Formal and Informal Mentoring in Academia for the 21st Century

Johannessen, B. Gloria Guzmán; Unterreiner, Ann

doi:10.7459/es/28.3.03

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To further the understanding of the production of expertise and the socialisation of new experts in expert organisations, as well as the understanding of the importance of these socialisation processes in the institutionalisation of expert organisations, this study will use a theoretical framework which combines concepts on both socialisation and organisational form. To study the process of socialisation, the analysis will combine theories on socialisation in academia Rhoads 1993, 1996;Mullen and Huntinger 2007;Johannessen and Unterreiner 2010) with theories on socialisation in international organisations (Checkel 2005(Checkel , 2013. To describe the organisational features of IPBES, two sets of concepts will be used in the analysis: (i) meta-organisations and member organisations Brunsson 2005, 2008) and (ii) primary organisations and secondary organisations (Johnston 2005).…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, by using the concepts meta-organisation and member organisation Brunsson 2005, 2008) in combination with primary organisation and secondary organisation (Johnston 2005), the study will analyze and contribute to the understanding of expert organisations' organisational preconditions for the socialisation of new experts. Second, by using descriptive theories on multiple dimensions of socialisation in academia and international organisations Rhoads 1993, 1996;Checkel 2005;Johannessen and Unterreiner 2010;Checkel 2013;Mullen and Huntinger 2007), the study will analyze and further the understanding of the production of expertise and the institutionalisation of expert organisations (Table 1).…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Producing expertise: the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity & Ecosystem Services’ socialisation of young scholars

Gustafsson

2018

Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Expert organisations, such as the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity & Ecosystem Services (IPBES), have become increasingly important in global, regional, and local efforts to manage current environmental challenges. As producers of environmental knowledge assessments, these expert organisations are epistemic authorities in their field of expertise. To achieve and maintain epistemic authority, expert organisations constantly need to reproduce and develop their expertise. By using the first cohort of IPBES's fellowship program as a case study, the current paper examines the production of expertise and the socialisation of new experts into expert organisations. The paper also examines the importance of these socialisation processes in the institutionalisation of expert organisations. By analyzing interviews, observations, and documents, the current study explores the expected goals, the performance, and the results of the socialisation. The study shows how the fellows learned and acquired new roles and norms. The study also shows that whoever controls the socialisation process also control the production of expertise and the institutionalisation of the expert organisation.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Producing expertise: the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity & Ecosystem Services’ socialisation of young scholars

Gustafsson

2018

Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similar to mentorship, it is not surprising that literature describes formal and informal mentorship in a variety of ways. Johannessen and Unterreiner (2010) believe that formal mentorship in the context of higher education focuses on the needs of the institution whereas informal mentorship focuses on the needs of faculty. For example, informal mentoring relationships can be valuable for faculty because of the process related to "self-study narratives" which involve reflection, transformation, and growth within the academy (Johannessen and Unterreiner, 2010).…”

Section: Formal and Informal Spacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Johannessen and Unterreiner (2010) believe that formal mentorship in the context of higher education focuses on the needs of the institution whereas informal mentorship focuses on the needs of faculty. For example, informal mentoring relationships can be valuable for faculty because of the process related to "self-study narratives" which involve reflection, transformation, and growth within the academy (Johannessen and Unterreiner, 2010). Grant and Simmons (2008) share how a formal mentoring program for new faculty was helpful in describing teaching methods and tenure expectations.…”

Section: Formal and Informal Spacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mentorship and the Advancement of Black Women in Higher Education

Choice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The educational journey for Black women scholars can be plagued by a lack of support and guidance, various forms of discrimination, and oppressive systemic practices. These challenges create barriers in accessing key resources such as mentorship, which is a powerful tool in helping Black females thrive within the academy. Although scholarship shows mentorship happening at both formal and informal levels, it is still unclear how Black female doctoral students are accessing mentorship within Predominately White Institutions. The purpose of this study is to provide insight into how Black female doctoral students are accessing mentorship while being a gendered and racially minoritized population. For this study, a qualitative, phenomenological design was employed using the theoretical frameworks of Culturally Responsive Mentoring and Black Feminist Thought. Data collection involved semi-structured 45–60-minute one-on-one interviews with twelve Black women engaged in doctoral work identified through purposeful, snowball sampling. Research question one, How do Black female doctoral students access mentorship in Predominately White Institutions? The findings of this study reveal that each participant was resilient in seeking out mentorship, and each participant had an awareness of its importance and its role in helping them to successfully complete their doctorate. Research question two, In what ways does mentorship appropriately meet the individual needs of Black female doctoral students at Predominately White Institutions? Participants shared that the dissertation journey has a variety of stages which require different types of support, support that cannot be provided by one person. Multiple mentors who specialize in different areas are needed to provide richness and to add value while guiding a student’s doctoral work.

show abstract

Literature review: the gap between mentoring theory and practice for diverse women faculty

Graham

2019

Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Formal and Informal Mentoring in Academia for the 21st Century

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

Producing expertise: the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity & Ecosystem Services’ socialisation of young scholars

Producing expertise: the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity & Ecosystem Services’ socialisation of young scholars

Mentorship and the Advancement of Black Women in Higher Education

Literature review: the gap between mentoring theory and practice for diverse women faculty

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About