Mentoring at the University of Pennsylvania: Results of a Faculty Survey

BACKGROUND: Research suggests mentoring is related to career satisfaction and success. Most studies have focused on junior faculty. OBJECTIVE: To explore multiple aspects of mentoring at an academic medical center in relation to faculty rank, track, and gender. DESIGN: Cross-sectional mail survey in mid-2003. PARTICIPANTS: Faculty members, 1,432, at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine MEASUREMENTS: Self-administered survey developed from existing instruments and stakeholders. RESULTS: Response rate was 73% (n = 1,046). Most (92%) assistant and half (48%) of associate professors had a mentor. Assistant professors in the tenure track were most likely to have a mentor (98%). At both ranks, the faculty was given more types of advice than types of opportunities. Satisfaction with mentoring was correlated with the number of types of mentoring received (r = .48 and .53, P < .0001), job satisfaction (r = .44 and .31, P < .0001), meeting frequency (r = .53 and .61, P < .0001), and expectation of leaving the University within 5 years (Spearman r = −.19 and −.18, P < .0001), at the assistant and associate rank, respectively. Significant predictors of higher overall job satisfaction were associate rank [Odds ratio (OR) = 2.04, CI = 1.29–3.21], the 10-point mentoring satisfaction rating (OR = 1.27, CI = 1.17–1.35), and number of mentors (OR = 1.60, CI = 1.20–2.07). CONCLUSIONS: Having a mentor, or preferably, multiple mentors is strongly related to satisfaction with mentoring and overall job satisfaction. Surprisingly, few differences were related to gender. Mentoring of clinician–educators, research track faculty, and senior faculty, and the use of multiple mentors require specific attention of academic leadership and further study

Biodiversity of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi in South America: A Review

Identification of species is crucial in understanding how diversity changes affect ecosystemic processes. Particularly, soil microbial are key factors of ecosystemic functioning .Among soil microbes, arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF, phylum Glomeromycota) are worldwide distributed and form symbiotic associations with almost 80% of the vascular plants of the earth, except for one species, Geosiphon pyriformis, which associates with the cyanobacteria Nostoc. AMF comprise around 300 morphologically defined or 350–1000 molecularly defined taxa. Since AMF associate with aboveground community, their occurrence and composition can influence ecosystemic processes either through affecting plant community composition and thus its processes rates, or soil microbial communities, which are directly involved in nutrient cycling. Soil microorganisms are considered a potentially suitable target for studying regional and local effects on diversity. The symbiosis with AMF not only increases nutrient uptake by the plant of mainly phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N) in exchange for plant-assimilated carbon (C), but also improves the tolerance of plants to various biotic and abiotic stresses such as pathogens, salinity, and drought

Mentorship in Academic General Internal Medicine: Results of a Survey of Mentors

BACKGROUND: Effective mentorship is crucial to career development. Strategies to improve the availability of mentors include mentoring multiple mentees at once, compensating mentors, comentoring, and long-distance mentoring. OBJECTIVE: To describe current trends in mentorship in general Internal Medicine (GIM). METHODS: We conducted a national cross-sectional web-based survey of GIM mentors, GIM fellowship directors, and GIM National Institutes of Health K24 grant awardees to capture their experiences with mentoring, including compensation for mentorship, multiple mentees, comentorship, and long-distance mentorship. We compared experiences by mentorship funding status, faculty type, academic rank, and sex. RESULTS: We collected data from 111 mentors (77% male, 54% full professors, and 68% clinician-investigators). Fifty-two (47%) received funding for mentorship. Mentors supervised a median (25th percentile, 75th percentile) of 5 (3, 8) mentees each, and would be willing to supervise a maximum of 6 (4, 10) mentees at once. Compared with mentors without funding, mentors with funding had more current mentees (mean of 8.3 vs 5.1, respectively; P<.001). Full professors had more current mentees than associate or assistant professors (8.0 vs 5.9 vs 2.4, respectively; P=.005). Ninety-four (85%) mentors had experience comentoring, and two-thirds of mentors had experience mentoring from a distance. Although most mentors found long-distance mentoring to be less demanding, most also said it is less effective for the mentee and is personally less fulfilling. CONCLUSIONS: Mentors in GIM appear to be close to their mentorship capacity, and the majority lack funding for mentorship. Comentoring and long-distance mentoring are common

Mentoring Faculty in Academic Medicine: A New Paradigm?

In this paper, we discuss an alternative structure and a broader vision for mentoring of medical faculty. While there is recognition of the need for mentoring for professional advancement in academic medicine, there is a dearth of research on the process and outcomes of mentoring medical faculty. Supported by the literature and our experience with both formal dyadic and group peer mentoring programs as part of our federally funded National Center of Leadership in Academic Medicine, we assert that a group peer, collaborative mentoring model founded on principles of adult education is one that is likely to be an effective and predictably reliable form of mentoring for both women and men in academic medicine