Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to PeerMentoring MCRJPW 03-28 update
Similar to PeerMentoring MCRJPW 03-28 update (20)
PeerMentoring MCRJPW 03-28 update
- 1. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE IMPACT: Internal Medicine Peer-led Academic Collaboration at Temple Marius Commodore MD Vanneta Hyatt MD Regina Jacob MD, MSCE Paul Williams MD, FACP Gina Simoncini MD, FACP Alia Chisty MD, FACP E. Leilani Lee MD, FACP SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE
- 2. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE Peer Mentoring in General Internal Medicine: Outline • A brief history of mentoring • Models of peer mentoring • IMPACT: Internal Medicine Peer-led Academic Collaboration at Temple – Peer Mentoring at Temple • Breakout groups
- 3. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE Requisite history • Word “mentor” inspired by character from Homer’s Odyssey – This character was actually ineffective and unhelpful • Historical systems include “guru-disciple” or guild approach • Has gained traction in business parlance
- 4. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE Benefits of mentorship • Associated with: – Career satisfaction – Research productivity – Increased retention – Professional advancement
- 5. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE The dyadic model • Classic mentor-protégé model • Often occur by chance – Sometimes by design – “arranged marriage approach” • Objective is pro-active assistance of mentee’s career
- 6. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE The dyadic model - benefits • Ideally, “dynamic, collaborative, and reciprocal1” • Career-related support – Exposure – Visibility – Sponsorship – Coaching – Protection 1Zerzan, J.T. et al. 2009. Making the most of mentors: a guide for mentees. Academic Medicine (84) 1: 140-144.
- 7. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE The dyadic model - benefits • Psychosocial support – Role-modeling – Acceptance and confirmation – Counseling – Friendship?
- 8. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE The dyadic model - drawbacks • Good mentors are hard to find • Power differential • Differing expectations • Differing needs • Gender and race dynamics
- 9. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE Other issues… • Clinician-educators are less likely to have mentors • Few programs target these faculty • Women and URM may have more trouble finding a mentor • One survey found less than half of junior faculty felt adequately mentored
- 10. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE It takes two– or does it?
- 11. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE Curriculum Goals for Mentorship Education Research Faculty Development Networking Education • Undergrad Med Ed • Graduate Med Ed • Effective Teaching • Curriculum Dev Research • Determine Interests • Discuss Funding • Sr. Faculty Mentor • Works in Progress Faculty Development • Resume Building • Tasks for Promotion • Clinical Med Topics Networking • Intra/Extramural • Relevant Societies • Interest Groups • Conferences
- 12. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE Models of Peer Mentoring • Pure Peer Mentoring • Facilitated Peer Mentoring – Top-Down Formal Didactic Model – Peer-Initiated Faculty Involvement
- 13. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE A Word on Peer Mentoring… • It is not meant to exist on its own • Designed to supplement the traditional dyad model of mentorship
- 14. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE Why peer mentoring?
- 15. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE Why peer mentoring? • I had no mentors • Academic medicine is poorly designed to help those without crystallized interests • The academic business model makes it difficult to carve out time to develop interests • Finding mentors is hard (especially in a small section)
- 16. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE Why peer mentoring? Bucklin et al., BMC Medical Education, 2014
- 17. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE IMPACT: “What are y’all doing?” • Dedicated time – 45 minutes monthly • Set agenda for next meeting – Strict adherence by meeting leader • “Works in Progress” dates for each member and their various projects • Minutes taken • “Safe space”
- 18. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE IMPACT: Outcomes • Faculty Development – Preparation for Promotion – Maintenance of Certification – Career Goals • Career Inventory • New Clinical Initiatives
- 19. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE IMPACT: Outcomes • Networking – Extramural Mentors (outside of Temple) – Intramural Mentors (within institution) – Interest Specific Groups – Identification of Conferences
- 20. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE IMPACT: Outcomes • Research – Delineation of interest – Introduction of new research – Identification of funding – Facilitation of collaborative efforts – Project encouragement
- 21. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE IMPACT: Outcomes • Education – Undergraduate Medical Education • Curriculum lectures for “Doctoring” – Graduate Level Medical Education • Team Based Learning – Poster # 39 on the ICD 10 • PREP Clinic • Lectures in novel curriculum areas
- 22. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE Peer Mentoring at Temple GIM: Future Opportunities • Needs assessment • Cross department assessment • Guest senior faculty involvement
- 23. SECTION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE
Editor's Notes
- Mentor responsible for taking care of another character in the Odyssey. Athena took the form of Mentor and provided encouragement and strategies for dealing with personal dilemmas
- There has been some research on this, but much of it seems to be taken as articles of faith and is extrapolated from the business literature. Historically, associated with higher income, better education, higher achievement, and more job satisfaction. This has been borne out in the field of medicine as well, with a special eye on the advancement of women.
- This is what we classically think of mentoring. Senior faculty pairs up with junior faculty, and fruitful relationship is formed. Formal versus informal mentoring; informal likely more rewarding. “Having a mentor” listed in one survey as being rated the most important influence on career development.
- By dint of senior person’s position, experience, and organizational influence
- Qualitative studies show that “chemistry” plays an important role in successful mentor-mentee relationship, which may be why informal mentoring tends to be more successful. Mentors typically are pressed for time, which makes interest moot at times. The inherent power differential can potentially be exploitative, and so credit for output can sometimes be problematic. This can show up in the expectations over who gets credit for what. There has also been some interesting qualitative research that shows that gender differences can pose significant challenges with mentor-mentee interactions.
- Researchers tend to have more mentors, possibly because shared interests are more readily apparent. Fewer programs target these faculty. The cynical part of me wonders if this is because the productivity and output outside of patient volume are less clearly defined. Women and URMs may benefit most from mentorship, and so of course have the most challenges finding mentors.
- Or put another way, why did I think we needed peer mentoring at my institution?
- The other reason peer mentoring is important is that it may be part of the solution to the recognized problem of the hollowing out of the academic bench. This is a from a 2014 report on full time faculty attrition from the AAMC. If you look at the figures average years of retention it shows that assistants on average stay in academics 8-9 years and associates stay in academics around 9-10 years. Add those together and that doesn’t sounds like a full career. Moreover, if you look at the rates at which 25% and 50% of the cohort leave academics it is actually less inspiring
- Further, faculty who feel like me leave academics. Nationally, it is estimated that 40 percent of new faculty leave academics in 5 years which seems to me a remarkable loss of talent that is hard to come by. This study from the University of Colorado took on the question of why their faculty leaving and some of the key findings are reproduced here - 47 of 130 faculty members who started in the 2005 to 2006 academic year had resigned in three years (that 34%). Number 3 was that the section or division head is not interesed in their personal development. Number 2 is that an environment fostering research and creativity is not fostered. And number one was that there was no rewarding of excellence in clinic medicine. I would argue that numbers 3 and 1 bear directly on some of the primary challenges faced by junior faculty.
- We opened up participation to all our junior faculty. We established a dedicated, protected time, during business hours. We also have a set agenda – we aren’t meeting just to chat – and as the group leader I lead the meetings and are responsible for keeping us on time and on task. Only two or so members interests can be properly discussed in each meeting and so we use each meeting to set “Works In Progress” dates for the selected members to reports back to the group. Minutes are taken and distributed monthly. And ONLY to members is a part of the principle of the mentoring group as safe space. We try to foster an idea that folks can say anything to anyone, about anyone and that there will be no judgment carrying forward. For me, this is probably the most important principle. Our first meeting established how we would use the time and what we wanted to do with it and each successive meeting establishes the agenda for the next meeting.
- Using the for quadrant model that Dr. Jacob as an organizing principle, I wanted to touch on some of the accomplishments we thought could be directly tied to our group and its activities. Prep for Promotion: Dr. Lee is up for promotion, so we dedicated time around her “checklist” MOC: many were unaware of ABIM requirements and guidelines, so thank you PM! Career Inventory: 7 members each took a personality test of sorts to determine career interests New Clinical Initiatives: Dr. Williams started a Transitions of Care clinic
- Extramural mentors: I was interested in Business… connected with Interest Specifics Groups: Dr. Hyatt was able to connect with Geriatricians – Temple doesn’t have Geriatric department Dr. Jacob was able to initiate a possible Clinical Collaboration (Survivorship)
- Dr. Jacob is applying for institutional funding for a grant exploring complex trauma in primary care Several members of our group have collaborated on a number of projects, three of which are being presented here today
- PLUG: TBL Poster -- Dr. Williams and Dr. Chisty -- check it out! Novel curriculum: Survivorship, Complex Trauma
- In the future we are planning on redoing a needs assessment, acknowledging the fact that peoples’ needs change in fairly short order as a career proceeds. It would be interesting to survey other departments about their needs for mentorship with a view to encouraging other sections and departments to add peer mentoring to their faculty development toolbox and we would like to start integrating senior faculty lectures on a variety of topics. Perhaps you can all help us think of other areas a peer mentoring group might push into.