Effectiveness of Innovative Research Mentor Interventions among Underrepresented Minority Faculty in the Southwest

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

Although mentoring is critical to the success of investigators, the best practices for training and supporting mentors are not known. There is an urgent need to correct this gap in knowledge, particularly at institutions with large proportions of underrepresented minority (URM) faculty scientists. Our long-term goal is to create and scale interventions to enhance the skills of the diverse workforce to meet the nation's research needs. Our objective is to develop, implement, and evaluate theoretically grounded mentor development programs, mentor support networks, and customized institutional mentoring climate interventions. The rationale for our project is based upon the literature that conveys that mentors currently feel unprepared and unsupported in an institutional climate that is not aligned with their needs. We will accomplish our objective with the following Specific Aims: Aim 1: To compare the effectiveness of a combined online plus face-to-face research mentor development program vs. an online program alone, using a non-randomized quasi-experimental study. Hypothesis 1A: The combined mentor intervention results in greater and sustained improvement in mentor competency than the control intervention. Hypothesis 1B: The combined mentor intervention results in greater faculty mentee success in achieving milestones, including scholarly products, grants, and navigating critical career decisions. Hypothesis 1C: The combined mentor intervention results in greater number and quality of mentor-mentee behavioral interactions. Aim 2: To compare the effectiveness of a structured mentor support network, using a randomized controlled trial. Hypothesis 2A: As compared to mentors who do not participate, mentor support network participation results in a greater change in mentors' developmental network diversification and supportive characteristics. Hypothesis 2B: Mentors' developmental network diversification and supportive characteristic scores positively correlate with the faculty mentees' corresponding developmental network scores, subjective career success inventory scores, and research productivity. Hypothesis 2C: Content analysis will provide insights into contributions to changes in network characteristics of URM mentors and mentees and in career success and research productivity for URM mentees. Feasibility Aim 3: To determine the feasibility of developing, implementing, and evaluating customized institutional mentoring climate interventions. Hypothesis 3A: A faculty survey of mentoring climate and focus groups/interviews with institutional stakeholders can be used to identify institutional interventions of value related to mentoring structure, programs/activities, and/or policies/guidelines. Hypothesis 3B: Interventions that impact mentoring structure, programs/activities, and/or policies/guidelines improve the measured institutional mentoring climate in the study population. The completion of these Aims will establish the feasibility and effectiveness of mentor interventions, particularly among URM faculty at three southwestern institutions. This will allow evidence-based activities to replace trial-and-error approaches, expanding the scientific scope of the National Research Mentoring Network.