Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Developing effective mentoring programs for non-tenure track faculty
(USC Thesis Other)
Developing effective mentoring programs for non-tenure track faculty
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 1
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS FOR NON-TENURE
TRACK FACULTY
by
Diane Yoon
________________________________________________________________________
A Research Proposal Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements of the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
December 2015
Copyright 2015 Diane Yoon
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 2
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to God, my mother and father, and my younger sister, Julia.
Without the love and support from God and my family, I would not have been able to complete
my Ed.D journey. I am so thankful to my family for their encouragement, patience, and prayers
for me during every step of the process.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank all the people that helped make it possible for me to complete my
Ed.D journey. First, I must express my deepest gratitude to my dissertation chair, Dr. Adrianna
Kezar for her guidance, invaluable expertise, and patience as she challenged me to dig deeper
and produce my best results. I would also like to thank Dr. Ruth Chung and Dr. Zoe Corwin as
my other committee members for all the helpful feedback and encouragement I received
regarding my research topic. I am so appreciative of the opportunity to work with my amazing
committee.
I am pleased to thank the USC School of Social Work and Western School of Nursing for
participating in my study. This study would not have been possible without the cooperation and
support from the administrators and faculty that were involved in my study. I really appreciate
their time, openness, and willingness to share with me so that I was able to gain a thorough
understanding of their experiences.
I’d like to thank my former colleagues at the USC Pullias Center for Higher Education,
especially Monica Raad and Diane Flores for giving me the time and flexibility I needed to work
on my Ed.D and for Dr. Lisa Garcia for her valuable advice during the program. I’d also like to
thank my former supervisors Dr. William Tierney and Dr. Victor Garcia for their professional
guidance which has meant a lot in my career.
I would also like to thank a few members from my thematic dissertation group: Yun Kim
Veridiana Chavarin, and Lillian Coye who provided much needed motivation and practical help
so that I was able to finally complete my dissertation.
Lastly, I want to thank my incredible friends: Dr. Jane Hong, Dr. Nadine Singh, Dr.
Elizabeth Truby, and Dr. Kelsey Iino who kept me accountable and were excellent models for
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 4
me as they had paved the way in receiving their doctorates. Jessica Oei and Jiyoo Pena, two of
my closest and dearest friends were also tremendously supportive and encouraging and I’m so
grateful to have them as life-long friends.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION 2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3
LIST OF TABLES 7
ABSTRACT 8
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 9
Background 9
Statement of the Problem 14
Purpose of the Study 15
Research Questions 16
Significance of the Study 16
Summary 17
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 19
Introduction 19
Definitions of Mentoring 19
Kram’s Theory of Mentoring 23
Types of Mentoring 25
Benefits 29
Challenges 31
Criteria for Effectiveness 33
Conclusion 35
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 37
Methodology 37
Site Selection 40
Data Collection 46
Data Analysis 49
Validity and Reliability 50
Limitations 53
CHAPTER FOUR: RESEARCH FINDINGS 54
Introduction 54
Chapter Overview 55
Overview of Programs 55
Program Differences 58
Positive Attitudes Towards Mentoring 59
Mentoring Needs of Faculty 61
Structure of Mentoring Practices 66
Effective Mentoring Practices 73
How Mentoring can be Improved 79
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 6
Conclusion 83
Chapter Summary 84
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 86
Introduction 86
Research Findings and Discussion 88
Implications for Practice 94
Implications Future Research 99
Conclusion 100
References 102
Appendix A: Faculty Protocol 108
Appendix B: Administrator Protocol 109
Appendix C: Informed Consent Form 110
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 7
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Kram’s Mentoring Model 24
Table 2: Characteristics of Different Types of Mentoring 26
Table 3: Demographics: Overview of Participants 43
Table 4: Demographics: Overview of NTTF Gender and Years of Teaching Experience 43
Table 5: Mentoring Characteristics by Institution 56
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 8
ABSTRACT
The landscape for traditional tenure track faculty positions has changed considerably.
The number of NTTF, including both full-time and part-time positions, has risen to two-thirds of
faculty positions across the academy (AFT, 2010). In 2007, part-time faculty appointments made
up more than half of the academic workforce at 4-year public and private universities, and now
just 3 out of every 10 faculty are on the tenure track (AFT, 2010). The total faculty in the United
States is approximately 1.3 million and approximately 800,000 are non-tenure track, in the most
recent data that has been analyzed (AFT, 2010). This study utilized a qualitative interview study
to collect data through interviews from 16 faculty and 3 administrators from two university
graduate programs. The purpose of this study was to understand the various aspects of mentoring
programs that incorporate NTTF and the characteristics, benefits and challenges that are
embodied within these programs for NTTF. The main research question guiding the study was:
what are effective mentoring practices for mentoring programs that include NTTF? This study
fills a large gap in the research by taking an in-depth look at the mentoring experiences of NTTF.
There were several important findings that will help institutions with implementing
effective mentoring practices for NTTF: creating mentoring structures/opportunities,
understanding the mentoring needs of NTTF, and incorporating effective mentoring practices
which include establishing trust/respect and providing support. Based on the findings of this
study, universities are highly recommended to establish formal mentoring programs for all
NTTF. These mentoring programs may be individualized to the needs of the NTTF instructor to
maximize growth opportunities, professional development, and foster critical reflection on
teaching and learning strategies to improve student learning.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 9
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Background
Mentoring is a powerful process for enhancing the development of individuals and
organizations. Individuals who have a mentor typically report higher job satisfaction,
compensation, and promotions as well as lower turnover intentions and less work–non-work
conflict (De Janasz & Sullivan, 2004). Organizations benefit from mentoring as well, as mentors
facilitate the socialization process, help acculturate junior members of the organization, and
foster more positive attitudes toward their work settings and higher organizational commitment
(De Janasz & Sullivan, 2004).
Within the past few decades, interest in mentoring and attempts to implement successful
mentoring programs has increased throughout higher education. Many institutions have
established formal and informal mentoring programs for their faculty, specifically tenured track
faculty to address common challenges or issues that they may which includes lack of support or
isolation. However, mentoring programs in higher education have met with mixed success
because such programs are based on the premise that more experienced faculty will assist, guide,
and support the new and non-tenured faculty through the murky and sometimes treacherous
waters leading to tenure (Angelique, Kyle, & Taylor, 2002, p. 196).
As universities struggle for flexible and efficient ways of managing their human
resources to gain competitive advantages in a global economy, the workforce has experienced a
tremendous increase in the adoption of contingent faculty employment (Liu & Zhang, 2007). For
the last three decades there has also been a shift in the composition of the faculty demographics
at higher education institutions (Shannon, 2007). Higher education administrators have become
reliant on hiring contingent faculty in an effort to reduce personnel costs (Shannon, 2007), which
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 10
result from declining financial support of higher education institutions from federal and state
governments and are acknowledged to be the cause in this alarming shift (Williams & Ceci,
2007). According to the American Federation of Teachers (2010) part-time/contingent faculty
members (not including graduate employees) represent 47% of instructional staff.
Contingent faculty are defined as not only as part time non tenure-track faculty (NTTF)
but also as other instructors who lack full faculty status, including full-time fixed term faculty,
graduate assistants, and postdoctoral researchers (Jaegar & Egan, 2011). Contingent faculty tend
to have fixed-term appointments or temporary contracts, where individuals are hired for a
specific purpose and teach for only one term or a limited number of terms. The shift to non–
tenure system faculty has taken place in both private and public institutions and at all levels from
research universities to community colleges (Clawson, 2009). This shift has also created a
bifurcated faculty, where those with full-time tenure-track appointments enjoy the traditional
benefits of professorial work—respect, autonomy, collegiality, and opportunities for professional
growth—while those who are not on the tenure track do not necessarily receive those benefits
(Gappa, Austin, & Trice, 2007). Furthermore, these different types of appointments cause
inequities, which can undermine the sense of commitment that all faculty should bring to their
work (Gappa et al., 2007, p.16).
The idea that tenure is the only way to promote quality is unrealistic in an environment in
which the majority of faculty are not eligible for it. As colleges and universities redefine faculty
appointments and as increasing numbers of people with more diverse interests, motives, and
qualifications enter the academy, it is time to rethink who the faculty are (Gappa & Leslie,
1997). The new faculty majority includes people with high-level professional experience,
cutting-edge clinical and research skills, broad and unusual life experiences, distinguished
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 11
records of community leadership, perspectives from different cultural points of view, creative
and original artistic ideas, experience in politics and government leadership, and a deep and
genuine humanity that may not be measurable in conventional terms (Gappa & Leslie, 1997).
Many of these faculty, or prospective faculty, do not consider tenure important and instead need
to be appropriately socialized into the institution or supported through mentoring.
Despite the growth of mentoring research in the management literature and the research
on the mentoring of graduate students, there are relatively few empirical studies on the
mentoring of professors (Tenenbaum, Crosby, & Gliner, 2001) including tenured faculty. First, it
is presumed that faculty are well prepared for their careers and therefore do not require a mentor
(De Janasz & Sullivan, 2004). Most entrants in academe are expected to have studied extensively
to acquire their degrees and have had extensive one-on-one apprenticeship-like training with
their dissertation advisor (Betz, 1997).
Second, the separation of management and labor in an academic environment is
more permeable than in many business organizations (De Janasz & Sullivan, 2004). In a
traditional business environment, one might expect to find a wide variation in terms of
employees’ education, experience, and responsibilities between hierarchical layers. For this
reason, management scholars have warned that employees who are promoted are likely to face
many new challenges and need to be prepared for them, perhaps through the guidance of a
mentor (Brett, Feldman, & Weingart, 1990). By contrast, professors of different ranks within an
academic environment typically have the same education level and relatively similar experiences
and responsibilities, albeit a different mix. College administrators (management) are typically
academicians who have accepted the additional responsibility of managing other academics
(labor) and engaging in cost-cutting, fund-raising, or other administrative activities (De Janasz &
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 12
Sullivan, 2004). Although traditional business organizations typically have top-down
hierarchical reporting relationships, with the exception of the top level administrators (e.g.,
department chair or dean), professors have few supervisors and these supervisors have limited
power because of benefits unique to academe including tenure and academic freedom (De Janasz
& Sullivan, 2004).
Third, the three-rung tenure track academic career ladder (assistant, associate, and full
professor) does not parallel the traditional, multi-layered organizational hierarchy (De Janasz &
Sullivan, 2004). Therefore, the need to have and utilize internal and external sources to obtain
necessary opportunities, connections and visibility seems less clear in academe than in a
traditional environment (De Janasz & Sullivan, 2004).
Faculty mentoring addresses numerous faculty career needs and is a developmental and
continuous process (Luna & Cullen, 1995). Research on faculty development and mentoring
programs have historically been created to fit this traditional definition (Sorcinelli & Yun, 2007)
and for the most part focuses on mentoring tenure track faculty. Nevertheless, academe has been
slow to formalize its faculty mentoring practices in response to the changing organizational
dynamics and demographics of higher education (Zellers, Howard, & Barcic, 2008).
The tenure-track career model has a built in mentoring component as many tenured
faculty are encouraged to take those on the tenure track under their wing. For many NTTF they
may feel that their colleagues are not willing to invest in them as they are viewed as temporary
employees or experience lack of connection within the department. Wickun and Stanley (2000)
suggest that, despite NTTF possessing important real-world experiences, they are rarely
mentored by full-time faculty members and seldom have the opportunities to share those life
experiences with full-time faculty. The traditional academic mentoring model of a single, more
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 13
experienced faculty member from the degree-granting institution guiding the protégé throughout
his/her tenure track career needs to be reconsidered in light of the increase of NTTF teaching in
higher education (Kram & Hall, 1996).
Although faculty appointments have shifted from tenure-line to non-tenure track and
NTTF now represent the majority of faculty in higher education, most institutions have not
adequately addressed the issue of how best to support NTTF (Kezar & Sam, 2010b). Many
institutions have not been intentional in their planning process for appointing NTTF, though they
have been growing in numbers (Kezar & Sam, 2010b). Studies have shown that many
institutions do not have policies and practices that take into account the unique needs of the
NTTF, therefore many NTTF work under inadequate working conditions that prevent them from
performing effectively (Gappa et al., 2007).
Socialization with regards to organizational politics, concerns the success of an individual
in obtaining formal and informal work relationships and power structures within an organization
(Chao et al., 1994). Systems should be created to socialize NTTF members, or they should be
included in current orientation and mentoring systems serving tenure-track faculty (Kezar, 2012,
p.4). Socialization needs to happen among the two faculty groups whenever possible and
mentoring is an ideal place for this interaction (Kezar, 2012). Tenure-track and senior non-tenure
track faculty members who are familiar with the roles and responsibilities of the work should be
included as mentors for NTTF. Often it is the practice to have other NTTF, who are more senior,
mentor newer NTTF. It is important to remove the barriers between NTTF and tenure-track
faculty (Kezar, 2012, p.5). New job acclimation could be more efficient if an individual attained
a heightened awareness of and connection to the more knowledgeable and powerful players
within the organization (Zellers et al., 2008). However, for some part-time faculty, socialization
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 14
may be less important, as they may be teaching but not be interested in becoming part of the
academic community (Kezar, 2012, p.5).
Statement of the Problem
Faculty members ineligible for tenure are found in significant numbers in all types of
institutions and in most disciplines (Gappa, 2000, p.77). The shift away from tenure has
ramifications for the fundamental social principle on which universities are organized—
professionalism (Clawson, 2009, p. 1148). Professionalism operates on the basis of people who
develop both expertise, wherein mentoring is needed to ensure quality, and a set of values and
commitments (Clawson, 2009). Also, the availability of professional development resources is
often limited for NTTF, if it is offered at all, even though professional development is of
growing importance to the experience of NTTF (Kezar & Sam, 2010).
Roueche and Roueche (1996) suggests that college and university administrators fail to
successfully integrate NTTF into their institutions and stress the importance of implementing
socialization strategies in every department within an institution. Early research on NTTF
focused on documenting the trend of increasing numbers, examining who these new faculty
were, and attempting to understand some of their working conditions, which turned out to be
subpar across a host of dimensions from no orientation, formal hiring, mentoring, or professional
development (Levin & Shaker, 2011). Many full time NTTF teach, research, administer, and
serve their institutions just as do those with tenure but they lack permanent employment
protection, an acknowledged role in institutional governance, and an established or well-
understood position in the academy (Levin & Shaker, p.2, 2011).
Mentoring programs are especially needed for NTTF since they face overwhelming
obstacles in being acclimated to their institution’s environment as they lack the information and
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 15
resources required to help them perform their jobs well. It is difficult for NTTF to be as fully
engaged in their academic disciplines and with their students because they usually receive fewer
resources than do those on a tenure track.
The literature suggests that adjunct faculty feel left out and removed from the mainstream
college academic community (Webb, 2007). While adjunct instructors are integral parts of
colleges and universities, they are often made to feel marginalized and have been described as
invisible (Shannon, 2007). Institutional culture influences the degree to which faculty become
integral parts of an institution (Shannon, 2007). Shannon asserts that socialized faculty of a
higher education institution become connected to the department and the institution and, thus,
become committed to an institution's goals and values. He further found that new faculty
members, who learn the culture of their institution and develop relationships with colleagues,
eventually become accustomed to their new roles by discovering how they fit within the culture
of the institution (Shannon, 2007).
The dramatic shift to part-time instructional jobs at higher education institutions
has resulted in the need to effectively socialize NTTF faculty into the organizational culture of
colleges and universities (Shannon, 2007; White, 2008). Colleges, however, do little to prepare
part-time faculty for the profession (Shannon, 2007). Boyd (2006) suggests that research on
faculty-to-faculty mentoring has only been explored with fulltime faculty, not part-time faculty.
Only a limited number of studies have evaluated the effect of socialization of part-time faculty
on their sense of connection to the university (Shannon, 2007).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to understand the characteristics of mentoring programs that
exist for part-time and full-time non-tenure track faculty at four-year universities and how NTTF
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 16
perceive effectiveness related to mentoring in order to provide a resource for universities that
would like to develop one. Limited research has been done regarding mentoring NTTF as the
mentoring literature has focused mostly on faculty-student relationships.
Research Questions
The research questions for the study are the following:
1. What are the characteristics of mentoring programs that exist for part-time and full-time
non tenure track faculty at four-year universities?
2. What are benefits/challenges that exist for mentoring programs aimed at part-time and
full-time non-tenure track faculty at four-year universities?
3. What do NTTF perceive as effective mentoring?
Significance of the Study
Growing interest in the potential benefits of mentoring relationships has led to an
increase in the number of research studies devoted to the topic. Many of these studies focus on
corporations and businesses and, in academe, on the relationship between faculty and students
(Cunningham, 1999). This study will fill a gap in the existing literature by exploring the
mentoring dynamics of NTTF and mentoring programs focused on this population. By
understanding how NTTF can be better supported through mentoring, they will be more engaged
in their work and the institution and contribute to the overall success of the institution.
The teaching, research, creative endeavors, community involvement, professional
service, and academic decision making—the work of the university or college—is carried out
each day by committed faculty members (Gappa et al., 2007, p.4). It is the work of the faculty
that is instrumental to achieving the excellence that colleges and universities envision. If faculty
members working in non tenure-track appointments are to be in a position to do their best work,
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 17
leaders must provide equitable working conditions and ensure these faculty members’ inclusion
in the campus community (Gappa et al., 2007).
This study seeks to inform administrators of the need to strategically implement
mentoring in their plan for NTTF development and examine the role mentoring plays in the
socialization of NTTF. In addition, findings from this study could assist academic institutions
with improving socialization practices for NTTF. This study will also provide higher education
administrators with practical tools to help develop mentoring programs to support the NTTF who
are becoming a more visible presence on the college campus.
Summary
Institutions of higher education are continually challenged to confront the growing
attrition of non-tenured faculty resulting from overbearing workloads, job dissatisfaction and
competitive job markets, so it becomes imperative that a broad range of strategies be explored
(Angelique et al., 2002). Issues such as isolation and resource scarcity can have debilitating
effects on NTTF which has created the need for mentoring programs to help them transition
more effectively to the university. Many institutions have addressed these challenges by
establishing formal and informal mentoring programs but have met with mixed success
(Angelique et al., 2002).
Vital faculty members are essential in contributing to the success of an academic
institution. Vital faculty members are passionately involved in and committed to their work,
committed to the goals of the institution, continually developing their teaching and research
abilities, and consistently growing in and contributing to their discipline (Bland, Taylor, Shollen,
Weber-Main, & Mulcahy, 2008). These characteristics, while highly desirable, cannot be
assumed; they must be cultivated over the career continuum. Effective mentoring is a powerful
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 18
strategy for facilitating faculty vitality. Mentoring can have a positive effect on research
productivity, teaching effectiveness, job satisfaction, socialization to a profession, promotion and
tenure, and salary satisfaction (Bland et al., 2008). Overall, mentoring can be applied to foster a
faculty member’s success and retention in academe.
The results of this study may assist higher education administrators with suggestions for
more strategic implementation of mentoring practices aimed at the enhancement of adjunct
faculty socialization. Chapter One provided a detailed introduction regarding the socialization of
NTTF faculty and the value of mentoring for NTTF in higher education institutions. Chapter
Two will present a supportive review of the literature, Chapter Three discusses the methodology
implemented, Chapter Four presents findings from the study, and Chapter Five includes a
discussion of the findings, overall conclusions, implications for professional practice, and
recommendations for implementation along with suggestions for further research.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 19
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to understand the characteristics of the mentoring programs
for part-time and full-time NTTF and gain a deeper understanding of the benefits and challenges
that exist for them at four-year universities in order to provide a resource for universities that
would like to develop one. The main research questions for the study are the following:
1. What are the characteristics of mentoring programs that exist for part-time and full-
time non-tenure-track faculty at four-year universities?
2. What are benefits/challenges that exist for mentoring programs aimed at part-time
and full-time non-tenure track faculty at four-year universities?
3. What do NTTF perceive as effective mentoring?
In order to address the purpose and research questions, it is necessary to review the
overall literature on the theories of mentoring, including definitions of mentoring, characteristics
of mentoring programs, and benefits/challenges that are specific to mentoring programs aimed at
NTTF. First, I will provide an overview of the definitions of mentoring and Kram’s theory of
mentoring which has been instrumental in understanding the purpose of mentoring and the
various roles and functions of mentoring. A discussion of various types of mentoring follows,
providing a brief introduction of the history of mentoring, and continues with an exploration of
benefits and challenges for NTTF in mentoring. Lastly, I will discuss the elements of
effectiveness for NTTF that will be used to guide the study, in addition to Kram’s theory of
mentoring and provide overall recommendations for effective criteria.
Definitions of Mentoring
Mentoring is usually characterized as a process that facilitates the shared learning and
growth of participants, usually a more experienced employee paired with a less experienced
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 20
employee, in order to provide both with career support and psychosocial support in order to
advance the career of one or both participants (Kram, 1988; Allen, 2007). The definitions of
mentoring also range from simple relationships to complex relationship constellations (Sorcinelli
& Yun, 2007). The most frequent definition in the literature, though, is a relationship between a
more experienced mentor and a less experienced person for the purpose of helping and
developing the less experienced person’s career with support, encouragement, and knowledge
(Zellers et al., 2008). Mentors are knowledgeable in their respective fields and of the political
environment of the organizations in which they work, are empathetic and patient, lead by
example, encourage professional behavior in others, and help build the self-efficacy of their
colleagues (Zellers et al., 2008).
Just as the definition varies, there is no universally accepted definition of the roles and
functions of mentoring (Sorcinelli & Yun, 2007). Hansford, Tennet, and Ehrich (2003), in a
meta-analysis of 300 research-based articles, report 90 percent of the studies attribute positive
outcomes to mentoring (Mullen, 2009). Recipients of mentoring report increased confidence and
competence in job related functions (Allen, 2007). The relationship provides the protégé with
career and psychosocial support (Kram, 1985). It also fosters the mentor’s professional activity
and growth and serving as a mentor is a way to re-energize senior level faculty and to combat
burnout (Mullen, 2009). Institutions with high-quality mentorships report enhanced productivity,
greater satisfaction, and improved retention (Allen et al., 2004).
Mentoring relationships can also be structured as formal or informal. Among the
differences in the structure between formal and informal mentoring, are the aspects of
relationship initiation and the relationship structure (Allen, 2007). The literature identifies
informal mentoring programs as developing spontaneously, without outside assistance (Eby,
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 21
Rhodes, & Allen, 2007). The organization neither administers nor endorses informal mentoring,
and often permits a new faculty member to choose whether to have a mentor (Chao, 2009). Kram
(1985) identifies informal mentoring as evolving over several years, while formal mentoring is
usually contracted to last one year or less (Mullen, 2009). Informal mentoring may or may not
have pre-established guidelines or goals for the mentoring relationships, and the goals of the
relationship do not necessarily align with the organization’s goals (Gothard, 2009). In contrast,
formal mentoring is planned, structured, and based on the needs of the organization (Mullen,
2009).
It is important that NTTF participate in formal mentoring programs as they are usually
not physically available on campus to develop informal mentoring relationships and cannot rely
on developing relationships organically due to usually feeling isolated. Strategies that are
included in a formalized program structure include mentor training and implementing mentor-
protégé agreement forms which is helpful for faculty mentors to gain awareness of how to best
mentor NTTF and establish clear expectations in navigating the mentoring relationship.
Research on mentoring, and faculty mentoring in particular, has only been published
during the last approximately thirty years; and while much is known about mentoring, many
aspects still remain unclear (Mullin, 2009). The mentoring relationship itself has been well-
researched, beginning with Kram’s (1988) seminal work on the phases of the relationship. In
subsequent years the impact of the psychosocial and career functions of mentoring partnerships
has been well documented in studies such as the meta-analysis on career functions conducted by
Allen, Eby, Poteet, Lentz and Lima (2004) and the study conducted by Noe (1988) on
psychosocial benefits (Mullen, 2009). Additionally, many research articles, such as those by
Wang and Odell (2002) on mentor training and the literature review by Girves et al. (2005), have
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 22
been published that provide strategies for creating effective mentoring programs (Mullin, 2009).
Currently, limited empirical research exists on faculty mentoring programs in higher
education (De Janasz and Sullivan, 2004). The research that does exist in the university setting
focuses primarily on: (a) mentor preparation, (b) psychosocial functions (Cawyer et al., 2002);
and (c) career functions such as tenure attainment by focusing on research and publishing (Allen
et al., 2004). Also, studies that have examined mentoring for NTTF usually exist at the
community colleges and not four-year universities. Lottero-Perdue and Fifield (2009) developed
a conceptual framework for higher education faculty mentoring that captures diverse conceptions
of faculty mentoring, but their framework mostly reflects the characteristics of institutionally
administered mentoring programs that connect senior and junior faculty members to help junior
colleagues achieve promotion and tenure which does not apply to NTTF (Nilson, 2010). This
framework is also designed to be broad so that it can inform design decisions in various kinds of
approaches but creates a challenge when trying to apply it to effective mentoring programs for
NTTF.
De Janasz and Sullivan (2004) propose three reasons for the gap of empirical research on
faculty mentoring programs, the first being the presumption “that faculty are well prepared for
their careers and therefore do not require a mentor” (p. 264). Second, De Janasz and Sullivan
(2004) suggest a belief by some that faculty mentoring is not needed for career advancement
(from academics to administration) because college administrators and faculty members usually
have similar educational backgrounds and work experiences. Third, “the tenure track academic
career ladder … does not parallel the traditional, multi-layered organizational hierarchy” (p.265).
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 23
Kram’s Theory of Mentoring
Kram’s (1985) mentor role theory has provided the basis for much of the research
conducted on the topic of mentoring. In the theory espoused by Kram (1983,1985), mentoring
can be categorized as career or psychosocial and distinct phases of mentoring occur. As a result
of a five year longitudinal study of eighteen mentoring relationships between managers at a
public utility company, Kram (1983) identified four stages in a mentoring relationship: initiation,
cultivation, separation, and redefinition. The mentor-protégé relationship is formed during the
initiation phase, with both parties are curious as to what the other brings (Chao, 1997). The
cultivation phase is the time when “the mentorship partners learn more about each other’s
capabilities and optimize the benefits of participating in the mentorship” (Chao, 1997, p. 16). As
implied by the name, during the separation phase the mentee breaks away from the partnership
and each partner may experience some anxiety (Chao, 1997). The final phase, redefinition,
involves the renegotiation of the relationship, from a mentorship to a peer-relationship.
Kram (1983) also identified functions of mentoring that occur during the phases of a
mentorship. Career functions, which may include “sponsorship, coaching, protection, exposure-
and-visibility, and challenging work assignments” (p. 613), help the mentee to learn “the ropes
of organizational life and [to prepare] for advancement opportunities” (p.614). Psychosocial
functions, which may include “role modeling, acceptance-and confirmation, counseling, and
friendship” (p. 614), help the mentee to experience an enhanced “sense of competence,
confidence, and effectiveness” (p. 614). Kram (1983) reported that mentors received recognition
for helping the newcomers and experienced personal satisfaction from helping others to be
successful in the organization. The career functions occur before the psychosocial functions
during the initiation phase, and both are at their peak during cultivation (Kram, 1983).
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 24
Kram's mentoring model is diagrammed below:
Table 1. Kram's Mentoring Model
Function Purpose Behavior
Career
For hierarchical
advancement in
organization
-coaching and sponsoring their
achievement
-increasing positive exposure and visibility
-offering protection and challenging
assignments
Psychosocial
To enhance professional
and personal growth,
self-worth, and self-
efficacy
-offer acceptance and confirmation
-provide counseling, friendship, role-
modeling
Mentoring theory and theoretical extensions of mentoring theory to formal mentoring
provide a solid foundation on which to develop hypotheses about how perceived program
characteristics relate to mentoring outcomes (Allen, Eby, & Lentz, 2006). Kram’s (1985)
pioneering work on mentoring relationships suggests that mutual liking, identification, and
attraction are key interpersonal processes associated with the development and sustenance of
mentoring relationships. Further, to the extent that the relationship is able to meet both
individuals’ developmental needs is a characteristic of mentoring. Mentorships help protégés
develop a sense of professional identity and personal competence and can provide mentors with a
sense of generativity and purpose (Allen et al., 2006). The psychosocial functions described by
Kram (1985) are key to the social learning process. Mentors serve as the veteran models of
behavior for their protégés and provide protégés with the rules that govern effective behavior in
the organization (Allen et al., 2004). Through friendship, counseling, and acceptance the mentor
also helps the protégé develop the sense of professional competence and self-esteem needed to
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 25
achieve career success (Kram,1985). As purposeful relationships designed to bring about
individual change, growth, and development, mentoring theory suggests that mentorships should
be inherently linked to career success (Allen et al., 2004).
Social learning theory (Bandura, 1976), can also be applied as the foundation of
mentoring, as the central characteristic of this theory is that people learn from observing others.
The observational learning that takes place is further characterized by the notion of self-
regulation. Bandura contended that individuals regulate their own behavior to some degree by
visualizing self-generated consequences (St. Clair, 1994). Social learning theory combines the
elements of behaviorist and cognitivist orientations, with the result being that people learn from
observing others (Moss, 2012). This theory emphasizes the importance of social content and
demonstrating the process of modeling and mentoring. For example, a new NTTF member
achieves competence by observing and being involved with an experienced faculty member who
demonstrates skills in teaching (Moss, 2012).
Types of Mentoring
Table 2 shows the four main types of mentoring: traditional mentoring, peer mentoring,
psycho-social and career-related and the characteristics that encompass each type. Burlew (1991)
claims that three types of mentoring relationships exist. A mentor may serve as a trainer, who
facilitates the protégé’s mastery of a job; as an educator, preparing the protégé for a new position
or new responsibilities; or, as a developer, facilitating the protégé’s growth (Burlew, 1991).
Phillips-Jones (1982) identified six types of mentors ranging from the traditional mentor who
serves as an advocate, educator, and constant presence in the protégé’s life, to the invisible
godparent, an individual who works behind the scenes on the protégé’s behalf (Allen, Lentz &
Lima, 2004). Each type uses her/his resources (e.g., financial support, influence, etc.) to facilitate
the novice’s success. In a mentoring relationship, as in any relationship, it is presumed that both
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 26
mentors and protégés develop expectations for their mentoring partners and exchange behaviors
throughout the relationship. (Young & Perrewe, 2004, p.104).
Peer mentoring, sometimes referred to as peer coaching or sometimes as just peer
relationships can be thought of as a response to traditional mentoring (Russell & Adams, 1997).
Like traditional mentoring, peer mentoring is said to promote career enhancement and
psychosocial well-being (Campbell, Angelique, Bootsmiller, & Davidson, 2000). However,
based upon their structural underpinnings, there are significant differences between traditional
mentoring and peer mentoring (Campbell et al., 2000). For example, peer mentoring involves
participants who are roughly equal in terms of age, experience, rank, and/or position along
hierarchical levels within their institution. Accordingly, mutuality, rather than complementarity
may be said to characterize such relationships; i.e., all participants usually have something of
value to contribute and gain from each other (Campbell et al., 2000). While it is encouraged to
have full-time tenured and tenure track faculty mentor NTTF, it may also be useful to have full-
time NTTF mentor other NTTF as they can relate to their NTTF peers and the dynamic would
not be so hierarchical. In addition, although peer mentoring is more flexible than traditional
mentoring, it is still usually a formal arrangement with relatively well-defined boundaries.
Table 2: Characteristics of Different Types of Mentoring
Traditional
Mentoring
Peer Mentoring Psycho-social Career-Related
Single dyadic (one-on
one)
Multiple dyadic
(duos, trios or
group)
Listening, caring Coaching
Hierarchical Multilevel Encouragement Work-related
Wider gaps in age Close in age Friendship Influencing others
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 27
Complementarity Mutuality Identity and
competence
Transmission of
professional ethics
There are several distinct yet interwoven functions provided by mentors to protégés.
Kram (1985) noted that these functions cluster within two primary domains: the career and the
psychosocial. Career functions are typically focused on career development and include aspects
of the mentorship that enhance “learning the ropes” and preparing for advancement. Career
functions include sponsorship, exposure and visibility, coaching, protection, provision of
challenging assignments, and transmission of applied professional ethics (Kram, 1985).
Psychosocial functions enhance the protégé’s sense of competence, identity, and work-role
effectiveness. Psychosocial functions include role modeling, acceptance and confirmation,
counseling, and friendship (mutuality). This distinction in mentor functions has received
considerable theoretical and empirical support, and skillful mentors seamlessly blend these
functions as they work with their protégé (Clark et al., 2000; Kram, 1985).
Several specific processes help explain why mentoring relationships relate to the
protégé’s career success (Allen et al., 2004). First, the mentorship serves as a mechanism for
information exchange and knowledge acquisition as mentors provide access into social networks
that include repositories of knowledge not available through formal communication channels
(Allen et al., 2004). Entry into these social networks also provides the protégé with the
opportunity to display talent and skills to decision makers within the organization. Because
mentoring functions consist of behaviors that prepare the protégé for career advancement, it
makes sense that those who have been mentored would achieve greater career success than those
who have not been mentored (Allen et al., 2004). Moreover, it also follows that the greater the
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 28
amount of career-related mentoring provided, the greater the outcome (i.e., compensation, job
satisfaction) realized. As discussed by Kram (1985) and others, mentoring is purported to
influence career progression, as well as enhance a protégé’s sense of professional identity and
self-competence (Allen et al., 2004). According to ecological theory, human relationships are
developed in the context of in-person environmental exchanges (Sands, Parsons & Duane, 1991).
Mentoring is viewed as both an individual developmental experience associated with maturation
in adulthood and as a reflection of the ecology of the workplace (Sands et al., 1991).
Despite the prevalence of research focusing on socialization in academic settings,
information is limited describing the practices and processes employed in the socialization of
new college faculty (Staton-Spicer & Spicer, 1987) especially for new NTTF. Moreover, it is
evident from the literature that full-time and part-time faculty need to be considered with equal
weight, and that, due to the increased dependence on NTTF at four-year universities, mentoring
programs can and should be a professional development option for these faculty. Some colleges
have chosen to implement mentoring programs in order to alleviate the difficulties involved in
the socialization process but the effect of mentoring on the socialization of new faculty members,
however, remains largely uninvestigated (Sands et al., 1991).
As an individual assimilates into a new work environment, S/he will negotiate her/his
role in the organization, adjusting her/his behavior in order to achieve membership status (Bullis,
1993). This type of negotiation requires that the newcomer be exposed to the realities of
organizational life. The ability to establish supportive interpersonal relationships, the opportunity
to understand the structure of the organization, and the learning of the day-to-day operations of
the work environment are venues for revealing the realities of work. These characteristics of
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 29
mentoring relationships are recognized as sources that enhance the newcomer’s understanding
of, and socialize her into, the work environment (Sands et al., 1991).
Because NTTF are usually thrust into new courses with new students when they first
arrive, having someone with whom to visit by the mentor can provide crucial and essential
feedback to the newly hired NTTF member (Diegel, 2013). If mentoring opportunities are in
place, the division chairperson then can make teaching more rewarding for the NTTF member by
stressing their value to the institution, actively acknowledging their contributions, and perhaps
even promoting team teaching opportunities between NTTF and full-time tenured faculty
(Diegel, 2013). If administrators invest some time and effort, they will find that NTTF are
valuable assets that produce significant returns (Diegel, 2013). If administrators invest time and
effort into each NTTF member, the NTTF member is much more likely to feel like an important
piece of the university culture. Investing in the professional development of NTTF can be an
effective strategy, as some NTTF seek full-time positions when they become available (Diegel,
2013).
Benefits
Mentoring allows universities to create an environment fostering personal and
professional growth through the sharing of experience and wisdom. Individuals are challenged
to pursue higher learning and development, and mentoring assists them in acquiring attitudes,
behaviors, and knowledge needed to participate as organization members (Bicelo, 2006). The
promotion of employee development through mentoring contributes to a positive organizational
setting and simultaneously increases employee commitment and loyalty to their development and
the organization (Bicelo, 2006). Studies particular to academe indicate that “faculty with mentors
feel more confident than their peers, are more likely to have a productive research career, feel
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 30
greater support for their research, and report higher career satisfaction” (Zellers et al., 2008,
p.34). Mentoring has also been found to enhance the teaching effectiveness of new faculty
members, ease their adjustment to the academic environment (Luna & Cullen, 1995), and relieve
the feelings of isolation and alienation that many new faculty members experience (Zellers et al.,
2008). While the benefit of increasing research productivity does not really apply to NTTF, the
fact that mentoring contributes to teaching effectiveness and alleviating feelings of isolation is
critical for NTTF as they navigate their role in academia.
Lyons (2007) expressed that mentoring programs enhance instructional abilities and
ensure students are receiving top quality instruction. At the pre-doctoral level, benefits to
mentored graduate students include development of professional skills, enhancement of
confidence and professional identity, scholarly productivity, enhanced networking, dissertation
success, and satisfaction with one’s doctoral program (Clark et al., 2000). Mentoring increases
team building and a sense of community among full time faculty and adjuncts. One of the most
important benefits to the protégé is what Levinson et al. (1978) referred to as support,
encouragement, and blessing on the student’s journey to “realization of the dream” (p. 98). That
is, a good mentor discerns a protégé’s personal and vocational dream, endorses this as realistic,
and offers an environment conducive to facilitating this dream.
Mentors are also likely to benefit substantially from mentoring. Overall, it gives the
mentor renewal and rejuvenation in their field, as well as professional pride that they are giving
back and passing on their knowledge (Lyons, 2007). Mentors describe reaping extrinsic rewards,
such as accelerated research productivity, greater networking, and enhanced professional
recognition, when protégé´s perform well (Russell & Adams, 1997). They also report intrinsic
rewards which include: a sense of contribution and accomplishment, achieving personal
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 31
satisfaction, and contributing to professional and personal development through exposure to
fresh ideas and new perspectives (Zellers et al., 2008). Mentors serve as role models that help
new faculty successfully transition into their new job (Wasburn & LaLopa, 2003). Individuals
who have had mentors report higher job satisfaction, compensation, promotions, and less work
conflicts (De Janasz & Sullivan (2001). Organizations benefit as well, with lower employee
turnover, higher organizational commitment, and higher morale (De Janasz & Sullivan, 2001).
Both individuals participating, and the institution itself, can benefit from mentoring programs, as
they promote the growth of faculty. Faculty development should be rooted in the values and
norms of the organization for all faculty, including NTTF, and should show through the
institution’s mission statement and core principles.
Challenges
While the literature revealed that mentorship has numerous positive impacts for
protégés, mentors, and universities, it is important to note that mentoring is not a solution to
every problem and challenge faced by an academic institution (Bicego, 2006). The ambiguous
culture and the pressures on balancing demands on time may prove challenging in the academic
realm. Mentoring alone cannot remedy all of the social and environmental factors, which impact
conditions conducive to learning (Bicego, 2006). Some negative consequences of mentorship
included the time required for mentoring, the possibility of perceived favoritism to the protégé,
potential abuse of the relationship by the protégé, and feelings of failure by either party due to
low motivation and willingness to participate in the mentoring process (Bicego, 2006). In
addition, while mentoring may provide opportunities for increased career development, there
should not be the expectation that mentorship is an inside track to promotion or a guarantee of
advancement within the organization. The focus on positive outcomes of mentoring may
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 32
encourage institutions to mechanize the process (Bicego, 2006). In addition, it may take a greater
amount of time for objective benefits to accrue which can be especially true for NTTF, than for
affective reactions such as job satisfaction to be impacted by a mentoring experience.
Mentoring can have a negative impact if expectations of both participants are not clearly
communicated. For example, the protégé may feel stymied if his/her career goals are de-
emphasized because the mentor has her/his own agenda for their relationship (Wasburn &
LaLopa, 2003). Individuals who need mentoring the most like NTTF may reject the opportunity
as a result of personality issues or the perceived notion that faculty mentors do not really want to
participate as mentors. As a result, mentoring programs may not have the desired effect if those
in need of mentoring do not participate. Wasburn and LaLopa (2003) found that mentoring can
sometimes fail to be successful depending on the characteristics of each member and their
relationship. Personality differences, failure to make clear goals, failure to allow sufficient time
to spend together, and the mentor pushing an agenda are some possible downfalls to this
relationship (Wasburn & LaLopa, 2003).
Because of the potential consequences it is vital to elicit participation of faculty mentors
that will be committed to NTTF. There may be unrealistic or mismatched expectations on both
ends related to the frequency and methods of communication and time actually spent during the
mentoring relationship period. Faculty mentors should be required to participate in a training that
provides a clear understanding of the goals and expectations of the mentoring program and
unique issues that are faced by NTTF. Ineffective mentoring can have harmful effects for NTTF
as they will continue to not be socialized and lack the support they need to transition effectively
to the institution. Institutions need to spend time developing these programs that will help recruit
and retain new NTTF.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 33
NTTF faculty provide expertise in critical courses that perhaps no full-time faculty
member or staff possesses; their evening and weekend availability enable the institution to
expand class schedules to serve time-and place-challenged students; their passion for teaching
enable students to achieve “real world” perspectives; and they do it all for typically modest
remuneration (Burnstad, 2007). Since most NTTF members are employed in other jobs, often
have family responsibilities, and teach at irregular hours and locations, they typically lack the
opportunity to participate in professional development initiatives designed especially with full-
time faculty in mind. Mentoring programs need to be designed to meet the needs of NTTF affect
the professional lives of NTTF by providing support, fostering insight and creating an
environment that supports collegial growth.
Criteria for Effectiveness
Because mentorship involves mutual learning and leadership initiatives, it is imperative
for both parties to understand how the process works. Job satisfaction for NTTF can be improved
by ensuring they become a part of the culture that exists at the institution along with
understanding the values and mission of the institution (Jacobs, 1998). Developing effective
mentoring programs and making NTTF faculty feel that they are part of the institution can lead
to increased job satisfaction (Tomanek, 2010).
Successful mentoring programs articulate the roles and responsibilities of both the mentor
and mentee (Ragins, Cotton, & Miller, 2000). New faculty mentoring typically focuses on
developing the teaching expertise and course administration competence needed for tenure and
promotion (Hopkins & Grigoriu, 2005). For NTTF, since tenure is not an option, the curriculum
for teaching and course administration should be generalized to include NTTF. Mentors and
protégés need to agree to the expectation of their relationships (Allen et al., 2009; Bland et al.,
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 34
2009). Establishing the frequency of meetings, mode of contact, and duration of the relationship
at the beginning of the relationship helps establish expectations (Hopkins & Grigoriu, 2005). In a
study of negative mentoring relationships, Eby and Lockwood (2005) identified unmet
expectations as a cause of dissatisfaction with mentoring relationships.
Because of the complexities and challenges that faculty might face, given their
environments, a single mentor might be insufficient to provide the resources and guidance that
are needed in mentoring NTTF (Higgins & Kram, 2001). A network of multiple, diverse
mentors may be more able to provide the NTTF protégés with perspectives, knowledge, and
skills that a single mentor may not. In addition, multiple mentors may have more opportunities to
fulfill the career and emotional needs of the mentees (Higgins & Kram, 2001). The success of
formal mentoring programs at universities is based on how well the institutions can offer strong
programs that are clearly visible but at the same time provide non-intrusive support for informal
mentoring as research has shown that the benefits for informal mentoring can outweigh formal
mentoring (Eby & Lockwood, 2005). A benefit to informal mentoring is that those involved are
able to match up with partners who have similar interests and an interpersonal liking. In formal
mentoring, the mentors carry out the mentor role as a duty imposed by administration, not
because of any personal interest in the career advancement of the mentees. The lack of a specific
framework could cause the mentoring relationship to suffer (Eby & Lockwood, 2005). This is
especially true if tenured faculty mentors do not regard NTTF with the same respect and are
required to participate in mentoring to fulfill a mandatory requirement.
Adequate faculty training involving mentoring of NTTF includes building relationships
as an important and vital part of the process (Morton, 2012). “Mentoring between senior and
junior full-time faculty is a time honored tradition within higher education, but it is generally not
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 35
as common between part-time and full-time faculty” (Zutter, 2007, p.68). Assigning NTTF a
full-time professor in their field of study brings an opportunity to build relationships as well as
provide the needed information for new NTTF. Some of the specific benefits of a mentoring
program for NTTF are building community, life-long learning, expanding teaching and
classroom skills, and promoting professionalism (Morton, 2012). A cornerstone of an excellent
mentoring program is effective communication (Rogers, McIntyre, & Jazzar, 2010). According
to Lyons (2007), effective communication needs to be constant between mentor and mentee. The
feeling of being included and heard can be enhanced by NTTF’s attendance at department
meetings or through face-to-face contact with chairpersons or full-time faculty (Lyons, 2007).
Conclusion
Faculty mentoring offers many benefits for mentors and the NTTF that are protégés
(Ehrich et al., 2004). Mentors can become invigorated by their mentoring experiences and NTTF
may acquire new teaching skills and insights (Barker, 2003). Additionally, careers and
psychosocial development of both the mentor and protégé are edified (Kram, 1983). With the
increase of full-time and part-time NTTF at four-year universities, institutions need to better
prepare NTTF to acclimate in their environment. Lack of support will create dissatisfaction and
leave NTTF feeling apprehensive about their role at the university. This study provides
institutions an increased insight into how mentoring can be effective for NTTF.
The research literature commonly describes mentoring as a process in which one
person, usually of superior rank and outstanding achievement, guides the development of
an entry-level individual (Morton, 2012). Colleges and universities historically offer new faculty
orientation programs and methods to support academic advancement of new NTTF.
Mentorship programs, if well-developed, can integrate new NTTF into the university
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 36
learning community and are characteristic of good educational practice.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 37
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the methodology that was used to collect and analyze data from two
university faculty mentoring programs for part-time and full-time NTTF. Detailed information is
provided on the research design, data collection, and data analysis. This study seeks to
understand the various aspects of mentoring programs that incorporate NTTF and the
characteristics, benefits and challenges that are embodied within these programs for NTTF. The
study also seeks to understand how NTTF perceive effective mentoring practices. This study will
analyze and determine the factors that influence university mentoring programs that serve NTTF.
The goal was to understand how a university department identified the characteristics necessary
to support their NTTF through a mentoring program.
Methodology
A qualitative, descriptive, methodology utilizing interviews was used to conduct this
study. The qualitative research interview seeks to describe the meanings of central themes in the
life world of the subjects. The main task in interviewing is to understand the meaning of what the
interviewees say, and to cover both a factual and a meaning level (Kvale, 1996). Interviews are
particularly useful for getting the story behind a participant’s experiences. The interviewing
process provides access to the context of people's behavior and thereby provides a way for
researchers to understand the meaning of that behavior. A basic assumption of in-depth
interviewing research is that the meaning people make of their experience affects the way they
carry out that experience. Interviewing allows us to put behavior in context and provides access
to understanding people’s actions (Seidman, 1998, p. 4). I sought to understand how mentoring
programs can support non-tenure track faculty.
An interview study methodology was selected to understand and describe the
characteristics of mentoring programs targeted to NTTF. The interview study approach is meant
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 38
to address questions that reveal findings specific to the context of the study (Patton, 2002).
Patton (1990) identifies three basic types of qualitative interviewing for research or evaluation:
the informal conversational interview, the interview guide approach, and the standardized open-
ended interview. Although these types vary in the format and structure of questioning, they have
in common the fact that the participant's responses are open-ended and not restricted to choices
provided by the interviewer. Patton states that qualitative researchers “try to develop a complex
picture of the problem or issue under study. This involves reporting multiple perspectives,
identifying the many factors involved in a situation, and generally sketching the picture that
emerges (Patton, 2002, p. 39). Thus, since the object of the study was to explore an issue or
phenomenon involving complex human relations and interactions, the study called for a
qualitative research design.
The purpose of my study was to conduct an in-depth examination of the policies,
practices and principles that support NTTF through mentoring programs at two institutions. An
interview study was utilized to provide rich data describing the creation and implementation of
mentoring programs targeted to NTTF. Furthermore, the use of an interview study was most
appropriate since getting the story behind a participant’s experiences can be done by pursuing in-
depth information around the topic of faculty mentoring. Meaning is not "just the facts," but
rather the understandings one has that are specific to the individual (what was said) yet transcend
the specific, which is the relation between what was said, how it was said, what the listener was
attempting to ask or hear, what the speaker was attempting to convey or say (Dilley, 2004). Thus,
the participant’s relationships, functions, and roles, associated with mentoring, will be explored
in depth through the compilation of rich, deep, and descriptive data gathered through interviews,
(Creswell, 2009).
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 39
Qualitative methodology is preferred when conducting exploratory studies because it
allows for the identification of anticipated phenomena and influences (Maxwell, 2011). Creswell
(2009) stated that qualitative methodology allows the researcher to focus on learning the
meaning that the participants have about the issue and provides a holistic account of the
phenomena being studied. My goal is to understand the components of established mentoring
programs at four-year institutions that include part-time and full-time NTTF. Further
justification for utilizing the qualitative paradigm was illustrated by Patton (2002) who expresses
the importance of getting “close enough to the people and situation being studied to personally
understand in depth the details of what goes on” (p. 28). Qualitative inquiry helps explore how
mentors and mentees experience mentoring using their own words instead of carefully worded
surveys that attempt to disclose these perceived experiences (Creswell, 2007; Merriam, 1998).
Qualitative research is an appropriate research approach when the goal of inquiry is to
create, “an intensive description, holistic description and analysis of a single instance,
phenomenon, or social unit,” (Merriam, 1998, p. 27). The characteristics of qualitative research
include: taking place in the natural setting, and employing multiple methods of data collection
that are inductive, emergent, interpretive, and holistic (Creswell, 2007). Qualitative methodology
is preferred when conducting exploratory studies because it allows for the identification of
unanticipated phenomena and influences (Maxwell, 2011).
Qualitative interviewing is a way of finding out what others feel and think about their
worlds. Through qualitative interviews one can understand experiences and reconstruct events in
which S/he did not participate (Dilley, 2004). In this study I sought to provide multiple
perspectives and determined from corroborating sources of data, the similar or dissimilar
elements of each, which will allow the reader to modify generalizations and determine the
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 40
significance, triviality, or meaning of those experiences for their own lives.
Site Selection
Creswell (2009) identified that purposefully selecting sites or individuals is the first step
in qualitative data collection procedures because these individuals will best help the researcher
understand the phenomena under analysis. The sampling strategy used in this study was
purposeful sampling. “Information rich cases” (Patton, 2002, p. 40) are specifically selected for
the in-depth information that would provide data towards answering the research questions in
this study. According to Patton (2002), “information-rich cases are those from which one can
learn a great deal about issues of central importance to the purpose of the research, thus the term
purposeful sampling” (p. 46). According to the literature, faculty mentoring programs for social
work and nursing programs are prevalent as a majority of the faculty that receive mentoring are
within these programs, and are clinical faculty and typically classified as NTTF (Noble, 2000).
The institutional sites selected for this case study and the faculty and administrators
selected were purposefully sampled. For my site selection I studied the faculty mentoring
programs at two different campuses: USC (University of Southern California) School of Social
Work (SOWK) and Western School of Nursing. The main criterion in choosing the sites was that
the department has an established mentoring program or makes mentoring available to NTTF
and that a majority of NTTF are eligible to participate in the mentoring. I chose social work and
nursing programs to study because both programs offer graduate level programs that typically
hire a substantial number of NTTF as clinical faculty.
USC is a large, private research university located in Los Angeles, California. The USC
general student population consists of approximately 40,000 students, 18,000 undergraduate
students and 22,000 graduate students. There are approximately 5,300 faculty of which 3,730 are
non-tenure track. Within the faculty, there are 1,944 full-time tenure track and 1,786 part-time
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 41
tenure track faculty members. The USC SOWK is selected as they have an established faculty
mentoring program that includes NTTF. The program hires a significant amount of NTTF as
clinical faculty and have developed practices to help them transition to their role as faculty. I was
able to interview the Executive Vice Dean and Associate Dean for Faculty Development in the
USC SOWK to discuss how the mentoring practices are implemented for their clinical faculty.
The mentoring process that the USC SOWK has in place is well documented in their faculty
handbook. Faculty coordinators who serve as mentors meet with NTTF about issues in classroom
management, examination protocols, cheating, effective lecture techniques, handling conflict and
other various topics. Timing of these meetings typically coincide with benchmarks in the
semester: the first 3 weeks, 6 weeks, and final examinations.
There seems to be three primary issues relevant to the increased use of NTTF in social
work education: first, an inadequate supply of full-time doctoral instructors to staff the rapidly
expanding numbers of BSW and MSW programs in the country; second, a larger net gain
financially to colleges and universities in relation to tuition and faculty salary ratios when
adjuncts are hired; and third, the release of tenured social work faculty from teaching
responsibilities to allow for increased research and/or administrative duties (Noble, 2000).
Western University of Health Sciences is a private, non-profit, graduate school for the
health professions, with a main campus located in downtown Pomona, California, and an
additional medical school campus in Lebanon, Oregon. Western University offers degrees in
osteopathic medicine, dental medicine, optometry, podiatric medicine, nursing, physician
assistant studies, physical therapy, pharmacy, biomedical sciences, and veterinary medicine.
With an enrollment of 3,916 students, Western is one of the largest graduate schools for the
health professions in California, offering 21 academic programs in nine colleges. Founded in
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 42
1977, the first program at Western was its medical school, the College of Osteopathic Medicine
of the Pacific (COMP). Since that time, several additional programs have opened. In 2011, the
university opened an additional campus in Lebanon, Oregon known as the College of
Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific-Northwest (COMP-Northwest). All of the programs at
Western have professional accreditation, and the university is accredited by the Western
Association of Schools and Colleges. The Nursing department at Western was chosen as they
have an established mentoring program for newly hired faculty. I also interviewed the Associate
Dean of Nursing who enabled me to understand the various aspects of the program.
Nowhere is it more imperative for current and future nursing leaders to initiate the
mentoring process than in the field of nursing education (Glynn, 2003). During the 1960’s, the
surgeon general documented the need to triple the number of nurses prepared as educators
(master’s and doctoral levels) by the year 1970. With an aging faculty population and a predicted
shortage of experienced and appropriately prepared replacement faculty for the new millennium,
mentor relationships helped bridge the gap by attracting nurses to the field and easing the
transition (Glynn, 2003).
Participants
The participants that were recruited for this interview study were administrators and
NTTF from USC School of Social Work and Western School of Nursing. One of my goals was
to interview the faculty mentors to the NTTF so that I could capture the dynamics of mentoring
pairs but unfortunately this was not possible. Since participation in the study was voluntary, I
was limited to interviewing faculty that were available and so was not able to interview the
mentors of the NTTF that were interviewed. Administrators at the campuses were also recruited
to participate in the study. Data regarding the development, implementation, and participation of
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 43
faculty mentoring programs were gathered from this sample. After collecting data from these two
campuses, I determined how USC and Western implemented their faculty mentoring program
and influenced the NTTF.
Table 3
Demographics: Overview of Participants
______________________________________________________________________________
By Sex
NTTF Administrators
Nursing SOWK Nursing SOWK
Male 5 (32%) 1
Female 11 (69%) 2
Total: 16 3
______________________________________________________________________________
Ethnicity
NTTF Administrators
Caucasian 13 Caucasian 2
Asian 3 Latino/ Hispanic 1
Total: 16 Total: 3
Average years of experience teaching at institution (NTTF): 3.5 years
Average years of experience at institution (Administrators): 8 years
____________________________________________________________________________
Table 4
Demographics: Overview of NTTF Participants’ Gender and Years of Experience
NTTF Administrators
Nursing SOWK Nursing SOWK
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 44
______________________________________________________________________________
Participant Sex Years of teaching experience at institution
______________________________________________________________________________
1 Female 6
2 Female 1.5
3 Female 5
4 Male 3
5 Female 5
6 Male 2
7 Female 2
8 Female 6
9 Female 5
10 Female less than 1 year
11 Female 3.5
12 Male 1.5
13 Female 8
14 Female 1.5
15 Female 10
16 Male 5
______________________________________________________________________________
Recruitment
Participants recruited to be interviewed regarding their mentoring experiences were
screened based on one major criterion. This is called criterion sampling wherein “all cases [must]
meet some criterion; useful for quality assurance” (Patton, 2002). The NTTF must have
experienced some type of mentoring from a faculty member or faculty coordinator for at least a
semester in order to be eligible to participate in the study. The NTTF participants for the study
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 45
were recruited for an interview with a letter sent via email introducing myself and informing
them of the general purpose of this study. Then, based on the initial response from NTTF that
were interested in participating in this study, I selected the NTTF which met the purposeful
sampling criteria mentioned above.
Once each participant expressed interest to participate in this study and met the minimum
criterion for the participant sample, I sent a follow-up email and confirmation to each individual
Finally, I either called by telephone or emailed each participant to schedule the time and date for
a phone or face-to-face interview. I gave each participant the option of meeting with me in
person at their institution or having the interview conducted via telephone. Most interviews were
conducted over the phone (16 out of 19) and the remaining interviews were conducted in offices
and a conference room. Administrators were recruited directly via email to participate in the
study, to understand how the faculty mentoring programs were coordinated and implemented.
Interviews were conducted on the phone and face-to-face at USC and Western and lasted
approximately 45-60 minutes. An interview guide approach provided the researcher with
prepared questions on subject areas that address the research questions. The design strategy
utilized for this study is purposeful sampling in the form of an interview study. I collected data
from multiple stakeholders, including the coordinators of the mentoring program, and NTTF that
were mostly mentees but also some that had experienced the role of being a mentor. Interviews
also included administrative staff (i.e. faculty affairs coordinators) that coordinate the mentoring
process. I interviewed a total of 19 individuals (11 from Western and 9 from USC). This
included 16 NTTF participants and 3 administrative staff members that coordinated the faculty
mentoring program for each institution. I was not able to have an equal number of faculty
mentors and full-time and part-time NTTF as mentees. Conducting interviews allowed
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 46
participants to provide historical information, and to allow the researcher control over the line of
questioning (Creswell, 2009). Patton (2002) stated that the aim of interviews is to gain entry into
the perspective of the interviewee. NTTF are sensitive to their needs, work-life, goals,
challenges and particular contexts that may not be completely understood by other faculty and
administration so it was important to gain insight into their opinions regarding mentoring
programs that incorporate them.
The purpose of interviews for faculty mentees was to discover how their experience was
in the faculty mentoring program and whether their experience was beneficial in meeting their
needs as NTTF and helped address the challenges they face as NTTF. Areas of particular interest
included: the effectiveness of the mentor, the relationship with their mentor and if it made a
difference in their career intentions, and how, the mentor contributed to their experience
positively or negatively as a NTTF.
The coordinator was responsible for policies and practices for the department, so it was
important to collect data on his/her perception of how the mentoring program supports NTTF. In
my interview with the faculty coordinator, I began with some open-ended questions about how
the mentoring program supports NTTF, how the mentors are selected, trained, and how the
program is evaluated. Since Wasburn and LaLopa (2003) found that mentoring can sometimes
fail to be successful depending on the characteristics of each member and their relationship, I
designed questions that allowed me insights into how the coordinator's leadership contributes to
ensuring the success of the mentoring offered at the institution.
Data Collection
For this study, interviews were the primary method for obtaining data for this study. This
methodological technique allowed me to understand how faculty mentoring programs are
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 47
implemented and what practices and characteristics make them unique to NTTF. The intent of
my analysis was to have a better understanding of the formal policies and practices that
contribute to a formal faculty mentoring program and how it contributes to the success of
supporting NTTF with the transition as a faculty member.
Instrumentation
Two interview protocols (Appendix A and B) for administrative staff and faculty were
the primary methods of instrumentation used in this study. This study was designed to probe into
the mentoring experiences of NTTF and explore their perceptions of the effectiveness of these
experiences. The interview protocols included questions regarding the logistical and structural
nature of the mentoring programs as well as asking if benefits/challenges existed and how their
experiences helped them to transition and be socialized to the institution. The questions on the
protocols reflect the themes reflected in the literature from Chapter Two which include:
characteristics of mentoring programs, the benefits and challenges of mentoring, and criteria for
effectiveness for NTTF. There is much discussion in the literature regarding the needs for NTTF
and the lack of support that they experience and how these issues can be addressed in
establishing mentoring programs for NTTF. There was also discussion of the potential benefits
that NTTF may experience during mentoring, so it was important to look at the particular
structural elements of each mentoring relationship. It was my intent that these benefits will be
used as potential benchmarks in the development of future mentoring programs for new NTTF. It
is also hoped that those interested in participating in a mentoring relationship whether in a formal
program or one that is informal will gain insight from these findings. These interested parties
will learn what is most beneficial to a protégé and how these elements can create and enhance
effective, successful mentoring relationships for NTTF.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 48
The interview explored potential benchmarks of successful mentoring relationships
specifically for NTTF by asking the respondents about their specific experiences with mentoring.
This will be significant as one of the goals for the study is to apply effective mentoring practices
that apply to NTTF. The interview questions served as a guide during the interviews since there
were instances when the information provided, guided further exploration into other relevant
areas. Each NTTF had his/her own unique mentoring experience so I probed into knowing as
much as I could about the experience(s) of the participants interviewed. This is an intentional
process inherent to the heuristic process of learning, which offers possibilities of idiosyncratic
understandings and meanings that would have been difficult to interpret statistically or
numerically (Merriam, 1998). Merriam (1998) states, “emerging insights, hunches, and tentative
hypotheses direct the next phase of data collection, which, in turn, leads to the refinement or
reformulation of questions, and so on” (p. 151).
These protocols were submitted to the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board for approval. The interview questions for the two protocols were developed and
organized in order to elicit responses connected to the themes of the theoretical framework of
mentoring theory for this study. These interviews allowed me to better understand how USC and
Western conceptualized the roles of NTTF and understand how mentoring practices meet the
needs of NTTF. It also helped me to understand the structures and strategies that helped the
SOSW and Western School of Nursing create its mentoring culture as part of faculty
development for NTTF.
An interview guide approach ensured that all participants were asked similar questions,
and allowed the researcher the opportunity to ask the participants to expand on particular topics.
Interview guides allow the researcher flexibility despite time constraints during an interview
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 49
(Patton, 2002). Throughout the data gathering, I analyzed the data by determining various
categories and themes from the data, and interview protocols were readjusted to explore
additional, specific themes further. At the same time, I utilized the opportunity to explore or
probe the participant to expand on a particular subject. Patton (2002) explains that interview
guides are useful because they allow the researcher the flexibility to make the most of limited
time available within an interview setting. Creswell (2009) adds that interviews allow
participants to provide historical information, a critical aspect of this interview study.
Data regarding the implementation and maintenance of faculty engagement culture which
include mentoring showed to be richest and most comprehensive when gathered from the diverse
viewpoints of these groups. After collecting data from administrative staff and faculty
perspectives and comparing it to data collected at each of the two campuses, I analyzed the data
from these varying points of view. The identity of administrative staff and faculty participants in
this case study were protected, as information related to the challenges of mentoring was also
asked. This might bring up negative feedback or feelings of not being well- supported which may
be a sensitive issue. Data was collected and stored in a secure and locked location to ensure that
the data was protected.
Data Analysis
After the interviews were transcribed, I reviewed the data. The review of literature,
especially Kram’s theory of mentoring, presented in Chapter Two was used as a foundation for
the themes, as the study aimed to add to the existing literature on faculty mentoring. This is the
traditional approach in the social sciences (Creswell, 2009). Coding is the process of organizing
the material into chunks or segments of text before bringing meaning to information (Creswell,
2009). Patton (2002) explains that once case data is accumulated, the researcher may organize
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 50
data by composing a case record. The purpose is to organize the extensive and voluminous case
data into a single resource package for analysis. The analysis was ongoing and data from the
interviews was coded, a main categorizing strategy in qualitative research (Maxwell, 2011).
Patton (2002) suggests that a thematic analysis requires the researcher to recognize patterns in a
litany of seemingly random information. Coding this information required the researcher to
organize information into meaningful clusters to reveal patterns, themes, and categories. Content
analysis was conducted to detect patterns and themes in this inductive method of inquiry.
To develop detailed description of the interviews, I followed the categorical aggregation
method advanced by Stake (1995). This method required me to get some sense of the
competence of the participants and piece together snippets of information here and there
aggregating impressions of the participant’s competence, which allowed me to make the
assertion that participants were competent and added significantly to the research findings. This
provided a method to pull the information apart from a single participant and put it back together
again more meaningfully and synthesizing it with all data gathered (Stake, 1995, p. 75). Creswell
(2009) explained that when doing categorical aggregation the researcher seeks a collection of
instances from the data, hoping that issue-relevant meanings will emerge. The process for
aggregating data is accomplished by analyzing the data and separating it into themes and
“...patterns, for consistency within certain conditions, which we call ‘correspondence’” (Stake,
1995, p. 78). These “snippets of information” (Stake, 1995) were pieced back together and
synthesized with other data, commentary, and relevant theoretical citations from the literature.
Validity and Reliability
Threats to validity are key issues in qualitative research (Maxwell, 2011). Maxwell
(2011) describes researcher bias and reactivity as the two specific threats to validity. Researcher
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 51
bias refers to the researcher’s own existing theory or preconceptions regarding the selection of
data that appeal or stand out to the researcher. Reactivity refers to the influence of the researcher
on the particular setting being observed or the participants studied (Maxwell, 2011). Completely
eliminating the actual influence of the researcher and researcher bias is impossible; however the
goal is to understand these influences and utilize them productively (Maxwell, 2011). In terms of
credibility, there were a few concerns associated with appointing credibility to qualitative inquiry
methods such as interview studies. According to Patton (2002) these are concerns related to
whether or not methods are rigorous, whether the researcher is credible, and if there is a
philosophical belief in the inherent value of qualitative inquiry. Being aware of these potential
threats to validity and reliability, I implemented strategies to lessen potential impact of these
threats.
In this qualitative interview study, the researcher was the instrument collecting and
interpreting the data. As such, researcher bias will be inherent in the data collection and how it is
analyzed and interpreted. By identifying this researcher bias before data was gathered, I was
aware of this reality and this strategy reinforced the importance of ethical and honest action. One
way bias was reduced was that during the interviews I made sure to ask follow up questions in
order to gain multiple views and analyze the data in an objective manner based on the
information available.
Triangulation. One of the strategies that I used in order to provide trustworthiness of this
study was triangulation. Specifically, I used triangulation to confirm the emerging findings from
the “multiple sources of data” or the multiple sources of information from the participants
(Merriam, 2009, p. 215). For this study, triangulation consisted of comparing and cross-checking
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 52
data collected from interviews. For instance, after conducting an initial interview, I compared my
memo-writing notes of the data collected to a subsequent interview with NTTF from the other
institution (Merriam, 2009). Gathering data from more than one source and striving to utilize a
representative sample of participants aided me in triangulation with the purpose of inspiring
credibility and reliability of findings. It is still important to note that even if methods are
triangulated, it is still possible that data sources will have similar biases and become sources of
invalidity (Maxwell, 2005).
Member checks. Another strategy that I used in order to provide trustworthiness
for this study included doing member checks, which is also known as “respondent validation”
(Merriam, 2009, p. 217). Member checking consisted of taking ideas back to a particular
participant for his or her confirmation of data meaning; clarification and elaboration from a
participant of their statements or stories (Merriam, 2009). Further, this strategy ensured internal
validity through the process of soliciting feedback from particular participants, as the findings
were emerging and in order to get an accurate understanding of the themes being studied. As a
result of using member checks, I reduced my misinterpretations of the meaning of a participant’s
interview responses. Additionally, member checks allowed me to identify and address any of my
own biases regarding any of the interview data which I collected, that otherwise, may have been
a limitation of this study (Merriam, 2009).
Maxwell (2011) recommends researchers seek not to verify conclusions but to test the
validity of conclusions and acknowledge the potential threats to those conclusions. Additionally,
Maxwell (2011) suggests researchers utilize strategies to deal with validity threats. By engaging
in intensive, long-term involvement with the data, I was better positioned to rule out chance
associations and refrain from forming premature theories. This long term involvement also
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 53
applies to interviews where longer interviews allow the collection of rich, detailed and varied
data, providing the researcher with a more complete picture of what was occurring at the USC
and Western campuses (Maxwell, 2011). Above all, acknowledging the existence of these
potential threats were helpful as analysis and conclusions took place.
Limitations
There were a few limitations that were anticipated for the study. The first limitation
concerns the relatively small size of the study sample of faculty compared to the total population
at USC and Western. My sample size of 16 NTTF in the Social Work and Nursing fields only
represent a very small proportion of NTTF. Comparing and contrasting the experiences of such a
small group of faculty that teach in graduate programs on the campus affects the applicability of
the findings to all faculty, especially the number of NTTF. Another limitation was in regard to
the universality of the study’s findings. The results may not be applicable to other faculty at
other types of institutions, especially NTTF at public institutions that serve a sizable
undergraduate population since the study focuses on faculty teaching in graduate programs. This
study may also be less applicable to faculty at two-year institutions due to the potential for a
variety of institutional differences. The final limitation was related to my own bias in analyzing
the data and framing the study since there may be an underlying assumption that faculty have the
need for mentoring.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 54
CHAPTER FOUR: RESEARCH FINDINGS
Introduction
This chapter presents the findings from the data collected from sixteen non-tenure track
faculty and three administrators that are involved with mentoring at their institutions. The
purpose of this study is to identify effective mentoring practices for NTTF so that best practices
may be implemented by other institutions that largely employ NTTF. The study utilizes a
narrative analytical approach to interpret data recounted from a total of 19 interviews with key
administration and faculty, examining the mentoring practices for NTTF utilized at two
university graduate programs. This study used qualitative data collected through interviews from
sixteen faculty and three administrators from two institutions, the University of Southern
California (USC) and Western University. From this assessment, the areas of analysis are
developed to represent relevant findings from the data. The purpose of this chapter is to illustrate
a number of themes/areas of analysis that emerged from the research by presenting the
significant statements made by participants and organizing them based on emerging themes
inspired by those statements.
Administrators and faculty that participated consisted of faculty coordinators and NTTF
in the departments of Social Work (USC) and Nursing (Western). The interview participants
possessed teaching experience that ranged from less than 1 year to 10 years in the classroom.
They provided their insights into the role mentoring played at their institutions and the perceived
benefits/challenges associated with mentoring that was offered. The main objective was to
understand the various aspects of mentoring programs that incorporate NTTF and the
characteristics, benefits and challenges that are embodied within these programs for NTTF.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 55
Chapter Overview
The study conclusions are based on themes or areas of analysis, which emerged from the
data gathered from the interviews. The results of the information collected during the interviews
are presented in this chapter. First, an overview of the mentoring offered at both institutions is
described including a table showing the various characteristics. Then five dominant areas of
analysis will be discussed which include: positive attitudes towards mentoring, mentoring needs
of faculty, structure of mentoring, effective mentoring practices, and how mentoring can be
improved. Finally, I will include a chapter summary.
As indicated in chapter one, this study seeks to inform administrators of the need to
strategically implement mentoring in their plan(s) for NTTF development and examine the role
mentoring plays in the socialization of NTTF. In addition, findings from this study could assist
academic institutions with improving socialization practices for NTTF. To set the stage for
determining their experience with mentoring and their perception of how it occurs within the
organization, I asked the participants questions related to their mentoring experiences and how
they see mentoring occurring at their institution.
Overview of Programs
Overall, the type of mentoring that each institution provided their NTTF was similar. In
the literature, two types of mentorship were typically described: a task-oriented relationship,
more similar to a preceptorship, or a scholarship-oriented relationship, similar to that found in
other literature (Turnbull, 2010). Scholarship or relationship-oriented mentoring that focused on
psycho-social (e.g. listening, caring, encouragement) and career-related (work-related) aspects of
mentoring were commonly described by participants. The mentoring provided was also similar in
that both schools incorporated traditional models where the format typically was one-on one
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 56
mentoring and hierarchical with more experienced mentors working with newer or less
experienced faculty. Below is a table that shows an overview of the mentoring offered at USC
and Western.
Table 5: Mentoring Characteristics by Institution
USC Western
Structure of Program
No formal program but mentoring
opportunities available
Formalized mentoring provided for
majority of new faculty
Number of NTTF in
department
150 NTTF
25 NTTF
Type of Mentoring
offered
Traditional; psycho-social,
career-related
Traditional; psycho-social, career-
related
Type of Mentors Faculty coordinators Full-time faculty
Duration of
Mentoring
Typically one semester
Typically one academic year
Goal of Mentoring NTTF receive support and
guidance with improving teaching
and management of students.
NTTF receive information with
policies and procedures to help
them be acclimated to department
as well as guidance regarding the
department culture. Instructional
support is also provided if needed.
Evidence of Culture
of Mentoring?
No. The term “mentoring” was
loosely described from those that
received mentoring from faculty
coordinators and many
participants not aware how
mentoring occurred within dept.
Yes. Incorporated into departmental
culture; almost all participants
knew mentoring existed.
USC School of Social Work. Within the USC Social Work department, there is no
formal mentoring program but mentoring opportunities are available to NTTF. There are 25 full-
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 57
time tenured and non-tenured faculty and approximately 150 part-time NTTF who teach in the
Social Work department. At the beginning of the academic year, during an orientation for new
faculty, they are informed about the mentoring opportunities provided by two main
faculty/administrators: the Associate Dean for faculty development as well as an instructional
faculty coordinator. Only NTTF identified as needing to improve their evaluation scores based
on their teaching evaluations are required to receive mentoring from one of the two faculty
coordinators. The goal for the mentoring is that faculty would receive support and guidance with
improving their teaching and management of students. Typically, the mentoring consists of
remedial instructional support as a result of instructors experiencing challenges which are
evidenced by low ratings on their student evaluations, or when complaints come in from students
regarding an issue related to classroom instruction. The faculty coordinators observe instructors
and provide support and suggestions for increasing their effectiveness. The faculty coordinators
will work with the NTTF for at least one semester and have meetings one on one with the faculty
member in person or over the phone. NTTF that are not required to meet with the faculty
coordinators have the option to request participation in voluntary mentoring with one of the
faculty mentors.
Western School of Nursing. At Western, a more formalized approach to mentoring
exists that includes NTTF being mentored by lead instructors. There are 20 full-time faculty and
25 part-time NTTF. The mentoring partnerships consist of a formal one-on-one mentoring
relationship typically for one academic year. After the duration of the academic year, the
mentoring pairs can decide whether they want to meet on an informal basis once the formal
mentoring concludes. A majority of lead faculty may mentor up to two faculty simultaneously
but the mentoring still remains as a one-on-one relationship. When a new faculty member is
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 58
hired at Western, S/he is typically assigned a mentor. The Associate Dean of the Nursing
department coordinates the faculty mentoring and matches new faculty with faculty mentors
according to personality and specialty. The Associate Dean who oversees the mentoring
describes it as a three-pronged approach. The mentor helps the new faculty member translate the
formal structures of the college, such as the policies and procedures as well as provides guidance
regarding the culture of the Nursing department. Mentoring is considered as both the nuts and
bolts of the job and the political environment and culture of the job. If the new faculty member is
already an experienced faculty member, then the mentor will need to translate how to do things,
but as a brand new faculty member, a whole program is set up on how to actually teach new
instructors how to teach. Newly hired faculty are usually informed that they will receive
mentoring so there seems to be a clear expectation that is communicated to them about the
mentoring support provided.
Program Differences
There were a couple key differences between the two institutions which included the size
of the departments and whether faculty perceived the department of having a “culture of
mentoring.” USC has a significantly larger NTTF population compared to Western. For example
when eliciting interviews for this study, the faculty coordinator at USC emailed the entire social
work faculty department to request interviews and at Western the faculty coordinator provided a
list of NTTF email addresses to me so that I could reach out to them personally. The fact that the
Western faculty were able to be emailed directly shows the main difference in how accessible the
faculty were. It was easier to contact the faculty and obtain interviews at Western since it was a
smaller department and faculty seemed to be well-acquainted with each other.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 59
There also a difference in that the culture of mentoring was more evident at Western.
Almost all the participants at Western knew that mentoring took place and that it was
incorporated into the departmental culture. At USC the term “mentoring” was more loosely
described when discussing their mentoring experiences with the faculty coordinators and many
were unaware of how mentoring occurred within the department.
Positive Attitudes towards Mentoring
My main objective was to gain a deeper understanding of mentoring experiences for
NTTF especially the positive aspects of mentoring since the purpose is to identify effective
mentoring practices. Almost all of the interviewees shared examples of how the mentoring they
received had a positive impact on them or that they described their mentoring experiences as
being helpful or valuable in some way. While the mentoring experiences varied among the
faculty interviewed, the consistent theme throughout was that the NTTF had positive mentoring
experiences and the mentoring contributed to outcomes that either helped them improve as
faculty or be more socialized to the institution. This was especially true for faculty that had very
little teaching experience or were new(er) to academia. Mentoring plays an important role in the
professional development of newly hired faculty as they may not be familiar with best practices
in teaching or other responsibilities associated with being a professor. For example, discussion in
the interviews confirmed that when a mentor provided support, the participants felt that their
confidence increased to take on new goals such as taking on a leadership role for a particular
course or pursuing research or professional development opportunities.
It was more of the culture of Western, where the staff members were very welcoming,
like I said, and then would keep you up to date, and that way it was more of a cohesive
education…So it was a partnership. It wasn't like, I'm going to be your mentor, I'm going
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 60
to do these things. It wasn't like that. And at other colleges, it's more like that. So I think
Western has a very nice way of – of coaching and mentoring their staff.
The comments of this interviewee reflect a positive faculty response to the concept of
mentoring and of the mentoring process and is generally representative of the overall views
expressed by the Western interviewees in this study.
The mentoring that NTTF received at USC was generally a positive experience as well.
Many of the faculty discussed how their mentoring experience with Nancy, one of the main
faculty coordinators, contributed to helping them to be more effective as instructors and that they
saw immediate results following the guidance they received. One faculty member in particular
sought out mentoring which shows that he was comfortable in taking initiative and knew that
Nancy was a resource that he could utilize.
I’m at a new school and wanting to acculturate to USC. And then meeting individually
with Nancy has been fabulous because I can talk about specific issues and whether – you
know, and how to handle, you know, certain – debrief what happened, sort of try to
understand, what I might do better or how I might improve to be more effective and more
satisfied as a professor. And honestly, it’s been enormously helpful and as a specific
example, I can tell you that I met with Nancy of my own instigation at the end of spring
semester 2014 and it’s all – I can already see how it’s helping me this – as the semester
has started in the fall, I’m incorporating things that – that I learned and you know, that we
brainstormed on, so I see it having an immediate effect.
Both of these faculty members shared how the mentoring they received contributed to the
acculturation process at their institution. Mentoring allowed the NTTF that experienced
mentoring to feel more connected to their departments which is extremely important for NTTF
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 61
so that they do not feel even more isolated. It also created a safe environment for NTTF to
discuss areas of growth especially in the area of teaching. Another NTTF from USC summarized
his mentoring experience in a very positive manner when asked how he would describe the
mentoring he received:
I would say caring, concerned, supportive, always made me feel better, made me feel less
isolated, made me feel encouraged, gave me sort of a renewed energy to, you know,
continue to improve my teaching, in a very positive way. Nothing but positive. Very safe
environment, things like that.
Mentoring Needs of Faculty
Though all the interviewees expressed a positive attitude toward mentoring, their
mentoring needs were very diverse. The role of mentoring in meeting the challenges and needs
of new faculty was identified by more than one faculty member. The mentoring needs of faculty
that were shared included receiving help with teaching, understanding policies, collaboration,
and receiving feedback.
Teaching
The NTTF at USC and Western are typically content experts in the areas of Social Work
and Nursing, so it is important for them to learn about pedagogy, effective teaching strategies,
and classroom management. The majority have extensive experience working in their fields as
clinicians but may not have the experience to be effective instructors. Mentoring was very
beneficial to almost all new instructors as it provided guidance with lesson planning, effective
teaching methods and dealing with students. One female NTTF from Western shared:
We would share ideas regarding different types of teaching styles, learning styles,
whether they be, you know, visual learners or tactile learners. I needed some mentoring
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 62
on that, the – the different types of cultures that were involved, working with students.
Several of the interviewees believed that a mentor provided valuable assistance with the major
faculty responsibilities. One male NTTF interviewee from USC also shared his experience about
receiving support from another instructor who he felt provided practical help with a specific
course:
Well, okay, so as an example, I'm going to be teaching a class starting in the fall that I've
never taught before. And I've been talking to the person who has taught it up to now, just
to get support with different activities that she's done with students, different strategies
for getting material across.
Overall, teaching was the main area that NTTF felt was where they needed the most
support and guidance and receiving mentoring in this area enabled them to be more connected to
the department and contributed to their sense of belonging. Because NTTF can feel isolated from
other faculty, mentoring was an opportunity for collaboration which was stated as the main
strength for mentoring. Mentoring programs provide a great opportunity for an experienced
mentor to help a mentee adjust to teaching techniques and skills that have proven successful in
the classroom. This was evident from a male NTTF from USC when describing how the faculty
mentor was most helpful:
She gave some useful feedback. I was pleased to get it. I want to bring students the best
possible learning encounters that I can and I wanted to have an objective specialist take a
look at my work. That was a real privilege to have something like that, so I was all over
it.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 63
Understanding Policies
As new instructors started, there was a need to have someone to go to and ask questions
regarding expectations for instructors and various types of policies associated with the position.
Most of the interviewees said that mentors in their department helped them with questions they
encountered once they were hired. Others said that members from administration, department
heads, and staff were very helpful in answering questions. During their mentoring interactions,
NTTF were able to gain valuable information related to their roles, relationships with other
faculty and program policies within their departments. Below is a NTTF from Western
discussing how different expectations and program policies were explained to her:
The expectations for my role with the students, there was expectations and mentoring on
the type of, like, the interaction between faculty and faculty, interaction with the college,
college policies. Program policies were discussed. And just – it was also at a – at a
county and a state and a national level types of expectations as far as curriculum
development goes.
Explaining information involved answering simple questions as well as providing
guidance to a faculty member regarding future career options as shared by a male NTTF from
USC:
As a result of finding out that I really, really, really, really love teaching, I've been
seriously looking into applying for a Ph.D. program. To make a long story short, I told
Nancy this and she was very supportive in letting me know that – that I'm, you know, I –
I have a lot of options as far as Ph.D. programs are concerned, and, you know, she helped
me think through how I should be much more realistic and how I think about which PhD
programs to choose, given what my specific professional goals are and things of that sort.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 64
So, you know, that kind of a conversation with her and – and other faculty quite frankly,
you know, in the school, has been very nurturing, very helpful.
This professor at USC felt comfortable with Nancy and he was able to share his interest
in pursuing a Ph.D. Nancy was a valuable resource in providing information regarding doctoral
programs and how to navigate the application process.
Collaboration
Many of the interviewees particularly from Western, shared how they viewed their
mentoring as an opportunity for collaboration and were appreciative that they were able to utilize
them as resources. Collaboration is necessary because of the depth of knowledge and experience
necessary to equip instructors to succeed. A faculty member from Western stated the importance
of being able to get information from more experienced colleagues and the need for mentoring:
“I’ll come across a problem and I’ll give someone a call, and they’ll be glad to answer my
question.” The importance of being able to use colleagues as resources was reiterated by another
interviewee: “I think faculty should feel comfortable to ask each other questions and to learn
from each other.”
A female interviewee from Western discussed the professional development
opportunities to collaborate with colleagues as an example of mentoring that allows her to learn
from her colleagues and share best practices.
Part of our role is to go to medical conferences and whether they be in the county and
state or in other states. And so several times through my experience, we meet at these
certain conferences, and we would have lunch or dinner or discuss informally, you know,
what we've learned, collaborate with each other.
Another female interviewee from Western mentioned how receiving input from several
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 65
instructors contributed to implementing best practices in her teaching. She acknowledged that
within her institution that it was a group effort for faculty to want to see their students succeed.
So I think that's one of the most useful things about mentoring, because it's one thing to
impart the knowledge of what you expect and what you're working towards. It's another
thing to see what worked, because you've got to be able to improve practice and use the
best practice, and the best practice is, a lot of times, information from several teachers
and then finding out what it is, and that's how come programs here are evolving, you
know? So I found that really useful.
Receiving Feedback
Mentoring provides important feedback on how things work, and it can help prompt the
need for continuous improvement as the process encourages review and revision through
feedback and ongoing evaluation (Dawson, 2011). An area of satisfaction which surfaced from
the interview responses was how feedback helped mentees to become more effective instructors.
Participants in the study indicated that they were always interested in improving their individual
skills and their overall performance, which was mainly done by receiving feedback and being
able to ask questions. Because they were engaged in relationships intended to foster success and
improvement, the participants did not seem to resist the idea of receiving constructive criticism.
One male interviewee from USC shared:
I was most satisfied with the feedback. I got immediate feedback from the person within
like 24 hours, saying, “Hey. You know, you probably could have done this a little bit
better or hey, you did a great job doing this.” So I think the feedback is one of the key
things, that that someone who kind of watches and mentors you should be able to give
you good, constructive feedback.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 66
From this response it is evident that not only is feedback important in the mentor/mentee
relationship, but “immediate” feedback that was “constructive” helped in providing satisfaction
to the mentee. Immediate feedback should occur within 24-48 hours according to one of the
instructors. Constructive feedback comes in the form of helpful feedback that helps the mentee to
improve.
Structure of Mentoring Practices
The mentoring experiences varied among the NTTF mainly due to the type of mentoring
they received which then contributed to the structure of the mentoring that took place. The
mentoring structures that were in place within the departments differed between the two
institutions, and it was evident that this played a role in perceptions of mentoring by the NTTF.
The mentoring structures that took place included formal and informal mentoring and various
types of communication practices. The mentoring that the interviewees experienced was largely
influenced by how the mentoring was structured which was also reflected in meeting the specific
needs of NTTF.
At Western, the interview responses were more consistent regarding having their
expectations and goals met through mentoring. The main difference between the structures of
mentoring was that at Western, the mentoring was mandatory for all new faculty and it was a
more formalized process with clear expectations for the faculty involved.
While it was generally described by the interviewees from Western that the mentoring
was structured with clear expectations, one faculty member however, from Western that felt that
the mentoring could be more structured and felt that she could benefit from more scheduled
meetings:
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 67
It would be very beneficial to definitely have more of a – a structured process. I guess it's
tough, I mean, from the university's perspective to know how much time to spend on an
adjunct faculty because I think adjunct faculty probably have a reputation of not sticking
around for a long time, so there's probably some of that kind of come and go quite a bit.
So, you know, I think – but it would be very beneficial for all parties involved if there
was kind of a bi-week – bi-month, maybe a bi-semester sort of a check in type of thing
where we meet up and – and, you know, but I think it depends largely on the – on the
personality of the person who – the adjunct faculty member.
A couple of faculty members interviewed at USC expressed that mentoring should be
more structured and formalized so that there could be a clearer understanding of both the
mentor’s role and mentee’s role during the mentoring process.
I think the – the most important thing is to make it clear to the faculty that’s – I mean,
this is going to sound really obvious, but service is available and to be assigned to
someone and I think it would be very valuable – I mean, what I do when I mentor is I
have a briefing meeting that just says this is my definition of mentoring, here’s how it
works. Here’s the dos and don’ts. Here’s the things that I will and won’t do, here’s the
things you will and won’t do. Is this something you’re interested in? And that’s about a
half hour meeting and – because people don’t inherently understand what that
relationship is.
This faculty member shared how he was not aware that mentoring was being provided to
him by the faculty coordinator and he elaborates on his recommendation of formalizing
mentoring by making it clearer about the expectations and roles for mentors. There were also a
couple of USC faculty that did not describe their experiences as mentoring during their meetings
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 68
with the faculty coordinator but were able to recall it as mentoring afterwards.
I don't remember it being called a faculty mentorship. It was really just, you know, from
feedback – I'm sorry, input from Nancy, that was triggered by my having had evals, but it
wasn't – it wasn't packaged as mentorship. When I first got that phone call from Nancy, it
wasn't done as a faculty mentorship program. This is – this is step number one, it wasn't
like that, it was, we received your midterm course evals, before you get your final course
evals you can have this talk, so, we're having this talk and – or something like that. It
obviously in hindsight I understood that professional development process to really be a
mentorship thing.
The mentoring at USC had not been formally evaluated in the last couple years, which
may explain why there may be a lack of understanding of expectations from faculty participants
as well as clarity about the direction of how the mentoring practices can grow and benefit more
faculty. The couple of faculty interviewed that were unaware that they were receiving mentoring
felt a bit more isolated but many of them mentioned how they were able to pursue informal
mentoring opportunities, which allowed them to feel more connected to the department. NTTF
that received mentoring at USC felt that it was generally helpful and welcomed the faculty
mentors in providing support to improve their teaching methods as that was the main purpose of
the mentoring.
Formal and Informal Mentoring
At both institutions both formal and informal mentoring occurred and faculty expressed
the benefits of the two types of mentoring that was available. They liked that there was a formal
structure to the mentoring which included specific goals and topics that were covered and
meeting times that were established. However one negative aspect for formal mentoring was the
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 69
potential of faculty in formal mentoring relationships who did not naturally get along, or having
to encounter personality/relational issues with faculty that were assigned to them as mentors.
While this occurred very infrequently, the Associate Dean of Nursing at Western who
coordinates the mentoring program mentioned several examples where she had to intervene
when issues came up between mentors/mentees usually based on personality differences.
Informal mentoring opportunities played a large role especially since they occurred more
organically and allowed faculty to form natural bonds with others. Even though informal
mentoring was mentioned positively, one drawback was that it required more initiative and for a
couple of faculty at USC that already felt isolated, informal opportunities were not available. It
was acknowledged by all faculty that mentoring-type activities may occur daily but perhaps they
don’t always recognize it as mentoring at the time that it occurs.
One significant finding was that the faculty with the least teaching experience were found
to be more in favor of formal and structured mentoring programs at both institutions. Of the 16
NTTF interviewed, 10 possessed 5 years or less of teaching experience. Newer faculty
expressed that they especially needed mentoring to help them transition to managing a classroom
and acclimate to the university culture. Several of the NTTF felt mentoring really benefit newly
hired instructors and help them as they grow and develop. One female interviewee from Western
elaborated:
I see that some of the other clinical instructors maybe struggle a little bit in that teacher
role, so it's difficult for them to kind of gear the students towards more higher levels of
thinking, towards critical thinking and problem solving. For them, sometimes it's just
very path-oriented, and so I would think that a formal mentoring program, especially for
them, would be really beneficial. And, you know, for me, too, but just the mentoring
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 70
program so that – so that they can kind of become familiar with some more of those –
those teaching techniques that I feel like a lot of people in higher education are lacking
because they are just not trained teachers.
While many interviewees viewed formal mentoring programs as a benefit, they did
express varied opinions on the level of formality that a mentoring program should have and felt
that informal mentoring by their department head was sufficient. One interviewee from USC,
noting satisfaction with the type of mentoring he received which was more informal, recognized
that others might appreciate a more formal mentoring experience:
I think that some people probably would do better with a more structured program. I
could very definitely see where, you know, that might be useful to some people. I’m not
one of those. I mean, I got exactly what I wanted, you know, exactly what I needed, and
always felt like, I could ask for more if I needed it. But I could see where people might
want a more formal program.
While these two faculty shared that formal mentoring may not be desired for everyone,
they agreed that NTTF should take advantage of mentoring offered to them at least on an
informal level. The goal of providing mentoring is that every newly hired instructor feels a sense
of belonging. It seems that it was ideal to have both formal and informal mentoring opportunities
available for NTTF. Having formal mentoring is necessary for NTTF faculty in that it was a
source of support that was needed especially for those that do not have the time to access
informal mentoring opportunities. While formal mentoring practices are important to have in
place and needed to facilitate mentoring, especially for NTTF that may not be as familiar with
other faculty, it was interesting to hear how informal mentoring was just as significant. Informal
mentoring seemed to complement the needs of the faculty well as it tended to provide additional
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 71
support in more organic ways.
Communication
Communication practices were a significant element within the structure of mentoring,
and effective communication was crucial for mentoring to work well in both formal and informal
mentoring. Effective communication allows mentoring relationships to share knowledge and
clarify any misunderstandings. It was found that mentors and mentees communicated in a wide
variety of ways and on different schedules that fit their demands and teaching responsibilities.
One interviewee from USC shared how the faculty mentor’s approach to communication created
a safe environment for him to feel comfortable in being open and receptive.
Her ability to listen and then reflect back on, what the issues really are and kind of
looking at them one by one, so that ability of listening and reflecting back with
clarification is very, very valuable. And then being able to go through each issue and sort
of talk about, you know, so what – what might we do or you know, sort of kind of debrief
issue by issue and in – in a way that’s so non – she’s very non-critical way, right, just
really sort of a – an approach that’s exploratory and supportive rather than being, you
know, heavily critical.
This approach was especially important for those receiving mentoring at USC as most of
them were required to meet with one of the faculty coordinators based on less than stellar
teaching evaluations. This allowed faculty to feel that the faculty coordinator was working with
them in a respectful manner instead of being lectured on as to how they needed to improve their
teaching methods.
Communication patterns and frequency varied depending upon the needs, the absence or
presence of the participants, and work pressures. Participants talked of meeting on a regular basis
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 72
either weekly or bi-weekly and that face-to-face meetings were preferred. Phone conversations
were mentioned as useful when in-person meetings were not possible and email was mentioned
by all mentoring participants as a form of communication that helped them share information and
solve problems. The participants reported that regular interaction helped them discuss issues,
solve problems and share valuable learning that made work easier and more rewarding. One of
the participants from Western elaborated on how she felt supported by her mentor and
communication was discussed as a major factor:
Oh, that she would call me every two weeks and find out how I'm doing and what's going
on, you know? I – I've worked at colleges where nobody calls, nobody says anything,
and, you know, I mean you – you're just told what you have to do and – and, you know,
you do it. And I have to call them, especially if I have a problematic student, because,
you know, I – if there's students that were problematic in – in school they are going to be
a problematic worker, you know what I mean? And you need to nip it in the bud, like,
right now. So that – they she was calling me two weeks to find out how things were
going, it was a plus.
Communicating well makes the entire mentoring experience more successful, as is
indicated by the thoughts of this female interviewee from Western.
Because I’ve had another mentor, you know, who thought she was mentoring me but all
of her answers were not answers at all but solutions for things that wasn’t part of the
question. So you can have a mentor that’s detrimental to your career, because if that’s not
your personality type, that it’s against every fiber of your being to do something that way,
even though this person has been successful and has done it that way, then you’re being
mentored by the wrong person.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 73
Effective Mentoring Practices
All participants mentioned at least one or more of the following: support, trust and
respect, willingness to share, and reciprocity were various aspects that contributed to effective
mentoring practices. Mentoring works best when both the mentor and the mentee engage
authentically and that a relationship was established. It was also noted that effective mentoring
requires time, mutual engagement, and appropriate levels of communication in order to be truly
effective. Many NTTF appreciated the time and individualized attention that they received in
guiding them through teaching and classroom management which were the two main topics that
were discussed among faculty and their mentors. Additionally, the interview participants felt that
inspiration and encouragement to take the next steps (especially in regards to their teaching or
research) in reaching their goals contributed to effective mentoring.
Providing support
Mentors provide an important sounding board for mentees dealing with students who
may, from time to time, create significant challenges to instructors. Without strong support and a
regular schedule of interaction between a mentoring pair, the literature indicates that mentoring
does not work (Grigoriu & Hopkins, 2005; Kram, 1988).
A common thread in all the interviews was when given extra responsibility, they felt
challenged and supported to meet new goals. One of the female interviewees from Western
described how good it felt to have a mentor who was interested in meeting her needs as an
individual and encouraging her with goals she had as an instructor:
I felt very supported and mentored in my responsibilities as a lead faculty, you know,
supervising other faculty. She was very helpful with that as well. And I would say just
also generally kind of, you know, validating from a – kind of an emotional support thing,
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 74
you know, like so – so those are two sort of additional things besides like mentoring as
far as teaching, I felt like she was mentoring as far as supervising other faculty and then I
just felt that she was also really providing some – some basic emotional support, if you
will, or counseling support in a way – not so much about personal things but just about
the – you know, the stress of being a faculty member and things like that.
A male interviewee from USC described the support that he received from one of the
faculty mentors, which helped him to overcome some negative issues he had experienced:
You know, she eased my anxiety over those issues. And I just remember feeling a lot
better after having discussed those, you know, concerns with her. You know, I felt like I
really wasn't the only one going through this. Everyone who’s a newbie kind of goes
through this self-flagellation, like, you know (laughs), like I’m no good at this, yadda,
yadda, yadda, you know, that – that kind of – that kind of negative self-talk. She – she
made me realize that, you know, that shit's real, everyone goes through that. Yeah. She
didn't say get over it, but that was essentially the message.
There is also a relationship between a mentor exerting their faith in a mentee's abilities
and the mentee's potential to accomplish goals and attain achievements that might have not been
realized otherwise. According to Day and Allen (2004), self-efficacy (personal satisfaction and
pride in one’s achievements) and career motivation are directly related to mentoring. The
research participants indicated that a mentor’s encouragement helped them to leverage their
unique potential to achieve greater career success.
One female interviewee from USC recalled how colleagues supported her, and how this,
in turn, encouraged her to continue in her authentic participation in the mentoring relationship
and in the life of the department.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 75
I think it helps you to feel included, because from day one I've always just felt a part of
the team. I didn't feel like a stepchild. I didn't feel like an outsider. I've always felt a part
of the team. And also, they hear you, like, from the first semester.
Even though mentoring was viewed as a positive experience, the issue of feeling isolated
from peers also came up. Faculty expressed that mentoring was especially important because it
was one of the few ways that they were able to connect with colleagues which was stated by a
female interviewee from USC, “Here’s another point which is an issue, is I guess it’s
professional isolation which seems to be endemic in this process. I don’t really know people.”
This was a powerful statement made by one of the faculty interviewed because it
reflected a common issue among NTTF. They usually come on board without being provided
with a supportive network and expected to work independently. While this can be the nature of
NTTF, it can be a detriment as it can contribute to isolation and may affect their willingness to
continue to work at the university.
As NTTF, a few of them expressed how mentoring allowed them to feel more connected
to the department especially since their faculty appointments were not long-term. For NTTF, it
can be especially stressful to lack long-term job security in their positions so it’s especially
meaningful to have mentoring as a supportive mechanism for NTTF. The feelings of mutual
support that come out of a mentoring environment afforded a positive work experience. Through
their common efforts, they develop an important support system that equips both members to
succeed with students.
Trust and respect
Interview participants frequently commented that trust and respect was essential
for effective relationships in mentorship. Most participants said a key success factor in mentoring
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 76
was feeling safe to share knowledge and experience, and try new things even if their actions
resulted in some mistakes, which usually occurred when there was a strong foundation of trust
and respect. An interviewee offered the viewpoint that if a mentor makes a mistake and
acknowledges their actions, others can feel safe to learn and make mistakes along the way.
Another interviewee added that a mentor “has to have a lot of trust and self confidence in their
own abilities”.
A relationship of trust and an “attitude of affirmation” were noted to be integral factors
for building confidence. Interview participants mentioned that they felt their mentors were
unique individuals and the fact that the mentors had an interest in their personal and professional
development was seen as a positive influence. This was explained by an interviewee from USC:
I didn't feel judged at all, throughout all the conversations I had with Nancy. In fact, I felt
nurtured and there was a clear understanding that she understood what I was going
through. You know, she explained her own experience when she was just starting out as a
faculty member as well, where she was just handed down this file books, and a syllabus
and told to teach. And that's – that's kind of how I felt myself, you know, it's pretty nerve
wracking but, you know, to teach that first semester. And having her share her experience
normalized my own experience and made me feel like oh, so this is what everyone goes
through.
Another interviewee from USC shared a similar sentiment:
I was learning – not only to – to manage a class, and not only to teach the material but
also manage a classroom of grad students, you know, not – not just undergrads but – it's –
it's pretty nerve wracking. And hearing – hearing Nancy share her own direct personal
experience as she was – when she was starting out made me understand that, you know,
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 77
pretty much everyone goes through this.
This was common among the USC faculty who were interviewed. The faculty
coordinators that worked with faculty mainly helped to improve the faculty member’s teaching
by sharing their own experiences. It was important that the faculty member can relate to the
mentor and know that they went through a similar experience.
Willingness to share
The participants also considered that being open and willing to share their weaknesses
and vulnerability, either as a mentor or mentee, contributed to building effective mentoring
relationships. This male interviewee from USC discusses the positive outcomes as a result of
being comfortable in discussing issues with his mentor:
It has been fabulous because I can talk about specific issues and whether – you know, and
how to handle, certain – debrief what happened, sort of try to understand, what I might do
better or how I might improve to, you know, be more effective and more satisfied as a
professor. And honestly, it’s been enormously helpful and as a specific example, I can
already see how it’s helping me this – as the semester has started in the fall, I’m
incorporating things that – that I learned and you know, that we brainstormed on, so I see
it having an immediate effect.
One interviewee pointed out that it is crucial to “feel like you are comfortable trying to
absorb whatever it is that is being mentored towards you so that the confidence, trust, and
support from others would make it be ok both in giving and receiving mentoring”. The
interviewees pointed to essential components of communicating, which form the foundation for
effective learning and leadership development. Factors found in existing mentoring relationships,
such as trust, safety, honesty, and openness in dialogue, were seen as enablers for maintaining an
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 78
effective mentoring relationship.
Reciprocity
Mentoring is a reciprocal relationship, because many times both the mentor and the
mentee learn together and on an ongoing basis. Mentees often possessed valuable current
knowledge in the content area, while mentors had the advantage in terms of understanding how a
particular department or program runs and teaching can be approached most successfully. This
was discussed by a female interviewee from Western:
We share very freely and if we got something, we're happy to give it away. So I don't see
a lot of holding on to knowledge, if that makes sense. I've actually worked places where
not sharing it, it gives them power. You know, as if it – if they can remain the only
person that knows this, then they have an advantage. That's kind of not what we have
here. Everyone benefits when we mentor each other, and when we all become good at
stuff. So, it's just a different philosophy.
This shows how mentoring allows both members to grow, and it helps them work more
effectively in the department to share critical knowledge that can help everyone perform at a
higher level. The reciprocal relationship in which all involved can contribute as well as benefit is
the idea that mentors are guides actively involved in supporting the growth of those who need to
develop existing skills or grow new ones.
The need not to bother another individual was alleviated when faculty felt they were also
offering something in the relationship. One female interviewee from Western described her
experience with an informal mentor, “We connected on a personal and professional level... It’s
just kind of a relationship that became mutually beneficial.” The interviewees’ responses echoes
research in the literature regarding how a mentor helps alleviate the stress, isolation, and
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 79
loneliness that new and junior faculty often experience (Pierce, 2004).
The participants whose experiences are reflected in this study found that mentoring
opportunities equipped them with key skills and offered support when they encountered
difficulties with the work. They tended to feel positive about the work, their ability to do it, and
the opportunities to grow in knowledge and skill over time because of their mentoring
relationships.
How Mentoring can be Improved
There were persistent themes regarding mentoring that emerged from the data, which can
be used to consider recommendations for future change in mentoring practices. However, the
interview participants noted that there are several challenges in terms of implementing mentoring
to support learning and professional development at their institutions, which include the lack of
time devoted to mentoring, that mentoring was not being used consistently, and that there needed
to be clear goals for how mentoring would be executed.
Lack of Time
The issue of time came up repeatedly as one of the main issues that needed to be
addressed when it came to incorporating more effective mentoring practices or the reason why
mentoring wasn’t occurring as it should. One interviewee from USC suggested that in order to
effectively implement mentoring, institutions should consider a key factor: “Time is a major
issue. We need more time to actively engage in mentoring.” Faculty described the need for
consistent, basic, task-related information or “learning the ropes” at the beginning of any new
role.
A main concern for the Nursing faculty at Western was the amount of time that has to be
dedicated by both mentors and mentees to ensure that the mentorship pays off. All leaders need
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 80
to understand the benefits of mentoring. Leading by example was of high importance and all
participants mentioned that learning and leadership development need to be demonstrated from
the top down. There were a couple faculty members that mentioned that mentoring is focused on
day-to-day activities rather than future planning. One of the greatest challenges cited by the
group was to have the time and opportunity to put their learning into practice.
It was also revealed that evaluations of mentoring practices at USC had not been
administered regularly which may contribute to the challenges that were expressed. This can be a
time-consuming process especially since it is largely the responsibility for the main faculty
coordinator, Nancy. When asked about how the mentoring is evaluated, the faculty coordinator at
USC responded:
That's a good question. I – I mean, it makes me realize that I kind of haven't done that in
a while. About – I guess two years ago, maybe, was the last time I did a survey of
everyone who had engaged in services and got some responses to that, but actually we
need to do – we have not done that in the last – I don't think we did it last year, we didn't
do it this year. So that is a need we have to address. That's a good question because our
lead instructors do a little feedback on the instructors they're working with, but we
actually haven't had the instructors give us feedback on the leads, which is something else
we should do.
Inconsistent Mentoring
Another challenge cited was that mentoring wasn’t used consistently. There seemed to be
a perception that formal mentoring was not in place where mentoring is mandatory but there
were plenty of informal mentoring opportunities. One of the participants commented that there
aren’t many available mentors and another interviewee stressed that “people who mentor may
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 81
not be aware of how and when to mentor to get the best results”. As mentoring programs are
developed, administrators should consider creating programs that are, as one interviewee
explains, “more of a formal mentoring program for all NTTF.” Task-oriented relationships were
primarily based on proximity and centered on meeting immediate needs, which may not be
considered as mentoring by some, but were described as such by participants at USC.
One faculty member from USC in particular did not feel that the support that he received
in receiving feedback regarding his teaching would be considered mentoring.
The only guidance I’ve had at all was the email and the video conference with Lizzie and
then questions as needed with the course lead and that’s it. And if there’s mentoring
beyond that, it has eluded me and I never heard of it. Nobody said that there’s a
mentoring program and someone will be in touch with you, or there’s a mentoring
program and here’s your mentor, get in touch with them. I don’t – I didn’t even know
there was such a thing.
Even the main faculty coordinator, Nancy acknowledged that the faculty mentoring
needed to be communicated to faculty more clearly, as there were a few faculty that were not
aware that mentoring existed. Or they understood it to be more of a professional development
practice. Since faculty that are mentored are largely identified by receiving low ratings on
teaching evaluations, other faculty that desire mentoring can be overlooked.
However, there was an instance when being formal was not the preferred approach by a
male interviewee from USC:
I think that's true, and the other thing was I think in my interaction with her, she seems
like a very nice person, is I was getting the school answer, and I – I don't particularly care
to get the school answer. So let me give you an example. The one question I asked her
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 82
was who was my boss. And that's a pretty simple question, don't you think? So she wrote
me – she wrote a page and a half explaining all the different levels of who I might report
to. And I laughed a little bit because it wasn't that she answered that way, but I think in a
relationship with someone I want to be in, they would give me an informal answer.
Lack of Clear Goals
The recommendation of having clearer goals to improve mentoring was stated frequently
especially by NTTF at USC. For many of the participants there was some confusion or lack of
understanding related to the goals for the mentoring. The majority of faculty specifically stated
that clearer goals for the mentoring needed to be communicated while one faculty member
wished for clear guidelines.
Since a few of the faculty at USC expressed how they did not realize that mentoring was
taking place when they were meeting with the faculty coordinators, it is important that the goals
and expectations are clearly stated in the beginning. This will also help for the faculty to know
what the expectations are of them during the mentoring process. It also seemed that even the
term “mentoring” was used loosely which affected the perception of the availability of mentoring
so it’s especially needed to formally state that the meetings taking place is actually mentoring.
There were a couple nursing faculty at Western that discussed the need for mentoring
guidelines that were better known to both mentor and mentee, believing that sharing the
guidelines would encourage the mentee to collaborate with the mentor. One female interviewee
from Western elaborated:
I like this – the mentoring is very open, and has no restrictions. But I wish I knew more
about mentoring and what was expected. I think this is important for the new faculty
member too. Do they know what to expect of a mentor? Do they know when to seek out
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 83
the mentor? If the mentoring goals were clearer, both the mentor and the mentee might be
happier.
At USC two of the administrative staff identified the focus of mentoring should be
introducing the new faculty member to the specifics of teaching a particular course and gaining
expertise in classroom management, while at Western the focus of mentoring includes both
teaching and guiding the new faculty member in ways to serve the college. The different
approaches to defining a successful first year for new faculty members, shows the different type
of mentoring activities that exist within the two programs.
It was interesting also that one of the professors at USC noted that the type of mentoring
that was offered was deficit based:
The mentorship program especially for non-tenure track faculty is it's deficit based, you
know, you – you're not doing well here, so here's this. So while that is perfectly
reasonable and there's a need for that, I have been the beneficiary of the value of that type
of mentorship, I think that there's room to look into – at least look into a complimentary
strength-based.
It is important that mentoring is communicated to show that it can benefit all faculty and
not just those that may be lacking in a particular area. This can help increase the value for
mentoring which can contribute to a culture of mentoring that is beneficial for all involved.
Conclusion
Though a number of interviewees believed that mentoring programs could and should be
improved, others were pleased with the mentoring practices currently in place at their
institutions. For example, one male interviewee at USC who earlier expressed being a proponent
of informal mentoring added:
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 84
I like the informal method. We did have some orientation via the administration. But
other than that, we simply depend on our department members and other faculty, staff, or
administration as is needed.
According to the majority of interview participants at USC, it would serve them well if
everyone in the department had a mentoring mindset. This includes full-time faculty to take on
mentoring roles and other NTTF to receive mentoring because some NTTF did not take
advantage of the mentoring offered. The interviewees’ responses provide valuable information
for administrators as they evaluate their mentoring programs. Some interviewees felt that
mentoring programs should be designed differently, depending on the size of the institution.
When asked about whether a formal mentoring program would be helpful, one interviewee from
USC replied, “Yes. Just to be assigned a specific person to ask all questions might help since it is
a large environment.”
In addition, a need for administrative support for faculty mentoring, not necessarily
through formal programs, but rather through creation of a “culture that encourages continuous
mentoring” and promoting an understanding that “everyone is not coming from the same place”
was described by NTTF. Interviewees also acknowledged mentoring as an evolving process and
expressed a desire for longer relationships with their mentors that would allow them to continue
focusing on professional concerns.
Chapter Summary
The intent of this study is to explore the mentoring experiences of NTTF engaged in
faculty mentoring within two university graduate programs. This chapter illustrates five areas of
analyses that emerged from the research by presenting the significant statements made by
participants and organizing them based on emerging themes inspired by those statements. These
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 85
five areas included: positive attitudes towards mentoring, mentoring needs of faculty, structure of
mentoring, effective mentoring practices, and how mentoring can be improved.
Participants in the study responded to questions designed to elicit their reactions to the
mentoring experience. The NTTF that were interviewed overall enjoyed their mentoring
experiences and felt that it was instrumental in helping them be more effective instructors. They
also felt a sense of belonging to their respective institutions and felt mentoring could help
promote a sense of belonging among new faculty. When discussing formal mentoring programs,
it was emphasized that an assigned mentor who would help them adjust to the responsibilities
and challenges of new instructors was vital.
What they revealed during the interviews, and what emerged as the significant statements
and formulated meanings were explored including what contributed to effective mentoring
practices. Faculty discussed how the following: support, trust and respect, willingness to share,
and reciprocity were the main benefits that they received from mentoring. They also shared their
recommendations for improving mentoring programs for NTTF which can be helpful when
developing mentoring programs for NTTF and being aware of their specific needs. Chapter Five
will discuss the implications of these findings, recommendations based on the findings, and
suggestions for future research.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 86
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Introduction
Faculty mentoring addresses numerous faculty career needs and is a developmental and
continuous process (Luna & Cullen, 1995). Research on faculty development and mentoring
programs has historically been created to fit this traditional definition (Sorcinelli & Yun, 2007)
and for the most part focuses on mentoring tenure track faculty. The current research provides
various faculty mentoring models that support tenured track faculty especially in preparing them
to receive tenure. With the vast growth of institutions hiring NTTF, mentoring programs are
needed that specifically cater to this population as they are often overlooked with respect to
mentoring practices applicable for NTTF. Unfortunately, academe has been slow to formalize its
faculty mentoring practices in response to the changing organizational dynamics and
demographics of higher education (Zellers, Howard, & Barcic, 2008). Studies have shown that
many institutions do not have policies and practices that take into account the unique needs of
the NTTF, therefore many NTTF work under inadequate working conditions that prevent them
from performing effectively (Gappa et al., 2007).
A review of the mentoring literature reveals several dimensions of mentoring such as
models of mentoring, definitions of mentoring, functions of mentoring, and types of mentoring
practices. Research and literature on mentoring practices can be found in the disciplines of
psychology, business and sociology, all of which contribute to the literature on faculty mentoring
in higher education. Most of the literature on mentoring in higher education focuses on the
experiences of the students, tenure-track faculty, or NTTF at community colleges. There is little
research pertaining to the mentoring experiences of NTTF at four-year universities, leaving a
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 87
large gap in higher education research and literature. This dissertation fills that gap by taking an
in-depth look at the mentoring experiences of NTTF.
The purpose of this study is to understand the characteristics of the various types of
mentoring programs that exist for part-time and full-time non-tenure track faculty at four-year
universities in order to provide a resource for universities that would like to develop one. The
review of literature on faculty mentoring was used to guide the study for higher education NTTF
mentoring that identifies and connects key components of mentoring as reflected in the literature
mostly from Kram’s (1985) mentoring theory. Kram’s theory reflects clear patterns as to how
faculty mentoring is conceptualized in the literature and can be a tool that program
administrators, participants, and evaluators use to adapt mentoring to the unique needs of NTTF.
Chapter five summarizes the results of the study and discusses implications of the results related
to mentoring practices for NTTF using Kram’s mentoring model as a guide and
recommendations for further research regarding best practice for mentoring relationships.
The research questions for the study are the following:
1. What are the characteristics of mentoring programs that exist for part-time and full-time
non tenure track faculty at four-year universities?
2. What are benefits/challenges that exist for mentoring programs aimed at part-time and
full-time non-tenure track faculty at four-year universities?
3. What do NTTF perceive as effective mentoring?
The USC Social Work department and Western University School of Nursing were
selected for this study over other departments/institutions because they both are regarded and
recognized as offering some type of mentoring for their faculty, which is typically made up of
NTTF. More specifically, this study addressed how NTTF experienced mentoring at their
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 88
institutions. The results of this study may assist higher education administrators with suggestions
for more strategic implementation of mentoring practices aimed at the enhancement of NTTF
socialization. The intent of this study is to share the mentoring experiences of NTTF engaged in
faculty mentoring within two university graduate programs.
Research Study Findings and Discussion
Based on the findings from the in-depth interviews, conclusions were drawn related to the
mentees’ perceptions regarding characteristics of mentoring relationships, as well as the benefits
and challenges of the mentoring they experienced. The main research question guiding the study
was: what are effective mentoring practices that can be implemented in mentoring programs that
include NTTF? There are several important findings that will help institutions with implementing
effective mentoring practices for NTTF: creating mentoring structures/opportunities,
understanding the mentoring needs of NTTF, and incorporating effective mentoring practices
which include establishing trust/respect and providing support. There were also challenges to
mentoring which is also discussed.
Creating Mentoring Structures/Opportunities
For the majority of the participants, they shared how they appreciated that a structure of
mentoring was in place which helped them know that mentoring opportunities existed. All the
participants stated that the person who served as their mentor, either formal or informal, chosen
or assigned, was helpful and they stated that the relationships they had with the mentor was
collegial and welcoming. Communication practices was found to be an element within the
structure of mentoring and effective communication was crucial for mentoring to work well in
both formal and informal mentoring. Communication patterns and frequency varied depending
upon the needs, the absence or presence of the participants, and work pressures. Communication
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 89
that was clear and consistent and communication styles that were warm and open contributed to
NTTF characterizing their mentoring relationship as positive.
Formal and Informal Mentoring
When discussing formal mentoring programs, it was emphasized that an assigned mentor
who would help them adjust to the responsibilities and challenges of new instructors was vital.
While formal mentoring took place both at USC and Western, there seemed to be some
inconsistency of the perception of formal mentoring offered at USC. It was clearer to NTTF at
Western that there was a formal mentoring process established. A few of the faculty at USC
expressed that they did not realize that the interactions that they were having with the faculty
coordinator was mentoring. Formalizing the relationship offers a sense of authorization or
legitimacy and, may create a different range of relational capacities (Dawson, 2011). The
participants that had formal mentoring described this experience as supportive, informative, and
encouraging. Even though it has been shown that formal mentoring does not always carry the
intimacy and long-term quality that strong informal relationships do (Ragins et al., 2000), they
were important in providing valuable support for NTTF within this study. Since NTTF may feel
isolated from other faculty and do not have the built in support that tenured faculty typically
have, a formal structure is highly recommended.
The informal mentoring also served a purpose to assist the NTTF with their transitions
into academia. If the participants felt that they had been left on their own, they searched for a
person that could serve as a mentor to provide the warmth and support they needed. The findings
of this study supports Thompson's (2007) acknowledgement that mentoring can occur both
formally and informally. Furthermore, the findings from this study are consistent with Ennis-
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 90
Cole and Lawhon's (2004) study that found that mentoring approaches can utilize the
combination of both formal and informal mentoring.
Understanding NTTF Mentoring Needs
The interviewees shared the various types of mentoring needs that were specifically
addressed, as some of these needs were associated with role transition for NTTF. The mentoring
needs cited included: teaching, understanding policies, collaboration, and receiving feedback.
For the novice educator, the gap between clinical expertise and expertise as an educator can be
improved with mentoring of new faculty (McDonald, 2010). Many of the NTTF interviewed
indicated how the mentoring that they received was instrumental for them since they were newer
to academia so it helped them improve their teaching as well as understand how to navigate their
academic departments. One of the significant findings is the importance of mentoring for NTTF
who are newer faculty and transitioning to an instructor role.
Teaching
The majority of participants cited teaching as the main area of support received during
mentoring. The NTTF in nursing and social work, as well as in other professional and technical
programs, are different from NTTF in disciplines such as the humanities and sciences, as they
are in general not familiar with best practices in teaching. The NTTF interviewed for this study
are content experts, but they need to learn about pedagogy, effective teaching strategies, and
classroom management, therefore mentoring is critical for them. Since it may take longer for
NTTF to acclimate to an academic environment, it would be even more challenging for part-time
NTTF to become fully socialized into the community. Many faculty appreciated the time and
individualized attention that they received in guiding them through teaching and classroom
management which were the two main topics that were discussed among faculty and their
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 91
mentors. In regards to teaching, interviewees admitted to needing help with effective teaching
methods, setting learning goals, developing and designing instructional plans, and understanding
how to manage a classroom. These findings support Gappa’s (2008) claim that most new adjunct
faculty are provided little, if any, guidance in the methodology of teaching and the perception is
that if an individual possesses the general pedigree and is a professional in their respective field,
they should automatically know how to teach (Wickun & Stanley, 2000).
For the NTTF interviewed at USC and Western, they enter academia as expert clinicians,
but may lack vital experience as instructors (Datillo et al., 2009; Janzen, 2010). Because they are
removed from a central academic hub, as well as removed from making most decisions about
curriculum design and other full-time faculty responsibilities, NTTF are reliant on receiving
instruction and mentoring from a full-time faculty member.
Role Transition
Role transition is the process of the new adjunct clinical faculty becoming comfortable
and confident in the acquisition of new teaching skills and the process of learning to be an
educator (McDonald, 2010). McDonald (2010) and Roberts et al. (2013) found that role
transition from being a practitioner to instructor was challenging and that it could be likened to a
career change. Similarly, participants of this study identified that there was a transition that they
expected and that mentoring helped with the transition. In order to learn how to be an instructor
and take on a new role, participants identified that initially there needed to be a type of mentor,
someone for them to ask questions, role model, receive advice, and be a supportive figure. This
was especially true for NTTF at USC as the mentoring that took place was not available on a
formal level for all faculty. Additionally, participants stated that even if they had prior
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 92
experience in teaching clinical education, mentorship was of great value to their continued
professional growth and development.
Collaboration and Receiving Feedback
Collaboration was also important as many interviewees expressed the need to collaborate
with their colleagues. Many viewed their mentoring as an opportunity for collaboration and
were appreciative that they were able to utilize them as resources. An area of satisfaction which
surfaced from the interview responses was how feedback helped mentees to become more
effective instructors. Participants in the study indicated that they were always interested in
improving their individual skills and their overall performance, which was mainly done by
receiving feedback and being able to ask questions.
Effective Mentoring Practices
The NTTF that were interviewed overall expressed how their mentoring experiences
were positive and beneficial and felt that it was instrumental in helping them be more effective
instructors. Faculty discussed how the following: providing support, trust and respect,
willingness to share, and reciprocity were the aspects of mentoring that were cultivated and
received during their mentoring relationships. Providing support and establishing trust and
respect were the main aspects that were repeated throughout the interviews when NTTF were
asked to share about mentoring experiences that were positive and beneficial. These aspects that
contributed to effective mentoring also played a major role in NTTF feeling more connected to
their department/institution.
Where mentoring exists, the climate of the organization is such that giving and receiving
guidance are embedded in the values and norms of the institution. Such interactions allow for
connections to be established which increase bonding and social support for the mentee. A
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 93
majority of mentees from this study reported that their mentors were accessible to them and
supportive. Without strong support and a regular schedule of interaction between a mentoring
pair, the literature indicates that mentoring does not work (Grigoriu & Hopkins, 2005; Kram,
1988). A common thread in all discussions was that when given extra responsibility, they felt
challenged and supported to meet new goals. There is also a relationship between a mentor
exerting their faith in a mentee's abilities and the mentee's potential to accomplish goals and
attain achievements that might have not been realized otherwise. According to Day and Allen
(2004), self-efficacy (personal satisfaction and pride in one’s achievements) and career
motivation are directly related to mentoring. The research participants indicated that a mentor’s
encouragement helped them to leverage their unique potential to achieve greater career success.
They also felt a sense of belonging to their respective institutions and felt mentoring
could help promote a sense of belonging among new faculty. It was also noted that the benefits
and effectiveness of mentoring requires time, mutual engagement, and appropriate levels of
communication in order to be truly effective. Mentoring played a major role for NTTF by
supporting the individual’s acclimation to the institution. Cawyer, et al. (2002) found that
mentees required clear affirmation that they were valued members of their departments prior to
participating freely and comfortably within their department. The ability to participate in small
talk allowed for trust to develop. This conclusion is also consistent with Kram’s (1983) and
Suplee and Gardner’s (2009) findings that the benefits of mentoring relationships included
developing understandings about the internal workings of departments.
Challenges to Mentoring
The interview participants noted that there are several challenges in terms of instituting
mentoring to support learning and professional development at their institutions, which include
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 94
the lack of time devoted to mentoring, that mentoring wasn’t being used consistently, and that
there needed to be clear goals for how mentoring would be executed. Also it was found that in
order to increase the value for mentoring, it needed to be communicated clearly throughout the
department and to show that it can benefit all faculty. This can help increase the value for
mentoring which can contribute to a culture of mentoring that is beneficial for all involved.
The findings of this study reveal that NTTF members prefer to be mentored both formally
and informally and, for the most part, feel a sense of belonging to their current institution when
the mentoring that they receive is perceived as beneficial. It was also very valuable for NTTF to
help them in their roles as instructors and socialization to the university. They also discussed
ways that mentoring could be improved as challenges also came up that made the mentoring
experience less than positive at times. As higher education administrators become more aware of
beliefs NTTF hold towards mentoring, they will become better equipped to design more effective
and productive mentoring programs that will integrate part-time instructors into the campus
culture.
Implications for Practice
The findings from this study may be used to guide departments in implementing
mentoring practices for their NTTF. The practical implications for this study include the
improvement of mentoring programs for NTTF and socialization for NTTF at their institutions.
Additionally, an outcome of mentoring NTTF may result in the improvement of the educational
quality that students are taught which will better prepare them for their future professions.
Defining expectations about the new academic faculty role is important for mentees as
they transition into their new roles. Successful mentoring programs articulate the roles and
responsibilities of both the mentor and mentee (Ragins, Cotton, & Miller, 2000). New faculty
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 95
mentoring typically focuses on developing the teaching expertise and course administration
competence needed for tenure and promotion (Hopkins & Grigoriu, 2005). For NTTF, since
tenure is not an option, the curriculum for teaching and course administration should be
generalized to include NTTF. It is important for new NTTF to fully understand their role
within the department and to understand what is to be expected of them and what their new
limitations might be. When mentors are truly available or accessible to them, mentees feel as if
they are socially supported. As a result, mentees feel less isolated, less stressed, and more
supported. This conclusion is consistent with what Cawyer et al. (2002) defined as social
support.
Because high NTTF turnover rates do not benefit educational institutions, this research
may also assist with recruitment and retention issues. NTTF members who are left on their own
accord to utilize their clinical expertise in teaching students may feel isolated and unsupported
without the provision of solid mentoring (Dawson, 2011). This could lead to higher turnover
rates if the teaching environment is perceived to be unpleasant and unsupportive. Mentoring was
found to be a helpful mechanism for NTTF to feel more connected to the university and remain
teaching at the university. It is important that mentoring is communicated to show that it can
benefit all faculty and not just those that may be lacking in a particular area. This can help
increase the value for mentoring which can contribute to a culture of mentoring that is beneficial
for all involved.
Mentors and protégés need to agree to the expectation of their relationships (Allen et al.,
2009; Bland et al., 2009). Establishing the frequency of meetings, mode of contact, and duration
of the relationship at the beginning of the relationship helps establish expectations (Hopkins &
Grigoriu, 2005). Mentoring programs need to be designed to meet the needs of NTTF affect the
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 96
professional lives of NTTF by providing support, fostering insight and creating an environment
that supports collegial growth. Meetings between mentors and mentees need to be consistent and
cover specific topics that that mentees feel will be beneficial in helping them improve their
teaching methods or enhance their professional development.
Although team teaching may not be possible for many organizations that have financial
constraints, connecting NTTF with experienced faculty so that they can provide teaching-related
or emotional support is paramount to helping NTTF succeed. Mentoring can be incorporated into
the departmental culture if additional faculty are recruited to participate as mentors. In order to
encourage full-time seasoned faculty to act as mentors for newer or adjunct faculty, department
chairpersons and campus administrators may need to consider providing some sort of
institutional incentives for full-time faculty members to accept mentoring roles. Incentives could
include a monetary stipend for mentors or some other formal recognition.
Cawyer et al., described social support as lending an emotional ear by answering
questions that new faculty have and helping them to neutralize anxiety. Creating an environment
of social support for new faculty mentees involves clearly defining expectations, inviting
members to participate with mentors. It is also important for the department to ensure that
mentors are fully available to provide mentees with opportunities to listen, give advice, and
provide feedback. This then helps mentees feel less alienated (2002). Leaders in the department
should encourage faculty mentors to create a caring and supportive environment. Certainly,
participants described their experiences within the relationship as helping to reduce anxiety and
uncertainty associated with the novelty of working in an instructional environment when many
mentees start their educational adventures with little or no formal training in topics such as
pedagogy, classroom management, or instructional strategies for exceptional students. This is
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 97
consistent with the literature (Ambrosino, 2009; Bell-Scriber & Morton, 2009) as novice
educators engaged in mentoring experiences tend to glean essential lessons from more
experienced educators, and these experiences provide crucial learning opportunities and coping
strategies.
Adequate faculty training involving mentoring of NTTF includes building relationships
as an important and vital part of the process (Morton, 2012). Assigning NTTF a full-time
professor in their field of study brings an opportunity to build relationships as well as provide the
needed information for new NTTF. This can be especially helpful for NTTF at USC since there
are only two faculty coordinators that participate in mentoring. Departments should establish
guidelines explaining the roles and expectations for both mentors and mentees within their
programs. Such guidelines can help facilitate the relationships between mentees and their
mentors. Furthermore, mentors and support leaders should receive professional development
about mentoring in order to develop better understanding of how to foster mentoring
relationships among early career academic NTTF and senior staff.
These leaders should also emphasize the fact that senior faculty are positioned to mentor
new NTTF and that it will be part of their promotion and tenure service requirements to mentor
new faculty. In order to foster professional advice, mentors need to expose mentees to various
opportunities for sharing of their knowledge about university and department expectations about
the instructor role. Mentors and departmental leaders need to realize that they must do a better
job with communicating historical information to their mentees, as well as sharing or identifying
current departmental needs and key organizational relationships within the university. The
sharing of this information can begin during orientation and proceed systematically throughout
their first year. Cangelosi et al. (2009) reported that faculty surveyed felt that novice faculty does
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 98
not have enough guidance when they first move from clinical practice into academia, and that
they often lack guidance from their senior mentors. Clearly, having mentors who are accessible
to the mentees provide an important advantage for embracing academia.
While most colleges offer mentoring of various sorts and degrees, peer mentoring offers
the added advantage of placing the mentor and the mentee on common, familiar ground. Since
they already speak the same language in terms of their shared content-area background, the
mentor can more easily and confidently introduce concepts surrounding teaching and
contextualize them, tying them to industry experiences. Mentees involved in even marginally
satisfying informal relationships experienced satisfaction with opportunities for promotion and
satisfaction with career commitment.
Ideally, the mentorship provided to the NTTF should assist the NTTF member with
feelings of inclusion, support, and resources to foster collegiality and professional growth and
development. Examining the outcomes of mentorship will add new knowledge in ways to refine
mentoring and make it successful that can benefit both the career and professional growth and
development of the NTTF, and benefit the student by improving the quality of instruction.
Feedback is also an important component of effective mentoring. In Eraut’s research (2007) with
nursing, accountancy and engineering learners, new recruits were more likely to be given advice
and feedback informally by those around them than formally by those designated as mentors.
Eraut asserts that “Learners need short-term, task specific feedback as well as long term, more
strategic feedback on general progress (p. 412).”
Findings from this study could highlight administrators' need for sharing the
importance of mentoring programs for NTTF in an effort to encourage more full-time faculty to
be more available to adjunct faculty. Additionally, administrators may want to schedule at
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 99
least some of the academic year's departmental faculty meetings at a time that is convenient for
NTTF to attend so that they feel more connected to the department and the institution. A well
thought out mentoring system that incorporates specific, measurable, and realistic goals based on
a thorough assessment of NTTF needs, regular contact between the mentor and mentee, and
open, honest communication is likely to provide the support that NTTF need and help them be
more socialized to the institution.
Implications for Future Research
This qualitative study provided insight into the mentoring experiences of NTTF within
two university graduate programs. The findings are subjective in nature, and the ability to
quantify the outcomes described could provide a stronger foundation for developing mentoring
programs that can meet the mentoring needs of NTTF, especially at four-year institutions. For
future research, it is recommended to include case studies that compare different mentoring
models during a longer time frame of at least six months to one year. This will provide deeper
insight to various types of mentoring. For example, some institutions administer peer mentoring,
group mentoring or online mentoring programs.
It is also recommended that further research focus on the role of institutional policies,
training and resources, information that mentors may receive prior to entering into a mentorship
role, and which may impact their effectiveness. Most of the literature on mentoring focuses on
the learners, which leaves the impact of mentoring on those who act as mentors less understood
(Billett, 2003). A comprehensive understanding of the needs of mentors and the most effective
method of training and supporting them could help institutions ensure that faculty mentors are
able to provide more consistent and effective mentoring services.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 100
Due to the lack of research on mentoring NTTF, especially NTTF in higher education,
there is a great potential for future studies that could significantly impact higher education and its
approach to mentoring practices for NTTF. To get a complete look at mentoring from all angles,
it would be interesting to interview both mentors and their mentees about mentoring practices
and experiences. Comparing the experiences and perceptions of same-group mentors and
mentees would provide a more inclusive view of the mentoring experience. It could also reveal
contrasting perspectives of the effectiveness and significance of mentoring relationships and
whether effectiveness may be contributed to factors that can be attributed to the matching
process. Information can be gleaned from interviewing mentoring pairs that may help to
understand the necessary qualities and characteristics that participants must possess prior in order
for their mentoring relationships to be successful.
Other interesting areas include research on mentoring and retention, comparing
experiences of mentors and their mentees and teaching outcomes. This study focused mostly on
mentoring experiences by NTTF and did not address direct links between mentoring and the
retention of faculty, however as the results suggest, there may be some connection between
them. In addition, it would be beneficial to explore in-depth the effectiveness of the various
initiatives directed towards facilitating mentoring relationships at all levels including the
department and the university.
Conclusion
Faculty mentoring is a common and powerful tool that can be utilized to help NTTF
become socialized within institutional culture at their universities. Due to colleges and
universities heavily relying on NTTF, higher education administrators may need to recognize
and understand the potential benefits that mentoring can provide to help NTTF feel the sense of
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 101
belonging and to reach their highest potential as instructors. The inclusion of NTTF into the
university culture will help with the transition into the educational role, improve job satisfaction,
and, influence recruitment and retention (Dawson, 2011).
NTTF will continue to provide a valuable service to higher educational institutions and
remain instrumental in helping them achieve their overall institutional goals. Based on the
findings of this study, it is highly recommended that universities establish formal mentoring
practices for all NTTF or at least create mentoring opportunities for NTTF as mentoring is a
valuable resource. These mentoring practices may be individualized to the needs of the NTTF
instructor to maximize growth opportunities, professional development, and foster critical
reflection on teaching and learning strategies to improve student learning. Implementing
effective mentoring programs, designed to address the needs of NTTF as they transition into
their teaching roles, demonstrates that institutions are committed to supporting their faculty
which contributes to an exceptional educational experience for students. Appropriate support for
NTTF may translate into better outcomes, which reflects well on programs and the entire
university.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 102
References
Allen, T. D. (2007). Mentoring relationships from the perspective of the mentor. In B. R. Ragins
& K. Kram (Eds.), The handbook of mentoring at work: Theory, research and practice
(pp. 123–147). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Allen, T. D., Eby, L. T., Poteet, M. L., Lentz, E., & Lima, L. (2004). Career benefits
associated with mentoring for protégé’s: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 89, 127–136.
Allen, T. D., & O’Brien, K. (2006). Formal mentoring programs and organizational
attraction. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 17, 43–58.
Angelique, H., Kyle, K. & Taylor, C. (2002). Mentors and muses: New strategies for
academic success. Innovative Higher Education, 28 (3): 195–209.
Ambrosino, R. (2009). Mentors as fellow travelers. Adult Learning, 20, 31–34
American Federation of Teachers. (2010). American academic: A national survey of part-
time/adjunct faculty. Washington DC: American Federation of Teachers.
Bandow, D., Matuszek, T., & Self, D. R. (2012). Contingent Faculty Members: A Just-in-
Time Work Force for Universities. Journal of Higher Education Theory and
Practice, 12(4), 105-116.
Barker, A. M. (2003). Faculty development for teaching online: Educational and technological
issues.
Bell-Scriber, M. J., & Morton, A. M. (2009). Clinical instruction: Train the trainer. Nurse
educator, 34(2), 84-87.
Betz, N. (1997). Increasing research involvement and interests among graduate
students in counseling psychology. The Counseling Psychologist, 25, 88–93.
Bicego, M. L. (2006). Mentoring: Bridging the Gap Between Learning and Leadership
Development. ProQuest.
Billett, S. (2003). Workplace Mentors: demands and benefits. Journal of Workplace
Learning, 15 (3), 105-113
Bland, C. J., Taylor, S., Shollen, A, Weber-Main, P., & Mulcahy. (2008).
Faculty Success through Mentoring: A Guide for Mentors,
Mentees, and Leaders. Westport, CT: ACE Series on Higher Education.
Bowen, R. (2008). A faustian bargain for academic freedom. The Chronicle for Higher
Education, 6(5) 36-40.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 103
Brett, J. M., Feldman, D. C., & Weingart, L. R. (1990). Feedback-seeking and
adjustment: An empirical comparison of new hires and job changers. Journal of
Management, 16, 737–749.
Burlew, L. (1991). Multiple mentor model: A conceptual framework. Journal of Career
Development, 17, 213–220.
Burnstad, H. (2007). Best practices for supporting adjunct faculty. R. E. Lyons (Ed.). Anker Pub.
Campbell, R., Angelique, H., Bootsmiller, B., & Davidson, W. S. II (2000). Practicing what
we preach: Integrating community psychology into the job search process.
Journal of Prevention and Intervention in the Community,19, 33–44.
Campbell, T. A., & Campbell, D. E. (1997). Faculty/student mentor program: Effects on
academic performance and retention. Research in Higher Education, 38(6), 727-742.
Chao, G. (1997). Mentoring phases and outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 51,
15-28.
Chao, G., O'Leary-Kelly, A., Wolf, S., Klein, H., & Gardener, P. (1994). Organization
Socialization: It's content and consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology,
79(5), 730-743.
Clawson, D. (2009). Tenure and the Future of the University. Science. 324(5931), 1147-
1148.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches. Lincoln, NE: Sage.
Cunningham, S. (1999). The nature of workplace mentoring relationships among faculty
members in Christian higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 441-463.
Dawson, B. L. (2011). Perceptions of the Role of Faculty Mentoring to Socialize Adjunct
Faculty Into Institutional Culture at a State University in Georgia (Doctoral dissertation,
Mercer University, Atlanta).
De Janasz, S.C. & Sullivan, S.E.(2004). Multiple mentoring in academe: Developing the
professional network. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64, 263-283.
Diegel, B. L. (2013). Perceptions of community college adjunct faculty and division
chairpersons: support, mentoring, and professional development to sustain academic
quality. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 37(8), 596-607.
Dilley, P. (2004). Interviews and the philosophy of qualitative research. The Journal of Higher
Education, 75(1), 127-132.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 104
Eagan, M. K., & Jaeger, A. J. (2011). Examining Retention and Contingent Faculty Use
in a State System of Public Higher Education. Educational Policy 25(3) 507–537.
Eby, L. T., & Lockwood, A. (2005). Protégés’ and mentors’ reactions to participating in
formal mentoring programs: A qualitative investigation. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
67, 441–458.
Eby, L. T., Rhodes, J. E., & Allen, T. D. (2007). Definition and evolution of mentoring.
In T. D. Allen & L. T. Eby (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of mentoring: A multiple
perspectives approach (pp. 7-20). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Eraut, M. (2007). Learning from other people in the workplace. Oxford Review of Education,
33(4), 403-422.
Ehrenberg, R. G., & Zhang, L. (2005). Do tenured and tenure-track faculty matter? Journal of
Human Resources, 40(3), 647-659.
Gappa, J. M. (2000). The new faculty majority: Somewhat satisfied but not eligible for
tenure. In What contributes to job satisfaction among faculty and staff: New
directions for institutional research, No. 105, ed. L. S. Hagedorn, 77--86. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gappa, J. M., Austin, A. E., & Trice, A. G. (2007). Rethinking faculty work: Higher education's
strategic imperative. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Gothard, K. A. (2009). Faculty mentoring in higher education: How can the institution benefit?
(Doctoral dissertation, Capella University).
Glynn, B. (2003). The Nature and Effect of Mentoring on Career Satisfaction and Future
Mentoring Activities of Adjunct Faculty in Collegiate Schools of Nursing (Doctoral
dissertation, Southern Connecticut State University).
Hansford, B, Tennent, L. and Ehrich, L. (2003), Educational mentoring :Is it worth
the effort? Educational Research & Perspectives, 30(1), pp.42-75.
Higgins, M. C., & Kram, K. E. (2001). Reconceptualizing mentoring at work: A developmental
network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26, 264–288.
Hopkins, R. A., & Grigoriu, E. (2005). Mentoring community college faculty and staff:
Balancing contradictions of informal program components and formal program
structure. Community College Review, 32(4), 40-60.
Howell, L. P., Chen, C. Y., Joad, J. P., Green, R., Callahan, E. J., & Bonham, A. C.
(2010). Issues and challenges of non-tenure-track research faculty: The UC Davis
School of Medicine experience. Academic Medicine, 85(6), 1041.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 105
Jacobs, F. (1998). Using part-time faculty more effectively. In D. Leslie (Ed.), The growing use
of part-time faculty: Understanding causes and effects (pp. 9-18). New Directions for
Higher Education, 104. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Jaeger, A. J., & Eagan, M. K. (2011). Navigating the transfer process: Analyzing the effects of
part-time faculty exposure by academic program. American Behavioral Scientist, 55(11),
1510-1532.
Kezar, A. (2012). Embracing non-tenure-track faculty: Changing campuses for the new faculty
majority. Florence, KY: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. 41042.
Kezar, A., & Sam, C. (2010). Understanding the new majority of non–tenure track faculty in
higher education: Demographics, experiences and plans of action (ASHE Report Series).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kram, K. E. (1983, December). Phases of the mentor relationship. Academy of
Management Journal, 26(4), 608-625. Retrieved July 14, 2013 from the
ABI/INFORM Global database.
Kram, K. E., & Hall, D. T. (1996). Mentoring in a context of diversity and turbulence. In
E. Kossek & S.Lobel (Eds.), Human resource strategies for managing diversity
(pp. 108–136). London: Blackwell.
Kvale, S. (1996) InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage
Levin, J,S., & Shaker, G.G. (2011). The Hybrid and Dualistic Identity of Full-Time Non-
Tenure-Track Faculty. American Behavioral Scientist, 55(11), 1461-1484.
Lincoln, Y. S., &Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Liu, X., & Zhang, L. (2007). What determines employment of part-time faculty in
higher education institutions? Ithaca, NY: Cornell Higher Education Research
Institute. Available from http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/cheri/.
Little, J.W.(1990).The mentor phenomenon and the social organization of teaching. In C. Cazden
(Ed.), Review of Research in Education (pp.297-351).Washington, DC: American
Educational Research Association.
Luna, G., & Cullen, D. (2000). Empowering the faculty: Mentoring redirected and
renewed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lyons, R. (2007). Deepening our understanding of adjunct faculty. In R. Lyons (Ed.), Best
practices for supporting adjunct faculty, Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 106
Maxwell, J. A. (2011). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41). Sage
publications.
McDonald, G. (2010). Continuing connections: the experiences of retired and senior working
nurse mentors. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 19(23 ‐24), 3547-3554.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John
Wiley & Sons
Morton, D. R. (2012). Adjunct Faculty Embraced: The Institution’s Responsibility. Christian
Education Journal, 9(2).
Moss, E. D. (2012). Online faculty satisfaction with formal and informal faculty mentoring at
community colleges. Ann Arbor, 1001, 48106-1346.
Mullen, C. A. (2009). Re-Imagining the Human Dimension of Mentoring: A Framework for
Research Administration and the Academy. Journal of Research Administration, 40(1),
10-31.
Nilson, L. B. (2010). Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors.
John Wiley & Sons.
Noble, Jr, J. H. (2000) ‘Cherchez l’argent: a contribution to the debate about class size, student–
faculty rations, and use of adjunct faculty’, Journal of Social Work Education, 36(1),
pp. 89–102.
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Rogers, C. B., McIntyre, M., & Jazzar, M. (2010). Mentoring Adjunct Faculty Using the
Cornerstones of Effective Communication and Practice. Mentoring & Tutoring:
Partnership in Learning, 18(1), 53-59.
Roueche, J., & Roueche, S. (1996). Identifying the strangers: Exploring part-time faculty
integration in American community colleges. Community College Review, 23(4),
33-49.
Seidman, I. (1998). Interviewing as Qualitative Research. 2nd. New York: Teachers.
Shannon, D. (2007). The socialization of adjunct faculty into the academic culture of a
public community college campus. (Doctoral Dissertation) Available from
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3298597)
Sorcinelli, M. D., & Yun, J. (2007). From mentor to mentoring networks: Mentoring in the new
academy. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 39(6), 58-61.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 107
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
St. Clair, K. L. S. (1994). Faculty-to-faculty mentoring in the community college: An
instructional component of faculty development. Community College Review, 22(3), 23-
35.
Tenenbaum, H. R., Crosby, F. J., & Gliner, M. D. (2001). Mentoring relationships in
graduate school. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 326–341.
Tomanek, J. K. (2010). Job satisfaction of community college adjunct faculty at Midwestern
Community College.
Turnbull, B. (2010). Scholarship and mentoring: an essential partnership? International journal
of nursing practice, 16(6), 573-578.
Wallin, D. (2004). Valuing professional colleagues: Adjunct faculty in community and
technical colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 28,
373-391.
Wasburn, M. H., & LaLopa, J. M. (2003). Mentoring Faculty for Success: Recommendations
Based on Evaluations of a Program. Planning and Changing, 34(3), 250-264.
Webb, D. (2007). Adjunct faculty: Boon or burden? (Doctoral Dissertation) Available
from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3273952)
Wickun, W., & Stanley, R. (2000) The role of adjunct faculty in higher education. The
Montana Professor Academic Journal, 10(1) Retrieved from http://mtprof.msun.
edu/Win2000/Wickun.html
Williams, W., & Ceci, S. (2007). Does tenure really work? Chronicle of Higher
Education, 53(21), B16.
Young, A. M., & Perrewé, P. L. (2004). The Role of Expectations in the Mentoring Exchange:
An Analysis of Mentor and Protégé Expectations in Relation to Perceived Support.
Journal of Managerial Issues, 16(1).
Zanna, M. P., & Darley, J. M. (1987). The complete academic: A practical guide for the
beginning social scientist. New York: Random House.
Zellers, D., Howard, V., & Barcic, M. (2008). Faculty mentoring programs:
Reenvisioning rather than reinventing the wheel. Review of Educational
Research, 78, 552-588.
Zutter, C. (2007). Mentoring adjunct instructors: Fostering bonds that strengthen teaching and
learning. Best practices for supporting adjunct faculty, 68-80.
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 108
APPENDIX A
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR FACULTY
1. Please describe your role at the university. How long have you worked here?
2. How did you learn about the faculty mentoring program?
3. What are the goals of the mentoring program?
4. How was the faculty mentoring program promoted?
5. What made you interested in participating in the faculty mentoring program as a
mentor/mentee?
6. How did your participation meet the goals and mission of the mentoring program?
7. What kind of information was provided to orient you to the mentoring program?
8. What were your expectations for participating in the mentoring program?
9. How were your expectations met or not met by participating in the mentoring program?
10. How was your mentoring relationship structured (meetings, times, ease of
access?)
11. How often did you meet with your mentee/mentor and how long did the duration of the mentoring
relationship last?
12. Can you describe an instance of formal and informal mentoring experience? Take me through a
common mentoring session.
13. How would the intensity of the mentoring relationship best be described? Casual? Caring,
involving genuine concern?
14. Who was responsible for initiating the mentoring relationship?
15. What were the major topics to be addressed in the mentoring relationships?
16. How did you feel supported by the faculty mentoring program?
17. How do you feel the faculty mentoring program helps NTTF?
18. Describe any informal mentoring that you participated in?
19. Do you have recommendations that you have to improve the faculty mentoring program for
NTTF? If so, what are they?
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 109
APPENDIX B
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR ADMINISTRATORS
1. Briefly describe your faculty mentoring program for NTTF.
2. How long has the program been in existence?
3. Are there staff or financial resources dedicated to the program?
4. What are the goals and missions of the faculty mentoring program?
5. How many participants are there in the mentoring relationship?
6. How are these participants related to one another with respect to rank, experience, and status?
7. What do you hope mentees/mentors get out of the program?
8. What are the major topics to be addressed in the mentoring relationship? What aspects of
professional/personal life do mentors cover?
9. What does a mentor do?
10. What does a mentee do?
11. Please give me an example of an effective mentor/mentee.
12. When do you need to intervene or provide guidance?
13. What kind of orientation/training is offered related to the program?
14. Are there specific qualities required for mentors?
15. Is the participation in the program mandatory or voluntary for the mentor and the protégé?
16. How long do new NTTF members participate in the program?
17. Do you have any mechanisms for evaluating the effectiveness of the program? If so, please
elaborate.
18. Do you believe mentoring has increased the proportion of NTTF who are successful in their time
teaching in your department?
19. Does the mentoring program have specific content that relate to the issues that are unique for
NTTF or do the participants set their own agenda?
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 110
APPENDIX C
INFORMED CONSENT FORM
INFORMATION/FACTS SHEET FOR EXEMPT NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
Developing Effective Mentoring Programs for Non-Tenure Track Faculty
You are invited to participate in a research study related to mentoring programs for Non-Tenure
Track Faculty (NTTF). Research studies include only people who voluntarily choose to take part.
This document explains information about this study. The study will take place during the 2013-
2014 academic year.
Your participation is voluntary. You should read the information below and ask questions about
anything you do not understand, before deciding whether to participate. You may keep a copy of
this form for a copy of your records.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to understand the characteristics of mentoring programs that exist for
part-time and full-time non-tenure track faculty at four-year universities and how NTTF
perceive effectiveness related to mentoring in order to provide a resource for universities that
would like to develop a mentoring program that includes NTTF.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to participate in a 45-60 minute audio-
taped interview. You do not have to answer any questions you don’t want to; if you don’t want to
be taped, handwritten notes will be taken.
CONFIDENTIALITY
There will be no identifiable information obtained in connection with this study. Your name,
address or other identifiable information will not be collected. Any identifiable information
obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential and will be destroyed three years
after the study has been completed. Permission to use the data in future studies will be obtained
since the data will not contain your name. Your responses will be coded with a false name
(pseudonym) and maintained separately. You have the right to review audio recordings or
transcripts of interviews. The audio-tapes will be destroyed once they have been transcribed. The
data will be stored on a password protected computer in the researcher’s office for three years
after the study has been completed and then destroyed. When the results of the research are
published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable information will be used.
Required language:
DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE MENTORING PROGRAMS 111
The members of the research team, the funding agency and the University of Southern
California’s Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP
reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please contact Diane Yoon (principal
investigator) via email at dyoon@usc.edu or phone at (213) 219-4047 or Faculty Advisor
Adrianna Kezar at kezar@usc.edu or (213) 740-7218.
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los
Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Supporting non-tenure-track faculty in a physical therapy program: a case study
PDF
The work identity of full‐time non‐tenure‐track faculty at a four year research university
PDF
Participation of full-time, non-tenure-track faculty in school-level goveranance and decision making
PDF
Part-time non-tenure track faculty, motivation, and departmental governance: a grounded theory approach
PDF
How do non-tenure track faculty interact with Latino and Latina students in gatekeeper math courses at an urban community college?
PDF
Reforming Ph.D. programs to address the changing academic labor market
PDF
Part-time and time faculty conceptualizations of academic community: a case study
PDF
Underrepresentation of African American faculty in higher education: an improvement model dissertation
PDF
Faculty perceptions of barriers: gender and ethnicity differences among tenured and tenure-track faculty in the University of California system
PDF
Collaboration across institutional silos: a case study of a postsecondary professional learning community
PDF
How the departmental cultures experienced by part-time, non-tenure track faculty affect their ability to meet first-year college student needs
PDF
Exploring faculty-student interactions in a comprehensive college transition program for low-income and first-generation college students
PDF
Experiences in academic governance and decision-making of full-time nontenure track faculty in communications fields
PDF
Building and sustaining effective school leadership through principal mentoring in an urban school context
PDF
Nursing students' perceptions of formal faculty mentoring
PDF
Supporting faculty for successful online instruction: factors for effective onboarding and professional development
PDF
A case study of promising practices mentoring K-12 chief technology officers
PDF
The role that mentoring interactions between faculty, staff, campus stakeholders, and peer mentors among students play in cultivating a culture of mentoring in higher education institutions
PDF
Developing a student athlete mentoring program to improve college readiness at a rural Hawaii public high school
PDF
Ensuring faculty success in effective online instruction
Asset Metadata
Creator
Yoon, Diane
(author)
Core Title
Developing effective mentoring programs for non-tenure track faculty
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
12/16/2015
Defense Date
12/16/2015
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
mentoring,non tenure track faculty,OAI-PMH Harvest
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Kezar, Adrianna (
committee chair
), Chung, Ruth (
committee member
), Corwin, Zoe (
committee member
)
Creator Email
dianeyoon79@gmail.com,dyoon@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-204073
Unique identifier
UC11277500
Identifier
etd-YoonDiane-4065.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-204073 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-YoonDiane-4065.pdf
Dmrecord
204073
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Yoon, Diane
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
mentoring
non tenure track faculty