mentor’s attitude including the general atmosphere of collegiality during meetings. Results presented are supported by a proposed intervention model. Recommendations for Practitioners: The model presented may inspire other universities to implement similar approaches for supporting their own doctoral students. Researcher enablers are also offered as strategies relating to workshop topics, meeting schedules, and programme organization. The main recommendation for practitioners is to be sensitive to the psychosocial needs of students. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers interested in doctoral students’ needs and ways of supporting them can utilize the proposed model for strategically planning such support. It is recommended that further research into the area of mentoring doctoral students makes use of the mixed-method approach. Such an approach takes cognizance of phenomenological exigencies as they pertain to individual meaning-making. Impact on Society: Supporting the effectiveness of doctoral students is significant as failure comes at great professional and personal cost to the doctoral student. There are also potential costs in terms of faculty disillusionment and impacts on university reputation. Economic benefits to the nation may also be forfeited when doctoral students fail to graduate. Future Research: It would be valuable to corroborate the model presented and extend it through the development of a mentoring support scale which identifies more linearly specific doctoral students’ needs. Longitudinal studies are also required to verify long-term effects of the programme.

The Importance of Tough-Love Mentoring to Doctoral Student Success: Instruments to Measure the Doctoral Student/Proteges’ Perspective

Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study is to examine tough-love mentoring theory (TLM) as a potential way to address the problem of low graduation rates among doctoral students. Background: In order to address this purpose, the researcher presents the following: a) a validation study for assessment tools pertaining to TLM and b) a validation study of TLM theory and its two sub-theories: mentor integrity and trustworthiness sub-theory (MIT) and the mentor high standards sub-theory (MHS). Methodology: The researcher tested the validity of the mentor integrity and trustworthiness scale from the protégés’ perspective (MIT-P), the mentor high standards scale from the protégés’ perspective (MHS-P) and the protégés’ perceptions of their own independence (PPI) scale. The sample consisted of 31 doctoral protégés recruited with multi-phase sampling at four education-related doctoral programs in the eastern part of the United States. Contribution: The study provides evidence to support TLM as a strategy to address the problem of low graduation rates among doctoral students. In addition, the study contributes validation of assessment tools that can be used to measure doctoral protégés’ perceptions of their mentors. Findings: For each scale, the data show acceptable levels of internal consistency and evidence of content validity. The data are consistent with the TLM theory and its two sub-theories. The unique contribution of the current study is that it draws from the protégés’ perspective. Recommendations for Practitioners: The researcher presents a) strategies protégés can use to find trustworthy mentors with high standards and b) strategies program administrators can use for professional development of doctoral mentors. The researcher also provides the Right Angle Research Alignment (RARA) table to help protégés organize and manage the research methods section of their dissertation. Recommendation for Researchers: It is recommended that researchers use experimental methods to test TLM theory and the sub-theories, MIT and MHS. Impact on Society: This theory may be useful in business and in the arts and in other teaching relationships such as coaching and tutoring. The researcher encourages scholars to test TLM theory in these other contexts. Future Research: Further research questions that arise from this study are as follows: How can protégés find mentors who have high standards and who are trustworthy? What can doctoral program administrators do to help mentors develop high standards and trustworthiness?