August 8th, 2014

Mentoring Bibliography

Adams, K.A. (2002). What colleges and universities want in new faculty. Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges and Universities. (available from

This paper reviews the research on the preparation needed for graduate students who plan a career in academia for their responsibilities as faculty. The research provides the theoretical and empirical bases for practices that achieve the kind of preparation needed in the current educational context. While practices developed in the Preparing Future Faculty programs (PFF) are not specifically referred to in this review, many of the strategies proposed here have been enacted—mostly successfully—at the universities where PFF programs have been in place. A companion piece to this review is Leigh DeNeef’s Preparing Future Faculty Program: What Difference Does It Make? (AAC&U 2002), which surveys the alumni of PFF programs as to their effectiveness.

Berk, R. A., Berg, J., Mortimer, M. S., Walton-Moss, B., & Yeo, T. P. (2005). Measuring theeffectiveness of faculty mentoring relationships. Academic Medicine, 80(1), 66-71.

 “Mentor” is a term widely used in academic medicine but for which there is no consensus on an operational definition. Further, criteria are rarely reported for evaluating the effectiveness of mentoring. This article presents the work of an Ad Hoc Faculty Mentoring Committee whose tasks were to define “mentorship,” specify concrete characteristics and responsibilities of mentors that are measurable, and develop new tools to evaluate the effectiveness of the mentoring relationship. The committee developed two tools: the Mentorship Profile Questionnaire, which describes the characteristics and outcome measures of the mentoring relationship from the perspective of the mentee, and the Mentorship Effectiveness Scale, a 12-item six-point agree–disagree-format Likert-type rating scale, which evaluates 12 behavioral characteristics of the mentor. These instruments are explained and copies are provided. Psychometric issues, including the importance of content-related validity evidence, response bias due to acquiescence and halo effects, and limitations on collecting reliability evidence, are examined in the context of the mentor–mentee relationship. Directions for future research are suggested.

Boyle, P., & Boice, B. (1998). Systematic mentoring for new faculty teachers and graduate teaching assistants. Innovative Higher Education, 22(3), 157-179 (available from

This study reports on the development and assessment of two mentoring programs, one for new faculty and one for new graduate teaching assistants. The first program was an externally funded, elaborate program; and it suggested the centrality of factors such as sustained, involving relationships for best outcomes with protégés. The second project, with newcomers to graduate study, demonstrated that a simpler program focusing on involvement within the pair and group meetings produces promising results. From both these projects, we developed a replicable model of systematic mentoring; and we obtained a clear picture of the styles and skills of exemplary mentors.

Brown, H. N. (1999). Mentoring new faculty? Nurse Educator, 24(1), 48-51. (available at

This is a report of the process and evaluation of 12 years of mentoring new faculty in a university nursing faculty of 48 members. Each new faculty member is paired with an experienced faculty member who serves as a mentor for a year. Evaluations completed by both new faculty and mentors at the end of the year are positive.

Cawyer, C. S., Simonds, C., & Davis, S. (2002). Mentoring to facilitate socialization: The case of the new faculty member. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education. 15(2), 225-242.

How easily a new faculty members adjusts and adapts to life in the professoriate is often dependent on the types of relationships that the newcomer establishes with colleagues and on the willingness of veteran faculty members to assist newcomers as they learn the ins and outs of the academy. One avenue for facilitating interaction between newcomers and academic veterans is to establish formal mentoring programs. In this case study, the formal mentoring relationship is examined as a means for understanding the socialization processes of new faculty members. Results suggest that mentoring relationships may facilitate socialization because they allow newcomers to establish interpersonal bonds and receive support and advice from experienced colleagues. Results also indicate, however, that the most important feature of mentoring may be accessibility. This finding leads to questions concerning the feasibility of assigning mentors rather than encouraging informal mentoring from multiple faculty members.

Feldman, M. D., Arean, P. A., Marshall, S. J., Lovett, M., & O’Sullivan, P.  Does mentoring matter: results from a
survey of faculty mentees at a large health sciences university? (2010).  Medical Education Online, 15, 5063 – DOI: 10.3402/meo.v15i0.5063.

To determine the characteristics associated with having a mentor, the association of mentoring with self-efficacy, and the content of mentormentee interactions at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), we conducted a baseline assessment prior to implementing a comprehensive faculty mentoring program. We surveyed all prospective junior faculty mentees at UCSF. Mentees completed a web-based, 38- item survey including an assessment of self-efficacy and a needs assessment. We used descriptive and
inferential statistics to determine the association between having a mentor and gender, ethnicity, faculty series, and self-efficacy. Our respondents (n464, 56%) were 53% female, 62% white, and 7% from underrepresented minority groups. More than half of respondents (n319) reported having a mentor. There were no differences in having a mentor based on gender or ethnicity (p]0.05). Clinician educator faculty with more teaching and patient care responsibilities were statistically significantly less likely to have a mentor compared with faculty in research intensive series (pB0.001). Having a mentor was associated with greater satisfaction with time allocation at work (pB0.05) and with higher academic self-efficacy scores, 6.07 (sd1.36) compared with those without a mentor, 5.33 (sd1.35, pB0.001). Mentees reported that they most often discussed funding with the mentors, but rated highest requiring mentoring assistance with issues of promotion and tenure. Findings from the UCSF faculty mentoring program may assist other health science institutions plan similar programs. Mentoring needs for junior faculty with greater teaching and patient care responsibilities must be addressed.

Hall, R. M., & Sandler, B. R. (1983). Academic mentoring for women students and faculty: A new look at an old way to get ahead. Washington, DC: Project on the Status and Education of Women. (available from ERIC link)

Issues concerning mentoring for women in higher education are discussed. After identifying benefits of mentoring for the protege, the mentor, and the institution, barriers to traditional mentoring for women are considered. Attention is directed to why men may hesitate to mentor women students and faculty, why female mentors are hard to find on campus, and why some women may exclude themselves from mentoring relationships. In addition, new approaches to mentoring for women are considered, including multiple mentors, networks, and paper mentors. Information is also provided on the following questions: how to decide if mentoring is needed, how to be selected by mentors, and how to be a mentor. Consideration is also focused on the following groups of women with special needs: women in nontraditional fields, older women, minority women, and disabled women. Five model programs are described that cover the following: an informal institution-wide approach, research mentors for minority and women faculty, the career cooperative, a career development program for women students, and a peer advising program for women students. Additional recommendations are offered for colleges, as well as for associations, disciplinary groups, and other organizations. Reference notes, a bibliography, and a list of information sources are appended.

Hixon, E., Barczyk, C., Buckenmeyer, J., & Feldman, L. (2011). Mentoring university faculty to become high quality online educators: A program evaluation. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 14(4).

This study summarizes the results of a program evaluation of the Distance Education Mentoring Program (DEMP), an ongoing initiative at Purdue University Calumet, Indiana (USA) designed to enhance the development of online courses by mentoring faculty in instructional design principles and technology. The evaluation covers a four year period and is based on a survey of 47 protégé-participants, who are both faculty members and clients of the program, using an anonymous online questionnaire. The research questions yielded evidence that focused on two broad themes, one of which was faculty participation, satisfaction, and university impact of the program. The second theme addressed the programmatic modifications required by a changing faculty client base. Analysis showed that thirty percent of the university’s faculty have participated in the program and were teaching 44% of the online courses offered by the university. This suggests that the DEMP was making a mainstream impact on faculty views and abilities related to the online delivery of material. Participants were satisfied with the DEMP and its effectiveness, which was related to the collaborative nature of the program. It was also found that faculty participating in later cohort groups of the DEMP had different needs, which necessitated building more structure and accountability into the program. Policy implications for program administrators are discussed to help universities develop a competitive advantage in the growing market for online education.   

Lumpkin, A. (2011, October). A model for mentoring university faculty. In The Educational Forum 75(4), 357-368.

Operational characteristics for successful mentoring programs of new university faculty include clarity of purpose of the program, methods for matching mentors and protégés, mentor training, mentor-protégé relationship building, and program effectiveness assessment. Strengths of formal, informal, peer, group or consortia, intra-departmental, inter-departmental, and research mentoring approaches to mentoring from the literature are presented. Using characteristics and outcomes from successful programs, a proposed four-stage model of conceptualization, design and development, implementation, and evaluation can lead to the benefits of socialization into the culture, emotional support, networking, and increased job performance.

Sands, R. G., Parson, L. A., & Duane, J. (1991). Faculty mentoring in a public university. The Journal of Higher Education, 62(2), 174-193.

The research presented in this article found that faculty mentoring faculty was not prevalent. Where it occurred, it had been mutually negotiated, primarily between persons of the same sex and between assistant and full professors. Using a factor analysis, this study identified four types of mentors, demonstrating that mentoring is a complex, multidimensional activity.

Schrodt, P., Cawyer, C. S., & Sanders, R. (2003). An examination of academic mentoring behaviors and new faculty members’ satisfaction with socialization and tenure and promotion processes. Communication Education, 52(1), 17-29.

This study explored the relationship between academic mentoring behaviors and the organizational socialization of new faculty members within the communication discipline. Participants included 259 faculty members from the National Communication Association. Results indicated that mentors’ tendencies to provide support and encouragement, a sense of collegiality, and research assistance are related to an organizational newcomer’s feelings of connectedness and ownership with the work environment. Overall, the results suggested that the benefits of mentoring are reciprocal and benefit the institution as well as the protégé.

Sorcinelli, M. (2007). From Mentor to Mentoring Networks: Mentoring in the New Academy. Change, 39(6), 58-61.

 The article discusses the emerging models of mentoring as a vital contribution to a successful academic career. Mentoring has been defined as one-to-one relationship win which an experienced faculty member guides and supports the career development of early-career faculty member and research on faculty development. The article highlights the faculty-development resources which were published since 2000 and offers fresh models, concepts and thinking on mentoring in higher education. The resources provides new conceptualizations of mentoring, recent studies on mentoring, faculty-development programs and practices, and issues on gender and race. (good annotated bibliography included).


Comments are closed.