Mentoring Teachers to Achieve Educational Excellence and Scholarship

Mentoring Teachers to Achieve Educational Excellence and Scholarship

Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEdDirector

Office of Medical Education Research and Development, School of MedicineAcademy for the Advancement of Educational Scholarship, LSU-New

OrleansProfessor

Department of Internal Medicine and School of Public Health

Learning Outcomes Use a variety of supportive

relationships within a mentoring framework

Define and promote excellence and scholarship in teaching and learning

Explore options for enhancing mentoring Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd

(5/4/12)

Supportive Relationships

Role Model

Advisor

CoachSupervisor

True Mentor

Advising Relationships Assigned, rather than self-selected Guided by program/organizational goals One direction from advisor to advisee Time limited Guided more by event and activities,

than processGlasser & Hook ,2008

Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd (5/4/12)

Coaching Relationships

Similar to advising, but more focused Primary focus on action, performance Often work-related knowledge, skills Often most important when developing

new knowledge and abilitiesInternational Public Management Association for Human

Resources

Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd (5/4/12)

Supervisory Relationships Formal, for the record Evaluative Managerial Performance Policies and procedures Can include supportive and

developmental perspectiveSheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd

(5/4/12)

True Mentoring: A Working Definition*

Voluntary, not required Based on affinity

between mentee and mentor

Separate from formal mode of instructional delivery and/or evaluation

Personal, holistic Dynamic, reciprocal

Interactive and mutually beneficial

Negotiated commitment of time and energy by both parties

Driven by the personal and professional needs of the mentee, rather than an agenda set by mentor or institution

*LSUHSC-NO OMERAD TeamSheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd

(5/4/12)

Key Concepts

Scholarship (Boyer, 1990)

Discovery

Integration

TeachingEngagement

Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd (5/4/12)

Scholarship of Teaching

Overturns the perspective that “to be a scholar is to be a

researcher and publication is the primary yardstick by which

scholarly productivity is measured.”

Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriateSheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd (5/4/12)

Common Domains Teaching Instructional design, curriculum

development, assessment of learning Advising and mentoring Educational leadership Educational research

Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd (5/4/12)

Scholarship Assessed (Glassick, et al. 1997)

Clear goalsAdequate preparationAppropriate methods

Significant resultsEffective presentation

Reflective critique

Research Teaching

Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd (5/4/12)

5 P’s of Scholarship(Adapted from Shulman and

others) Pertinent Public Peer review

Applied intellect; informed and disciplined manner

Quality and impact Glassick, et al. criteria

Permanent – enduring products Platform that is reproducible and can be

built upon Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd (5/4/12)

Scholarship Innovative Results from creative, disciplined work Public and shared – permanent products Advances the field

Contributes new knowledge, insights, questions, directions

Generalizable, reproducible, can be built upon Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd

(5/4/12)

Tenure and Promotion Reviews

Dissemination “We mostly consider if faculty members are moving

the field forward, whatever the field is.” Key Elements: Creativity, development, and

dissemination of transferable products “What defines a university is the development of

products that can be shared…”

Simpson, et al., 2004Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd

(5/4/12)

Building Consensus AAMC 2006 Consensus

Conference Concepts

Criteria Evidence Career

advancement

Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd (5/4/12)

Publication Formats Traditional abstract or poster

presentation Articles, chapters, monographs, books Workshops, demonstrations Digital formats, websites, multi-media Educational materials

Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd (5/4/12)

Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd (5/4/12)

Conceptual Framework

Activities in Teaching

Effective Teaching

Excellent Teaching

Scholarly TeachingScholarship in Teaching

Keys to Effective Mentors

(and Effective Mentees)

Development Education about mentoring processes Expectations Skills (e.g., communication) Strategies Professional boundaries, issues of

gender, culture, generational differences

Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd (5/4/12)

Recognition

Academic recognition Institutional priority and support Protected time Financial and non-financial rewards

Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd (5/4/12)

Support

Administrative infrastructure Peer support group Mentors for mentors Consultative referrals and resources

Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd (5/4/12)

Keys to Effective Mentoring Processes

Mentoring Agreement• SMART Goals – start with an end in mind

• Specific, Measurable, Action-oriented, Realistic, Timely

• Success – clear, observable• Relationship

• Commitment, expectations and responsibilities

• Ground rules• Stages, monitoring, feedback, adjustments

Benefits of putting it in writingSheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd

(5/4/12)

Action/Work Plan

SMARTGoal Strategy Action Item(s) Target

DateOutcome/Evidence

A Mentoring Agreement is necessary, but not sufficient. You also need a plan. . . . in writing and actively used.

Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd (5/4/12)

• Networking• Advocacy, introductions• Observation of exemplary teaching• Faculty development

Role Modeling

• Peer review of teaching• Wide range of levels and strategies for coaching• Educational consultation• Collaborative learning groups• Professional learning communities (e.g., Academies)

Coaching

• Academic advancement• Alignment of individual-organization priorities• Performance/work expectations• Professional development plans

Advising/Supervising

• Personal strategic planning• Educator and career development (i.e., action plans)

• Portfolio development• Professional learning communities (e.g., Academies)

MentoringSheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd

(5/4/12)

Mentoring Options 1-1 traditional model (e.g., expert-novice) Peer, near-peer Group

Mentee – multiple mentors Mentor – multiple mentees Multiple mentors – multiple mentees

Constellation (e.g., layered, pyramid, rolling) Professional learning community

Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd (5/4/12)

Mentoring Relationship: 5 Stages

Preparation (initiation, interaction)

Negotiation (investment, cultivation)

Facilitation (maturation, enabling)

Separation (adaptation)

Closure (redefinition)

Sources: Johnson, 2007; Kram, 1983, 1985;Luna & Cullen, 1995; Rodenhauser, et al., 2000; Zachary, 2000 Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEd

(5/4/12)

Daloz’s Mentor-Protégé Interactions (1986)

Regression Growth

Stasis Validation

Chal

leng

e

Support

Vision

Levels of Candor Mirroring—report what observer saw Alternative—focus on effective

behaviors; withhold subjective and/or negative comments

Analyzing—focus on less-effective aspects; comment on perceived effect, positive or negative; offer advice; explore cause and effect; include “plain talk”

The Mid-continent Regional Educational Laboratory (1985). Peer support groups (Videotape). Aurora, CO: Author.

Summary Mentoring

Range of supportive relationships Various options Importance of development, recognition,

and support for mentors and mentees Stages that evolve over time Role of challenge, support, and vision Mentoring agreement, SMART goals,

action plan

Summary Educational excellence and

scholarship Multiple domains Range of teaching and educator roles Effectiveness, excellence, scholarly,

scholarship Glassick criteria and the 5 P’s Evidence-based Reflective practice Innovation

Questions and Comments

Sheila W. Chauvin, PhD, MEdschauv@lsuhsc.edu