Late-career Faculty Research Articles

A Workshop and Toolkit to Support Late-Career Transitions for Faculty.

Twenty percent of medical school faculty are 60 years or older. These senior-career academic faculty often find a paucity of support for decision-making about late-career transitions. To help fill this professional development gap, we developed and tested an interactive workshop to facilitate deliberation and discussion among mid- and late-career faculty in various stages of career transition planning. The workshop included individual and small-group activities and a takeaway packet/toolkit for career transition planning. We conducted mixed methods analyses of postworkshop survey data to evaluate the workshop content, methods, and toolkit. The workshop was implemented six times, at four national conferences, one state-level conference, and one single institution, for a total of 207 participants. Evaluations were completed by 60% of participants. Thirty-one percent were thinking generally about transition, 40% were making specific plans for transition within 1-5 years, 15% were currently in transition, and 10% had fully transitioned. Perception of workshop objectives met received a median ranking of 4 (rated on a 5-point Likert scale). Participants reported positive outcomes, including taking time to think/reflect, finding starting points for transition planning, and sharing conversations. This highly rated, interactive workshop provides support and practical tools for faculty considering late-career transitions. In addition to providing resources for individual faculty, this workshop has value for an institution to support their senior-level faculty. We encourage the incorporation of this workshop into institutional faculty development programming to ensure a career lifespan approach to faculty development.

Development of a mentor training curriculum to support LGBTQIA+ health professionals.

While mentors can learn general strategies for effective mentoring, existing mentorship curricula do not comprehensively address how to support marginalized mentees, including LGBTQIA+ mentees. After identifying best mentoring practices and existing evidence-based curricula, we adapted these to create the Harvard Sexual and Gender Minority Health Mentoring Program. The primary goal was to address the needs of underrepresented health professionals in two overlapping groups: (1) LGBTQIA+ mentees and (2) any mentees focused on LGBTQIA+ health. An inaugural cohort (N = 12) of early-, mid-, and late-career faculty piloted this curriculum in spring 2022 during six 90-minute sessions. We evaluated the program using confidential surveys after each session and at the program's conclusion as well as with focus groups. Faculty were highly satisfied with the program and reported skill gains and behavioral changes. Our findings suggest this novel curriculum can effectively prepare mentors to support mentees with identities different from their own; the whole curriculum, or parts, could be integrated into other trainings to enhance inclusive mentoring. Our adaptations are also a model for how mentorship curricula can be tailored to a particular focus (i.e., LGBTQIA+ health). Ideally, such mentor trainings can help create more inclusive environments throughout academic medicine.

Improving Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Content in Pediatrics Grand Rounds.

Grand rounds (GR) is a quintessential component of medical education across the spectrum from undergraduate medical education to continuing medical education for established physicians with a goal of enhancing knowledge, changing physician behavior, and improving patient outcomes. The purpose and scope of GR has undergone many iterations over the hundreds of years of its practice and previous work has aimed to enhance its educational impact, 1 Van Hoof, Thomas MD, EdD, J. Monson, Robert PhD, J. et al. A Case Study of Medical Grand Rounds: Are We Using Effective Methods?. Academic Medicine. 2009; Volume 84 (August): 1144-1151https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181ad1c0e Crossref Scopus (33) Google Scholar including innovations that seek to educate about the origin and ongoing consequences of the health crises of systemic racism and other structural inequities. 2 Perdomo J. Tolliver D. Hsu H. et al. Health Equity Rounds: An Interdisciplinary Case Conference to Address Implicit Bias and Structural Racism for Faculty and Trainees. MedEdPORTAL. 2019; 15: 10858https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.10858 Crossref PubMed Scopus (39) Google Scholar A primary audience for GR is established mid- and late-career faculty, an educational target group perhaps more in need of DEI pedagogy than our earliest medical career learners. 3 Rosenkranz Kari M. Arora Tania K. Termuhlen Paula M. et al. Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in Medicine: Why It Matters and How do We Achieve It?. Journal of Surgical Education. 2021; Volume 78 (ISSN 1931-7204): 1058-1065https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.11.013 Crossref Scopus (34) Google Scholar Previous work on improving anti-racist content in medical education recognizes this group as in need of particular focus. 4 Blankenburg R. et al. Dismantling racism: Association of Pediatric Program Directors’ Commitment to Action. Academic Pediatrics. 2020; 20: 1051-1053 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (0) Google Scholar Development of presentations that consistently and specifically address aspects of DEI is essential to sustainably re-orienting medical education to address health equity.

Characterizing imposter syndrome among oncologists on social media.

11018 Background: Imposter syndrome (IS) is defined as an inability to believe that one’s success is deserved. It is commonly encountered by physicians, with cited statistics ranging from 22% to 98%, is associated with negative mental health impacts and can be harmful to one’s wellbeing. Given increasing SM use in hematology/oncology (H/O), we aimed to evaluate the effect of SM on IS among oncology trainees and oncologists. Methods: An anonymous online survey was distributed to oncology trainees and oncologists through SM platforms (Twitter, Facebook (FB), Instagram (IG)) and e-mail. Questions included demographics, current SM use, a novel scale for IS on SM (Table), Young Imposter Syndrome (YIS) Scale (a validated IS instrument) & assessment of mental health impacts of SM. Results: Out of 195 respondents, 103 answered all questions; median age 40y (27-65), 81% female. 21% were trainees and 36%, 30%, and 12% were early, mid and late-career faculty, respectively. Specialties included: adult H/O (72%), gynecologic oncology (11.3%), radiation oncology (10.5%), surgical oncology (4.1%), and pediatric H/O (1.5%). Twitter was the most commonly used SM platform (68%) followed by FB (36%) & IG (20%). 26% utilized professional SM 0-1 times/week while 28% did so daily. 97/157 (62%) noted positive mental health impacts from SM. 41% felt anxious, lonely or depressed due to SM. 19.7% have experienced SM harassment or cyberbullying. More than 50% of respondents met criteria on the YIS and IS scale; indeed, the YIS and IS on SM Scales were significantly correlated with each other (r = 0.57, p < 0.001, N = 103). The presence of IS on SM was associated with gender but not race/ethnicity or career stage. 59% of females versus 28% of males met criteria for IS (p = 0.02). The presence of IS on SM was significantly associated with self-perceived IS in professional settings (p < 0.001), but not in personal settings (p = 0.21). Conclusions: Many oncology professionals experienced IS while interacting on SM, but also note a positive mental health impact with SM use. The presence of IS on SM correlated with results on the YIS Scale, suggesting a novel assessment method, but further validation is needed. Future efforts to combat IS on SM while enhancing positive aspects of medical SM are warranted. [Table: see text]

Factors Influencing Retirement Decisions of Senior Faculty at U.S. Medical Schools: Are There Gender-Based Differences?

Purpose: Women comprise almost one-third of academic medicine faculty 60 years of age and older. Gender disparities have been documented across many measures in medicine, including salary, promotion rates, and leadership positions and may impact long-term career and retirement decisions. The authors sought to describe gender differences in retirement decisions among late-career, full-time medical school faculty. Materials and Methods: The authors conducted a secondary analysis of cross-sectional survey data from a 2017 survey of faculty 55 years of age and older at 14 U.S. Medical Schools. Responses were compared for differences by gender using bivariate and multivariable analyses. Results: Among the 2,126 respondents (41% response rate), the majority were male (67%) and the average age was 62. Less than half (45%) had current plans to retire and 50% reported that they would consider working part time. Women faculty were less likely to be professors or on a tenure track and more likely to be single and report past and current caregiving responsibilities. Women differed from men in the personal and professional factors influencing retirement decisions with women more likely to identify health insurance, sense of burnout, lack of access to career advancing resources and opportunities, feeling devalued at work, and caregiving responsibilities as important issues. Conclusions: Women late-career faculty report unique and salient factors influencing retirement plans that may reflect cumulative gender-based career differences and disparities. Institutions should be aware of these differences and work to support women during late career and retirement transitions, including creating opportunities for faculty to remain engaged in meaningful work during retirement transitions if they desire to do so.

Mid-Career Faculty Development Needs Assessment in Academic Radiation Oncology: A Prospective Qualitative Study

Mid-career faculty often report lower career satisfaction compared to those in their early or late career. Attrition, particularly of female faculty, is a major concern for academic medicine. Curricula for early-career faculty provide structure for professional development, but similar programming is less robust for mid- and late-career faculty. This qualitative prospective study aimed to explore and identify career needs and perceived obstacles to improve the experience and success of mid-career radiation oncology faculty.Associate Professors at a single academic medical center and affiliated regional centers were invited to participate in semi-structured small group interviews between February and April 2019. Performed by an expert in medical anthropology, interviews covered the following themes: 1) Present to future career goals, 2) Visions guiding career work and aims, 3) Obstacles in achieving career goals, 4) Resources to assist achieving career goals, 5) Balancing work/life priorities, and 6) Immediate needs for current work. All interviews were audio-recorded, de-identified, and transcribed, then a conventional content analysis approach was employed by a qualitative research expert.Eight small group interviews were conducted, with 5 female and 12 male Associate Professors in total. The cohort included 10 physicians and 7 medical physicists, spanning clinical and research focused careers, and satellite and main site locations. The key themes elicited several sub-themes as responses, presented below.This study suggests an unmet need for formal mentorship, sponsorship for leadership positions, and institutional resources targeting mid-level faculty in academic radiation oncology. Future efforts will address design and implementation of a strategic mid-career development program.

Experiences and attitudes of dental hygiene faculty regarding the mentorship of undergraduate student research.

Research remains a strong emphasis in entry-level dental hygiene programs as mandated by the Commission on Dental Accreditation. However, more exploration is needed to understand the faculty mentor and student research mentee relationship specific to undergraduate dental hygiene students. The purpose of the study was to identify factors and attitudes of undergraduate faculty influencing their level of interest in mentoring undergraduate student research. Using a cross-sectional survey research design, a non-probability sample of dental hygiene faculty from U.S. dental hygiene programs were asked questions about their experiences and attitudes about mentoring undergraduate student research. From the 248 survey invitations sent to dental hygiene program directors, 68 of the 75 responses received were analyzed. Fifty-six percent (n=38) of respondents mentored undergraduate research and 77% (n=52) of respondents expressed interest in mentoring undergraduate research. Full-time faculty (>75% FTE), mid-career faculty (7-20 years) and late-career faculty (>20 years) were more likely to have mentored undergraduate research. Mentors of undergraduate research were more likely to enjoy teaching students about research more than faculty without mentorship experience. Faculty members with interest in research mentorship were more likely to enjoy teaching students about research and help students become better prepared for graduate studies than faculty not interested in research mentorship. Experience with mentoring student research, early-career status (<7 years), and mid-career status (7-20 years) were significant predictors of interest in mentoring student research. Efforts should be directed to identifying and providing support for faculty mentors of undergraduate student research.

Late-Career Faculty: Individual and Institutional Perspectives

The demographic shift toward older populations of physicians is well documented across much of the globe. As a result, it is becoming imperative that academic organizations generate research to inform understanding of both individual and institutional needs relating to these faculty members. The 2 reports by Skarupski and colleagues in this issue of Academic Medicine build on the research that is available, expose some new areas for consideration, and raise new lines of inquiry for researchers interested in studying late-career faculty and faculty transitions. The author of this Invited Commentary aims to situate Skarupski and colleagues' findings relative to what the academic medicine community knows-and does not know-about late-career faculty members, the institutions that employ these faculty, and the complex relationships therewith. Specifically, the author explores the following: the demographics of those considering retirement; the connection between identity and retirement decisions; the alignment between institutional and faculty member needs; institution preparedness; mentoring; and theoretical constructs and areas for inquiry that may inform future investigations.

Late-Career Faculty: A Survey of Faculty Affairs and Faculty Development Leaders of U.S. Medical Schools.

Individuals 55 or older constitute 28.5% of the U.S. population but 32% of full-time faculty at U.S. medical schools accredited by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME). The academic medicine community knows little about the policies, programs, and resources for faculty in pre- and post-retirement stages. The authors sought to inventory the range of institutional resources for late-career faculty development and retirement planning in U.S. LCME-accredited medical schools. The authors surveyed 138 medical school faculty affairs deans and leaders in May 2017 to ascertain (1) priorities around retirement, succession planning, and workforce development/support; (2) retirement policies; (3) late-career and retirement resources; and (4) perceived factors impacting faculty retirement. Of those invited, 84 (60.9%) responded to the survey, and of these, 44 (52.4%) disagreed or strongly disagreed that retirement planning and support was a top priority in their offices. Less than half (n = 35 [41.7%]) reported that their institution had a retirement policy. The 5 most common late-career and retirement-related resources offered were emeriti or honorific appointments, academic benefits for retirees, phased retirement, retirement counseling, and financial planning. More than half the respondents noted that the following factors impact faculty retirements: physician burnout (43/75 respondents [57.3%]), decreased grant funding (42/75 [56.0%]), and changes in productivity requirements (38/75 [50.7%]). These data highlight a distinct, startling gap between the needs of a fast-growing population of late-career faculty and the priorities of their institutions. Faculty affairs/faculty development offices must meet these growing needs.

Late-Career Expectations: A Survey of Full-Time Faculty Members Who Are 55 or Older at 14 U.S. Medical Schools.

The average age of full-time faculty members at U.S. medical schools accredited by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education was 49.5 in 2017, yet the academic medicine community knows little about late-career faculty. The authors sought to characterize full-time faculty members 55 or older and assess their work-life expectations. The authors conducted a survey (May-September 2017) of faculty 55+ at 14 U.S. medical schools. Of the 5,204 faculty members invited, 2,126 (40.8%) responded. The average age of respondents was 62.3, and among those responding to the relevant questions, most identified as male (1,425; 67.2%), white (1,841; 88.3%), and married/partnered (1,803; 85.5%). Fewer than half (915; 45.2%) indicated they had begun thinking about full-time retirement, estimating that they would do so at a mean age of 67.8 (standard deviation = 4.3). Half the respondents (1,004; 50.0%) would consider moving to part-time status. The top 3 personal factors likely to affect retirement decisions were health, postretirement plans, and spouse's/partner's plans. The top 3 professional factors were phased retirement or part-time options, changes in institutional leadership, and presence of a successor. Faculty indicated that they would, post retirement, be interested in ongoing work in teaching/education and research/scholarship and that they wanted health insurance, email, and part-time teaching opportunities. U.S. medical schools employ a rapidly aging workforce. These data indicate that neither faculty members nor institutions are prepared. Faculty affairs and develop ment leaders should champion efforts to engage with late-career faculty to prepare for this changing landscape.

Editors’ Introduction

Editors’ Introduction Selima Sultana and Paul Knapp Issue 60.4 marks our one-year completion as editors of Southeastern Geographer. As this issue goes to press (early August), we continue to work remotely due to the ongoing global COVID-19 pandemic, which has caused more than 675,000 deaths worldwide, and more than 160,000 deaths in the US (1Point3Acres 2020). The number of COVID-19 infections and deaths is still increasing rapidly, especially in the American South, with several states recording their highest number of COVID-19 cases in recent days. We are at the fifth month since universities across the United States (and many other countries around the world) suddenly rushed to transition from face-to-face to a remote work environment. COVID-19 has impacted every facet of academia, especially in faculty research productivity—which we see has impacted our journal submission rate. Not only that faculty had to learn new technologies for teaching (which could be perhaps viewed as an opportunity), and the lack of access to library resources, but travel restrictions are probably the hardest hit for geographic research, especially for those geographers who rely heavily on field data. Likewise, many academics have been bearing a greater responsibility for family life (i.e., full-time caregiver to pre-school children, home schooling K-12 children, etc.…) while also being tremendously busy with modifying classes either online or hybrid models for the fall semester. At the same time, the stress level of geographers is high with the ongoing budget cuts, particularly given that in some places, geography programs are being scrutinized more closely due to the lack of understanding about the value of geographic education and research. The lack of manuscript submissions, however, may not be uniform along gender lines—some early research in other disciplines suggests that submission rates from women faculty are lower than prior years (Flaherty 2020). With facets of gender inequality that exist in academia, including geography, women academics—particularly early-career, non-white, and households headed by single women may have been facing a greater burden and financial stress during COVID-19 (Cardel et al. 2020, Malisch et al. 2020). Research conducted jointly by Emory University and Harvard University found that while overall publication numbers in social sciences increased by 35 percent during the ten weeks of lockdown, research published by women academics dropped 13.9 percent (Cui et al. 2020). There is no doubt that in the coming days, geographers will be engaged (or may already be engaged) in understanding the extent and regional patterns of impacts on geographers in general, including their productivity by gender, race/ethnicity, household structure etc.…during the COVID-19 pandemic. On a positive note, as the COVID-19 pandemic continues to concern us, our parent organization, the American Association of Geographers (AAG) allocated nearly $1 million [End Page 287] to support geographers, especially vulnerable geographers to address the systematic crisis that they are facing in the current climate. Similarly, we are happy to report that during the past five years (2016–2020) the number (46 percent) of publications by women as first authors in Southeastern Geographer is above the gender distributions of current (2018) female faculty (34.6 percent) and closely matches that of female graduate students (47.5 percent) in college and university geography departments (AAG 2020). We are hopeful that the gender gap in publications will continue to close in the coming days and that awareness of the relevancy of geographic work will continue to increase among decision makers and the public domain. Since the foundation of the journal in 1961, the tradition of Southeastern Geographer has been to encourage submissions from geographers spanning the spectrum of career development from graduate students, early- through late-career faculty, and even retired faculty. Case in point: in this issue of four articles, graduate students (collaborative with faculty) served as first author for two papers, one paper was written by an assistant professor and one paper was authored by two retired faculty. The quality of these articles is also excellent, and as editors we marvel at the amount of good work that is submitted to the journal and the history of publications by former AAG...

Faculty mentoring faculty: career stages, relationship quality, and job satisfaction

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to understand faculty mentoring experiences across career stages and the influence of mentoring relationship quality on job satisfaction. The study participants were faculty members from a consortium of liberal arts colleges in the USA. The theoretical lens draws from scholarship on career stages, developmental networks, and working alliances.Design/methodology/approachThe analysis is based on a subset of 415 faculty member responses about mentoring from a larger data set on faculty development. The online survey was conducted in Spring 2014. Frequencies, χ2, regression equations, and confirmatory factor analysis were computed using R statistical software.FindingsOver half the faculty members were both mentors and protégés; although, a sizable minority of faculty members did not engage in mentoring. Early-career faculty members were significantly more likely to have a mentor than were mid- or late-career faculty members. For both mentors and protégés, the higher they rated the quality of the mentoring relationship, the more job satisfaction they reported; this finding was greatest for mid-career (associate rank) faculty members. Participants reported significantly higher relationship quality with their mentors than with their protégés.Research limitations/implicationsThe results may not generalize to faculty members who work at other institution types, for example, research-intensive or two-year schools, or to non-US higher education contexts. Statements made regarding those who do not participate in mentoring are speculative on the part of the authors.Practical implicationsInstitutions may need to develop support for faculty members who may not desire to engage in mentoring. More attention may be warranted to create individual and institutional supports focused on high-quality mentoring.Originality/valueThis study extends the literature on mentoring by establishing that many employees serve in mentor and protégé roles simultaneously. Further, employees engage in mentoring relationships across career stages as mentors and as protégés. The authors developed a reliable measure of mentoring relationship quality that may be used in future mentoring studies. Higher quality mentoring relationships were associated with significantly greater job satisfaction.

Meeting the Late-Career Needs of Faculty Transitioning Through Retirement: One Institution's Approach.

Medical school faculty are aging, but few academic health centers are adequately prepared with policies, programs, and resources (PPR) to assist late-career faculty. The authors sought to examine cultural barriers to successful retirement and create alignment between individual and institutional needs and tasks through PPR that embrace the contributions of senior faculty while enabling retirement transitions at the University of Massachusetts Medical School, 2013-2017. Faculty 50 or older were surveyed, programs at other institutions and from the literature (multiple fields) were reviewed, and senior faculty and leaders, including retired faculty, were engaged to develop and implement PPR. Cultural barriers were found to be significant, and a multipronged, multiyear strategy to address these barriers, which sequentially added PPR to support faculty, was put in place. A comprehensive framework of sequenced PPR was developed to address the needs and tasks of late-career transitions within three distinct phases: pre-retirement, retirement, and post-retirement. This sequential introduction approach has led to important outcomes for all three of the retirement phases, including reduction of cultural barriers, a policy that has been useful in assessing viability of proposed phased retirement plans, transparent and realistic discussions about financial issues, and consideration of roles that retired faculty can provide. The authors are tracking the issues mentioned in consultations and efficacy of succession planning, and will be resurveying faculty to further refine their work. This framework approach could serve as a template for other academic health centers to address late-career faculty development.

Challenging the profiles of a plagiarist: a study of abstracts submitted to an international interdisciplinary conference

Much of the current literature on plagiarism focuses on students, attempting to understand how students view the concept of plagiarism, the best ways to prevent it, and the impact of collaboration on the concept of original authorship. In this article, we look at the role of plagiarism in 761 conference abstracts written by graduate students, early- to late-career faculty, and industry representatives, representing institutions from nearly 70 countries. These abstracts were submitted for participation in an international conference focused on the liberal arts hosted by our institution over the past four years. This study analyzes the corpus for patterns of plagiarism among professional academic writers. Our findings indicate that, while other demographic categories were not consistent indicators of text-matching, full professors were the most prevalent group to produce self-plagiarized abstracts. Overall, our study illuminates the significance of power dynamics in conferences’ efforts to maintain academic integrity.

Faculty Motivation to Mentor Students Through Undergraduate Research Programs: A Study of Enabling and Constraining Factors.

Undergraduate research experiences are a "high impact" educational practice that confer benefits to students. However, little attention has been paid to understanding faculty motivation to mentor undergraduate students through research training programs, even as the number of programs has grown, requiring increasing numbers of faculty mentors. To address this, we introduce a conceptual model for understanding faculty motivation to mentor and test it by using empirical data to identify factors that enable and constrain faculty engagement in an undergraduate research program. Using cross-sectional survey data collected in 2013, we employed generalized linear modeling to analyze data from 536 faculty across 13 research institutions to examine how expected costs/benefits, dispositional factors, situational factors, previous experience, and demographic factors predicted faculty motivation to mentor. Results show that faculty who placed greater value on the opportunity to increase diversity in the academy through mentorship of underrepresented minorities were more likely to be interested in serving as mentors. Faculty who agreed more strongly that mentoring undergraduate students was time consuming and their institution's reward structures were at odds with mentoring, or who had more constrained access to undergraduate students were less likely to be interested in serving as mentors. Mid-career faculty were more likely than late-career faculty to be interested in serving as mentors. Findings have implications for improving undergraduate research experiences, since the success of training programs hinges on engaging highly motivated faculty members as mentors.

Pedagogical Technology Experiences of Successful Late-Career Faculty

A small-scale phenomenological study reveals interesting and suggestive insights into the pedagogical technology experiences of late-career faculty with institutional recognition as successful instructors. Referred to in much of the literature as “resistant” and assumed to lack training in pedagogical technology and/or to adhere to passive learning strategies, the faculty in this study described attempts, successful and unsuccessful, to integrate technology into their teaching. Their experiences and perceptions point out the questionable effects of taking a “toolism” approach to faculty development and the risk associated with proceeding with unexamined assumptions about such faculty and their technology use.