AERA 2013 - Online Mentoring
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

AERA 2013 - Online Mentoring

on

  • 281 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
281
Views on SlideShare
281
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

AERA 2013 - Online Mentoring AERA 2013 - Online Mentoring Presentation Transcript

  • Strategies for MentoringOnline Doctoral Studentsthrough theDissertation ProcessMelissa L. Johnson, Ph.D.Swapna Kumar, Ed.D.Truly HardemonUniversity of Florida, USA
  • Objectives / PurposeIn what ways can asupervisor-student mentoringrelationship be successfullysupported in an onlineenvironment?
  • Literature• Mentoring relationships between student and graduateadvisor (Ives & Rowley, 2005; Lee, 2008; Maher, Ford,Thompson, 2004; Smith, 1995)• Helping to become a credentialed scholar (Burnett, 1999;Gaffney, 1995; Johnson, Lee, & Green, 2000; Lyons,Scroggins, & Rule, 1990; Rose, 2005)• E-mentoring (Bierema & Merriam, 2002; Griffiths &Miller, 2005; Mueller, 2004; Schichtel, 2010; Warner &Witzel, 2004)
  • Methodology• Participants: 6 graduates from first cohortof online doctoral program• Data collection: Semi-structured interview,phone• Data analysis: Inductive (Hatch, 2002)
  • ResultsEmerging themes:• The online environment and mentoring• Strategies used by mentors that helped students• Challenges faced by students• Strategies used by students termed best practice
  • ResultsThe online environment and mentoring• Value of using multiple media sources• 4/6 participants met with mentor for F2F discussion• Synchronous communication tools for discussion• Asynchronous communication tools for feedback
  • ResultsStrategies used by mentors that helped students• Participants appreciated structure, timelyfeedback, and the establishment of timelines forfeedback• Types of feedback = encouragement, specific /candid feedback, additional resources, posingquestions
  • ResultsChallenges faced by students• Time management, work-life balance, motivationto continue writing, research implementationproblems• Handling / acting on feedback• Low peer support
  • ResultsStrategies used by students termed best practice• Establish open and consistent communicationwith mentor• Ask questions and find medium ofcommunication that is helpful• Establish deadlines with mentor
  • Discussion / Implications• Clear communication, honest feedback -> perceptions ofideal mentor (Rose, 2003)• Multiple modes of communication in mentoring(Schichtel, 2000)• Students prefer faculty to initiate structure / supervisetransition (Johnson, Lee, & Green, 2000)• Improved strategies need to be found to provide feedbackin online environment
  • Future Research / Practice• Continue interviews with students in first cohortas they graduate from program• Use strategies to advise second and third cohortthrough the dissertation process• Interview faculty members re: their perspectivesof mentoring from a distance
  • References• Bierema, L.L. & Merrian, S.B. (2002). E-mentoring: Using computer mediated communication to enhancethe mentoring process. Innovative Higher Education, 26(3), 211-227.• Burnett, P.C. (1999). The supervision of doctoral dissertations using a collaborative cohort model.Counselor Education and Supervision, 39(1), 46-52.• Gaffney, N. (Ed.). (1995). A conversation about mentoring: Trends and models. Council of GraduateSchools, Washington, D.C.• Griffiths, M.D. & Miller, H.M. (2005). E-mentoring in schools: A brief review. Education and Health, 23,6-8.• Hatch, J.A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. Albany, NY: State University of NewYork Press.• Ives, G. & Rowley, G. (2005). Supervisor selection or allocation and continuity of supervision: Ph.D.students progress and outcomes. Studies in Higher Education, 30, 535-555.• Johnson, L., Lee, A., & Green, B. (2000). The Ph.D. and the Autonomous Self: Gender, rationality, andpostgraduate pedagogy. Studies in Higher Education, 25(2), 135-147.• Lee, A. (2008). How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision. Studiesin Higher Education, 33(3), 267-281.• Lyons, W., Scroggins, D., & Rule, P.B. (1990). The mentor in graduate education. Studies in HigherEducation, 15(3), 277-285.• Mueller, S. (2004). Electronic mentoring as an example for the information and communicationstechnology in engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 29(1), 53-63.• Rose, G.L. (2003). Enhancement of mentor selection using the ideal mentor scale. Research in HigherEducation, 44(4), 473-494.• Schichtel, M. (2010). Core-competence skills in e-mentoring for medical educators: A conceptualexploration. Medical Teacher, 32(7), e248-e262.• Warner, M. & Witzel, M. (2004). Managing in virtual organizations. London: Thomson Learning.
  • ContactMelissa L. Johnson, Ph.D.mjohnson@honors.ufl.edu(352) 392-1519