Mentoring Graduate Students Research Articles

Beyond Academics: A Model for Simultaneously Advancing Campus-Based Supports for Learning Disabilities, STEM Students' Skills for Self-Regulation, and Mentors' Knowledge for Co-regulating and Guiding.

Learning disabilities are highly prevalent on college campuses, yet students with learning disabilities graduate at lower rates than those without disabilities. Academic and psychosocial supports are essential for overcoming challenges and for improving postsecondary educational opportunities for students with learning disabilities. A holistic, multi-level model of campus-based supports was established to facilitate culture and practice changes at the institutional level, while concurrently bolstering mentors’ abilities to provide learning disability-knowledgeable support, and simultaneously creating opportunities for students’ personal and interpersonal development. Mixed methods were used to investigate implementation of coordinated personal, interpersonal, and institutional level supports for undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) students with learning disabilities. A one-group pre-test post-test strategy was used to examine undergraduate outcomes. Participants included 52 STEM undergraduates with learning disabilities, 57 STEM graduate student mentors, 34 STEM faculty mentors, and 34 university administrators and personnel as members of a university-wide council. Enrolled for 2 years, undergraduates were engaged in group meetings involving psychoeducation and reflective discussions, development of self-advocacy projects, and individual mentorship. Undergraduates reported improved self-efficacy (p = 0.001), campus connection (p < 0.001), professional development (p ≤ 0.002), and self-advocacy (p < 0.001) after two academic years. Graduate student mentors increased their understanding about learning disabilities and used their understanding to support both their mentees and other students they worked with. Council members identified and created opportunities for delivering learning disability-related trainings to faculty, mentors and advisors on campus, and for enhancing coordination of student services related to learning and related disorders. Disability-focused activities became integrated in broader campus activities regarding diversity. This research explicates a role that college campuses can play in fostering the wellbeing and the academic and career development of its students with developmental learning and related disorders. It offers an empirically tested campus-based model that is multilevel, holistic, and strengths-based for supporting positive outcomes of young people with learning disabilities in STEM. Moreover, findings advance the knowledge of supports and skills that are important for self-regulating and navigating complex and multi-faceted disability-related challenges within both the postsecondary educational environment and the young adults’ sociocultural context.

Implementation of a Biomedical Engineering Research Experience for African-American High School Students at a Tier One Research University.

Enriching science experiences and competencies for underrepresented students during high school years is crucial to increasing their entry into the science pipeline and to improving their preparedness for success in college and STEM careers. The purpose of this paper is to describe the implementation of project ENGAGES, a high school STEM year-long research program for African–American students, mentored by graduate students and postdoctoral researchers at Georgia Tech. It aims to provide an authentic research experience and expose student to the possibility and benefits of attaining an advanced degree and careers in STEM fields. Initial program outcomes include student reported satisfaction with research experience, improved technical skill development, and increased curiosity and interest in STEM careers. Additionally, students indicated increases in college readiness, research skill development, and exposure to STEM careers as a result of interactions with faculty advisors and graduate student mentors, along with laboratory assignments. Lessons learned and potential pitfalls and barriers to acceptance are also discussed.

Advice-Giving Roles and Strategies in Selected Faculty Member-Graduate Student Advising

In mentoring graduate students, it is hard to deny the ubiquity of graduate student advising. Faculty members, who are usually engaged in advising to tease out problems and suggest solutions, could often times be faced with negative attributions concerning faculty members’ competence, as well as receive unaligned responses rather than collaborative understanding of issues or recommendations. While previous studies on advising may have focused on specific, intricate, discourse particles and microscopic perspectives on advising, studies on advice giving exchanges that depart from these dimensions are insufficient. To fill in this lacuna, this paper proposes to explore strategies and participation roles in which faculty members assume in selected doctoral dissertation advising. Through discourse analysis, specifically focusing on discourse and situational identities grounded in identities-in-interaction (Zimmerman, 1998), the study illuminates some of the many advising roles and advising strategies that are revealed as legitimate, aligning doctoral student learning experience. In particular, advising roles and advising strategies, as illustrated in this study, link social and institutional context by proposing some of the many trajectories of how both faculty members and graduate students understand the relevance of advising exchanges. By focusing on these exchanges, the paper will also contribute to the growing body of literature on a range of different factors that may constitute advising in terms of content and manner in which advising takes place.

What would your ideal graduate mentoring program look like?: Latina/o student success in higher education

ABSTRACTThis study discusses how a diverse group of Latina/o undergraduate students perceive the ideal graduate-undergraduate mentoring program. Based on Latina/o undergraduate student voices from diverse majors and experiences, the results offer concrete solutions on how graduate student mentoring can play a pivotal role in increasing and enhancing Latina/o undergraduate students’ persistence at a research university. Major themes include graduate students being relatable role models who understand and can relate to first-generation college students’ life experiences and help them navigate the university. Few studies have focused on student perspectives of those attending HSIs at research institutions.

On Mentoring of Graduate Students

On Mentoring of Graduate Students

An Intergenerational Singing Group: A Community Music Therapy Qualitative Research Project and Graduate Student Mentoring Initiative

This study describes the implementation and investigation of a community music therapy (CoMT) intergenerational singing group. Participants were a non-clinical group of adults aged 20 to 65 years old. Weekly sessions were held over a 10-week period at a community art studio in a lower-income neighborhood within a large Canadian urban city. Participants reported experiencing increased self-expression, a sense of accomplishment, improved respiration, and feelings of general well-being. They developed new relationships and social and community networks, however participants mentioned limitations regarding the sustainability of this community development. They also indicated challenges with the multilingual repertoire. Three professional music therapy graduate students, acting as co-researchers, were introduced to and mentored in implementing community music therapy practice and research. Potential implications and recommendations for further research are discussed.

Engaging Early-Career Students in Research Using a Tiered Mentoring Model.

Incorporating research into undergraduate curricula, especially at an early stage, has been linked to improved critical thinking, intellectual independence, and student retention. This results in a graduating population more ready to enter the workforce or graduate school. Similarly, mentoring has been linked to enhanced self-efficacy, persistence, and desire to pursue graduate studies. We have designed two linked courses that engage second-year undergraduate students in developing self-directed research projects, proposal writing. These courses also serve to nucleate relationships with graduate student mentors enrolled in the companion course. Early-career undergraduate students, with no previous research experience, receive formal training in the process of scientific research from a faculty process mentor while working with a graduate student content mentor to develop an independent research project and write a proposal and embed themselves in an active research group. Undergraduate students may elect to submit their proposals for funding to continue the project, either as part of the upper division research course required for graduation or independently. Graduate students enrolled in the companion course gain experience in mentoring through formal training and actively mentoring early-career undergraduates. This chapter presents both the model and early assessment of our integrated approach to engaging early career undergraduates in developing and funding independent research projects with the support of empowering mentoring relationships.

Mixed Method Study Examines Undergraduate Student Researchers’ Knowledge and Perceptions About Scholarly Communication Practices

A Review of:&#x0D; Riehle, C. F., &amp; Hensley, M. K. (2017). What do undergraduate students know about scholarly communication?: A mixed methods study. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 17(1), 145–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/pla.2017.0009 &#x0D; &#x0D; Abstract&#x0D; &#x0D; Objective – To examine undergraduate student researchers’ perception and understanding of scholarly communication practices and issues. &#x0D; &#x0D; Design – Mixed method study involving a survey and semi-structured interviews. &#x0D; &#x0D; Setting – Two major undergraduate universities in the Midwest region of the United States. &#x0D; &#x0D; Subjects – Undergraduate students who participated in or had completed undergraduate research experiences with faculty mentors. &#x0D; &#x0D; Method – The method was first approved by Institutional Review Board offices at both campuses involved in the study. Then, students received invitations to participate in a survey via email (Campus 1 = 221 students; Campus 2 = 345 students). Identical online surveys ran separately on each campus; both remained open for a period of three weeks. All respondents received a reminder email one week before the survey closed. &#x0D; &#x0D; Participants answered twelve questions related to demographics and scholarly communication practices. The survey examined knowledge and experience across five areas: the peer review process, author and publisher rights, publication and access models, impact of research, and data management. All students who completed the survey were entered in a drawing for a $50 Amazon card. The response rates were 34.8% (Campus 1) and 18.6% (Campus 2). &#x0D; &#x0D; Surveys on both campuses were administered using different software: campus 1 utilized Qualtrics survey software while campus 2 used an institution-specific survey software. Data sets were normed and merged later in the study to enable comparison and identify broad themes. &#x0D; &#x0D; Survey respondents were also invited to participate in a 15 to 20 minute follow-up interview and were compensated with a $20 Amazon gift card. The interviews consisted of four open-ended questions that further examined students’ knowledge of scholarly communication practices. The researchers coded interview transcripts and identified themes. Qualitative software was used to analyze the surveys and assess coder agreement. Finally, connections and anomalies between survey and interview results were explored. &#x0D; &#x0D; Main Results – Quantitative and qualitative data collected during the study indicate that students were most confident in their understanding of the peer-review process and data management but felt less confident in their knowledge of author and publisher rights, publication and access models, and determining the impact of scholarly research publication. In addition, they value instruction related to scholarly communication topics like the peer-review process, publication models, and data management. However, few students feel confident in their current level of knowledge or ability surrounding the previously mentioned topics. Study findings suggest that this knowledge gap is based on a lack of training or discussion of scholarly communication topics in relation to students’ research activities. &#x0D; &#x0D; Results also suggest that undergraduate students have difficulty articulating their rights as authors and their scholarly communication practices. In many cases, skill sets like data management are learned through trial and error while students progress through the research process. In some cases, faculty mentors have misperceptions and assumptions about undergraduate students’ knowledge and abilities regarding scholarly communication practices. This can create challenges for undergraduate students as they attempt to make informed decisions about research activities based on a limited foundation of experience or information. &#x0D; &#x0D; Finally, results indicate that undergraduate student researchers do not currently view the library as a place to learn about scholarly communication practices. The authors suggest that by forming strategic relationships with undergraduate research program directors, faculty, and graduate student mentors, librarians are in a prime position to incorporate scholarly communication practices into information literacy sessions or provide point-of-need coaching. &#x0D; &#x0D; Conclusion – The researchers conclude that academic libraries are in a unique position to support overarching research, teaching, and learning goals within the academic community. By developing programs that support information literacy and scholarly communication, libraries demonstrate value and align goals with teaching and learning priorities within the higher education community as a whole. Through this work, librarians support students as knowledge creators and advocate for training that emphasizes data literacy, copyright and authors’ rights, and the impact of research within specific disciplines.

Mentoring graduate students through the action research journey using guiding principles

Our department has adopted action research (AR) projects as the culminating task for our master’s degree candidates. This article presents our work on mentoring graduate students towards the completion of their final AR research projects and details the deliberate structures put in place to guide them through the AR process. These structures include a full-semester course, individual meetings with an AR chair, and collaborative faculty–student feedback sessions. These collaborative conversations (between students and faculty) have allowed us to clarify our understandings of AR, set standards and goals for AR, and raise our expectations on the quality of final AR projects. We hope that the discussion in this article will give students assigned AR new insights as they conduct their research. Also, we hope that the guiding principles we have derived through our efforts can inform others who currently use or plan to assign AR to their students.

My Scientific Journey: From an Agrarian Start to an Academic Setting.

This article is a combination of an autobiography and a review of outstanding research done by over 70 graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, and visiting scientists along with excellent collaborators during my over-40-year career as a professor of reproductive physiology at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. I have also shared thoughts on mentoring, how research has changed over the years, and the future of reproductive physiology. I provide the reader with a snapshot of the challenges faced by a woman eager to obtain a PhD under the guidance of renowned professors in the early 1970s and to be hired as the first woman, and the only permanent female faculty member, for more than 20 years on a faculty of 40 men. As a comparative reproductive physiologist, I describe the various animal models used because they were the best models to answer specific questions in reproduction. Also, my graduate students and postdoctoral fellows were given the freedom to identify their research topics, articulate hypotheses to be tested, and select appropriate animal models. This approach caused students to take ownership of their research, resulting in the development of independent and creative scientists and over 170 publications, excluding chapters in top-tier journals. Finally, I am so grateful for a truly rich life mentoring graduate students and postdoctoral fellows who have become my lifelong friends.

Graduate Students of Color

The graduate student experience, for many, can be a time of great stress, insecurity, and uncertainty. Overwhelmingly, studies verify that good mentoring is one of the best indicators of graduate student success. In this literature review, we outline in detail previous research that attest to these experiences, and pay specific attention to the experiences of students of color. In general, our read of the literature suggests that academia, in general, and sociology, in particular, does not do a good job of mentoring graduate students of color. We begin our essay with an overview of graduate student experiences. Next, we discuss the mentoring side of the equation, addressing reasons that might explain variations in how students are mentored in higher education. Finally, we end with some thoughts on what faculty and departments can do to address the inadequate mentoring of graduate students of color.

Building Rapport Between International Graduate Students and Their Faculty Advisors: Cross-Cultural Mentoring Relationships at the University of Guelph

Mentoring graduate students is very challenging, even when both the student and faculty have similar cultural values. Many international students have a different culture from that of Canadian. Their challenge is adapting to their new environment, and for their faculty advisors to understand and work well with them. This research explored the relationships, experience, and challenges of international graduate students and their faculty advisors at the University of Guelph, through focus group discussions, semi-structured face-to-face interviews and online surveys. Language barriers and financial difficulties were among the major challenges international students face adapting to their academic and social environment and working with their faculty advisors. We found that building good student-advisor relationship requires understanding graduate student and advisor formal responsibilities and expectations. Le mentorat des étudiants de cycles supérieurs pose tout un défi, même dans les cas où l’étudiant et le professeur ont tous deux des valeurs culturelles semblables. De nombreux étudiants internationaux viennent d’une culture différente de ce que nous connaissons au Canada. Leur défi est de s’adapter à leur nouvel environnement et pour leurs conseillers pédagogiques, de les comprendre et de collaborer avec eux. Cette recherche explore les relations de travail, l’expérience et les défis auxquels sont confrontés les étudiants internationaux de cycles supérieurs et leurs conseillers pédagogiques à l’Université de Guelph par le biais de discussions de groupes de consultation, d’entrevues face à face semi-structurées et d’un sondage en ligne. Les barrières linguistiques et les difficultés financières s’avèrent comme étant les défis principaux auxquels font face les étudiants internationaux lors de leur adaptation à leur environnement académique et social et dans leurs interactions avec leurs conseillers pédagogiques. Nous avons constaté que pour établir de bonnes relations étudiant-conseiller pédagogique, il est essentiel de comprendre les responsabilités et les attentes formelles des étudiants et des conseillers pédagogiques.

Problem-Solving Practices and Complexity in School Psychology

How do experienced school psychologists solve problems in their practice? What can trainers of school psychologists learn about how to structure training and mentoring of graduate students from what actually happens in schools, and how can this inform our teaching at the university? This qualitative multi-interview study explored the processes that five experienced school psychologist used to solve problems in their practice in the schools. The interviews described their problem-solving efforts as being imbedded in complex school contexts and reliant on a dynamic team process of searching for solutions. The paper suggests that these teams fit what the field of complexity theory calls complex adaptive systems (CAS) and outlines what the research on such systems tells us about enhancing their function. It concludes with suggestions that training programs include these concepts in their consultation training and ensure that all students experience case work that is ongoing and supervised.

Use of a Needs Assessment in the Development of an Interprofessional Faculty Development Program.

A needs assessment was conducted regarding an interprofessional faculty development program for promoting excellence in education. Nursing and medical faculty and administrators (N = 156) were surveyed about perceived need, program curriculum, and delivery. The results indicated strong support for the program, particularly related to teaching/learning strategies, leadership, and scholarship. Nursing faculty rated some topical areas significantly higher than did the medical faculty, including innovative classroom teaching, educational technology, interprofessional education, diversity/inclusion, and mentoring graduate students.

TRIENNIAL REPRODUCTION SYMPOSIUM: American Society of Animal Science L. E. Casida Award for Excellence in Graduate Education: Thoughts on mentoring graduate students in reproductive biology.

Programs in animal science are particularly well suited for graduate education because students can receive comprehensive training in the laboratory as well as with the whole animal. Furthermore, graduate students in animal science have the opportunity to understand how their research relates to a real world problem. Graduate students need to take ownership of their education by identifying training goals, choosing a mentor who will help them achieve their goals, and becoming engaged in research as soon as possible. In my own graduate program, I emphasize concepts more than techniques and I believe that graduate course work should focus on the basic areas of science that underlie reproductive biology (e.g., endocrinology, biochemistry, physiology, immunology, and statistics). Based on the increase in technology available for scientific investigation and the diversity of expertise required to address important research problems, graduate students need to learn the importance of establishing productive collaborations and begin building a scientific network. Preparation for graduate school frequently begins early with a curiosity and passion for understanding how biology works. Undergraduate courses can facilitate scientific thinking by providing opportunities in lectures and laboratories for students to transition from passive learners to thinking of themselves as animal scientists. There is a profound difference between individuals who view themselves as practitioners of a discipline and those who are simply trying to complete a course requirement. Teachers of undergraduate courses should incorporate experiential learning exercises into their lectures and laboratories to provide undergraduate students the opportunity to function as animal scientists and to embrace their scientific education. Graduate training has been the most enjoyable aspect of my career and it has been a joy to witness the achievements of students following completion of their degree!

Going where the science matters.

Not long ago, I was a tenured professor on a sabbatical at the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom. One winter morning, reflecting on why we scientists work as hard as we do, I identified three primary drivers: curiosity, ambition, and idealism. We chase interesting problems, wherever they lead. We're a competitive lot, with career advancement an important incentive. And we're compelled by a desire to benefit society. Later that week, an old friend sent a photo taken in the Adirondack Mountains during my first summer's fieldwork as a Ph.D. student. Looking at my 24-year-old face, framed by long black hair and a dreadful orange sweater, I asked myself, “What was on that young fellow's mind?” Clearly, he wanted to satisfy his curiosity about how climate change affected ecological communities. He was idealistic, with notions of applying his training to the cause of conservation. In his naivete, he viewed personal career advancement as unimportant, even contradictory to the greater good. ![Figure][1] ILLUSTRATION: ROBERT NEUBECKER > “What would he think of my grayer self … some 30 years later?” What would he think of my grayer self, sitting in my Oxford chambers some 30 years later? Though I hadn't answered all the questions that gripped him, he'd be pleased that I'd learned a lot about climate change and ecology. He'd probably be happy that I'd had a successful career—though I expect he'd ask whether I hadn't been co-opted by “the system.” And he'd be wondering in exactly what ways I had contributed to conserving the natural world. My honest answer: “Not many, beyond haranguing students, giving public lectures, and writing academic papers.” Not long after these reflections, some colleagues suggested that I look into a job opening at a federal science agency to lead a program aimed at bridging the gap between the climate-change research and the natural-resource management communities. My knee-jerk reaction was to say no. I was comfortably tenured, enjoying the honors and perks of an established academic career. But tugging at my coat sleeve was my younger self, asking me why I shouldn't reinvest my knowledge and experience into benefiting the environment. With no good answers for him, and a reawakening idealism, I applied for the job. It's now been 3 years since I assumed directorship of the Southwest Climate Science Center in Tucson, Arizona. I've worked harder than I ever did as a professor. I've had to acquire new skills, and I'm still struggling to understand all the dimensions of my new field. But the work has been interesting and rewarding in countless ways. I am fostering partnerships between researchers and managers to address a variety of urgent conservation challenges: How will sea-level rise affect vulnerability of coastal marshes to storm surges? What forest management practices are most effective for increasing drought resilience? What are the best ways for researchers and managers to engage? Do I miss anything from my days as a professor? Certainly teaching, but I still mentor graduate students and younger colleagues. I continue doing research, but I've redirected much of my effort from paleoecology to conservation. I still get paid to satisfy my curiosity, but now I'm doing so in the center's rich environment of multiple academic disciplines and professional cultures, and with the view to solve compelling real-world problems. Is my job perfect? Certainly not. As in any administrative job, some tasks are neither interesting nor enjoyable, and government administration has unique aggravations. But on the positive side, I no longer suffer the exhausting high-passion, low-stakes squabbles that can arise among university faculty members. And, most importantly, I enjoy the added satisfaction of knowing that my center is having a real impact on conservation. So, looking again at that old photo, I wonder whether the grin on my face came from knowing that, one day, I would inform and influence conservation in a direct and tangible way. [1]: pending:yes

In Memoriam: Louis J. Guillette, Jr.

In Memoriam: Louis J. Guillette, Jr.

ASR News &amp; Announcements

By all measures, our 77th annual meeting in Chicago this year was a great success. Highlights of this year's meeting included Melissa Wilde's Presidential Address, “Complex Religion: Interrogating Assumptions of Independence in the Study of Religion,” Mike Hout's Furfey Lecture “St. Peter's Leaky Boat: Falling Intergenerational Persistence of U.S.-Born Catholics Since 1972” (In honor of the late Andrew M. Greeley), a special Presidential Panel on Religion and Gender, and two ASR/ASA Joint Sessions. The annual meeting also featured a newly initiated Graduate Student Mentoring Lunch, and review panels for each of the two newly released volumes of our Religion and the Social Order book series – Volume 25, Sociologies of Religion: National Traditions, edited by Giuseppe Giordan and Anthony J. Blasi, and Volume 26, Religious and Sexual Nationalisms in Central and Eastern Europe: Gods, Gays and Governments, edited by Srdjan Sremac and R. Ruard Ganzevoort (both Brill, 2015). Further details about these and other aspects of the annual meeting are available on the ASR website at www.sociologyofreligion.com.

AECT and the Next Generation: Mentoring Graduate Students through Professional Organizations

This article details the experience of one Educational Technology program’s efforts to use the Association of Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) as an integral part of the mentoring experience for its graduate students. Outlined is how the program has held the resident doctoral seminar at annual AECT conferences and at the Summer Leadership meetings. In addition, anecdotes written by four different students detail their experiences being mentored within the AECT organization and how it has impacted them as new professionals within the field of Educational Technology.

Collaborative partnerships: bridging the knowledge practice gap in client-centred care in mental health

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to describe a partnership, the Ryerson-Centre for Addiction and Mental Health Collaborative for Client-Centred and Family Sensitive Care Collaborative, between an urban university and tertiary care mental health facility to build capacity in using research evidence to support client-centred care. A cornerstone of the partnership was a study exploring the connection between effective interprofessional collaboration and the capacity to provide exemplary client-centred care in mental health. Design/methodology/approach – The Collaborative brings together organizations with shared values and a commitment to client-centred interprofessional care. It is a strategic approach in amplifying opportunities for the uptake of research evidence and knowledge transfer. One of the principal deliverables for the Collaborative was a multi-phased study exploring the relationship between team collaboration and client-centred care. Findings – Research findings identified a significant association between the level of team effectiveness and collaboration and the staffs’ perceived capacity to deliver client-centred care. Client and family member perspectives highlighted the importance of interprofessional team functioning and collaboration. The work of the Collaborative helped narrow the knowledge practice gap through: a research practicum to mentor graduate students; knowledge exchange and dissemination; and working with advanced practice staff to support change within the organization. Originality/value – Inter-organizational relationships, such as the Collaborative, support initiatives that accelerate the use of clinically relevant research and bridge the knowledge practice gap. A university/tertiary care teaching facility partnership represents a promising model for advancing and disseminating evidenced-based knowledge.