Essential E-mentors’Characteristics for Mentoring Online Dissertations: Faculty ViewsAuslyn Nieto, Ph.DAECT November, 2015

Introduction

• Effective mentoring is an integral component of the doctoral dissertation process.

• Archetypal model of mentoring: a tri-fold convergence of values, professional skill, and relationships.

• Faculty mentors are the lodestars in the doctoral student’s itinerary, guiding them through towards degree completion.

2

Problem

• 50-percent attrition rate of doctoral students (Mullen, Fish & Hutinger, 2010).

• Higher education administrators unaware of intervention strategies to increase doctoral completion rates (Council of Graduate Schools, 2009).

• E-mentors’ perceptions of the required mentoring characteristics are unclear.

3

Research Question

• What are e-mentors’ perceptions of the essential characteristics for effectively mentoring online doctoral dissertations?

4

Qualitative Case Study: Purpose

• Clarification of online mentoring functions and faculty roles as archetypal online mentors.

• Exploration of faculty perceptions of archetypal mentoring functions within three domains: professional, psychosocial, and career.

5

Significance of the Study

• Online doctoral faculty may enhance their e-mentoring skills.

• Doctoral learners challenged by the e-mentoring process will increase possibility of degree completion.

• The doctoral mentoring process may improve and learner attrition reduced.

6

Literature Review

• Faculty perceive mentoring to be important to their protégés, and acquire personal satisfaction and professional growth from the mentoring process (Busch, 1985).

• Empathy and counseling most important in mentor-protégé relationships (Burg, 2010).

7

Theoretical Framework

• Mentoring is a successful triadic confluence of values, professional skill, and mutually beneficial relationships.

• Mentoring is a transformative empowerment tool and reaches beyond traditional emphases of guidance and support (Hansman, 2012).

• Mentoring contributes to faculty mentor's interpersonal, pedagogical, and clinical skill (Lundgren and Orsillo, 2012)

8

Methodology

• Three data instruments: open-ended surveys, telephone interviews with faculty, faculty reflective journals.

• Instruments queried responses within three domains of archetypal mentoring: professional, psychosocial, and career.

• Data analysis: NVivo 10 for data categorization, custom built database.

9

Sampling

• 55 invitations were extended to recruit 9 participants.• Sample: 9 online doctoral faculty/Chairs with a

minimum of one years’ e-mentoring experience.• The gender of the participants included 4 male and 5

female. • 8 of the 9 Chairs had mentored for at least seven

years. One Chair had mentored for 1 1/2 years. 7 Chairs had mentoring experience ranging between 6 and 10 years.

10

Sampling (cont’d)

• Disciplines of the Chairs varied: 2 Chairs hailed from the business sector; 6 Chairs were in the field of education; one Chair was skilled in ethnographic nursing.

11

Ethical Considerations

• Participants were recruited from social media sites, including LinkedIn, Mendeley, and Research Gate.

• Participants signed an informed consent form apprising them of their rights.

• Participants were informed that data collected are confidential and will be destroyed after three years.

• No data was collected without UoPX IRB approval.

12

Key Findings

• E-mentoring doctoral Chairs possess all the essential archetypal characteristics in the professional, psychosocial, and career domains.

• Supplemental essential characteristics revealed include tenacity, innovation, adaptability to restrictive administrative protocols.

• Quality review process pose a barrier to both Chairs and doctoral students.

13

Implications

• The self-perpetuating functions of e-mentoring strengthens the academy through development of shared values and expectations.

• Favorable outcomes through reduced doctoral student attrition can emerge from effective mentoring.

• Streamlined administrative processes that empower doctoral Chairs and students engender mutual respect and co-operation.

14

References

• Busch, J.W. (1985). Mentoring in graduate schools of education: Mentor‘s perceptions. American Educational Research Journal, 22, 257-265.

• Burg, C. A. (2010). Faculty perspectives on doctoral student mentoring: The mentor's odyssey. 3424380, University of South Florida. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 367. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.apollolibrary.com/docview/755701942?accountid=458. (755701942).

15

References (cont’d)

• Lungren, J.D. & Orsillo, S. (2012). The Science and Practice of Mentoring in Psychology Doctoral Training. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 26.3 : 196-209.

16

Questions

• Why are you interested in mentoring?• What challenges have you experienced with

mentoring? • How can we contribute to enriching the field of

mentoring?• Do you have any mentoring experiences that you

can share?

17

References

Auslyn Nieto, Ph.D AECT November, 2015

Thank you for listening!