Faculty mentoring and networking are fundamental to career success, experts emphasized at a recent symposium hosted by Boston University Women in Science and Engineering (BU WISE) and the Boston University Women\u2019s Studies Program.<\/p>\n
Panelists examined the theory and practice of faculty mentoring and networking, highlighting strategies and programs that have proven successful in increasing advancement and retention, particularly in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. CAS Dean Virginia Sapiro reflected on the panelists\u2019 comments, shared personal experiences with the mentoring practice during her career, and discussed the challenges of building a mentoring program at BU.<\/p>\n
Mentoring doesn\u2019t\u2019 happen simply because someone says it should, said Abigail Stewart, Sandra Schwartz Tangri Distinguished University Professor at the University of Michigan. \u201cYou can\u2019t legislate it; you can\u2019t just make it happen,\u201d she said, noting the importance of getting chairs to engage in mentoring. \u201cChairs must be responsible and should be held accountable to make sure it happens. This creates support for everything else.\u201d<\/p>\n
Stewart emphasized that good mentoring requires developing a strong two-way relationship between the mentor and the person being mentored. She noted that senior faculty often avoid this more involved practice of mentoring, preferring just to be available to answer specific questions because the stronger version leads to a greater sense of responsibility. \u201cIt\u2019s a risky proposition and people feel it\u2019s easier not to get involved,\u201c she said. \u201cWe need to make it clear they\u2019re not responsible for the outcome.\u201d<\/p>\n
Moreover, Stewart said, it is important for institutions developing a mentoring program to support the process by carefully defining the expectations for the institution, academic leaders, and the partners in the mentoring process. Her own institution, the University of Michigan, developed a detailed guide to mentoring, “Giving and Getting Career Advice: A Guide for Junior and Senior Faculty.” It emphasizes that both the junior and senior partners have responsibilities in mentoring. Junior faculty should be active in seeking assistance and not just depend on one assigned mentor. \u201cRecognize the breadth of people who can provide examples,\u201d Stewart said.<\/p>\n
Susan Staffin Metz, senior advisor of the Center for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education, who focuses her research on STEM fields, noted that the \u201cculture of mentoring\u201d developed more slowly in some fields like engineering than in others. Many successful scientists learned not to attribute any of their success to the help they received, and pass on their view that success in the sciences is due simply to one\u2019s abilities and effort. In fact, however, favorite students and junior faculty have long received help. This poses special difficulties for the small number of women in engineering and the sciences, who have traditionally been excluded from this mentoring.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe need to include student-faculty mentoring, \u201cMetz said. \u201cWith the small percentage of women in the engineering discipline, they rely on this connection because of an isolating, lonely environment that undermines student\u2019s confidence. Validation makes a difference.\u201d
\nLotte Bailyn, professor of management at MIT\u2019s Sloan School of Management, pointed out that activity outside the university is just as important as internal efforts. \u201cBeyond mentoring relationships, it\u2019s a good idea to establish other relationships of support and information sharing,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
Reflecting on the comments of Stewart, Metz, and Bailyn, Dean Sapiro stressed the importance of peer mentoring, noting that she benefitted from a tradition among people who received Ph.D.s in political science from the University of Michigan in which \u201cone generation took care of another,\u201d especially at professional conferences where they met, socialized with each other, and shared the contacts they had developed. \u201cAll of the puppies looked after each other and introduced each other to the big dogs they knew,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
She also stressed the importance of being clear about balancing a common set of institutional expectations, norms, and processes with a recognition that good mentoring also depends on the differing experiences, needs, and styles of the partners. \u201cPeople bring different styles of learning and teaching,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
Sapiro also pointed to the importance of being aware of different needs that may depend on, for example, gender or race. Moreover, she said, to have a \u201cculture of mentoring\u201d rather than just particular programs, mentoring must exist at all levels. \u201cThis would require a recognition of mentoring needs of more senior faculty, administrators, and non-tenure-track faculty,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
Sapiro has already made major efforts to build a mentoring program in CAS for tenure-track faculty and a culture of mentoring that includes attention to the needs of senior faculty and department chairs. As of fall 2008, departments must assign a mentor to all tenure-track faculty. Sapiro collected and circulated descriptions of mentoring programs from all departments that have them, and will be leading efforts to define a common set of expectations and processes for CAS. She holds annual orientations for new and continuing chairs and directors, and has encouraged the development of strong ties among chairs and directors to facilitate sharing of knowledge and practices.<\/p>\n
Sapiro added that she wants to address the twin needs of developing a culture of mentoring on a College-wide basis and the craft of mentoring at the individual level. \u201cWe don\u2019t yet have a culture of mentoring; we have rules and practices,\u201d she said. \u201cThe academic community needs multiple mentoring, building the knowledge and craft of mentoring just as we build the craft of teaching and research.\u201d
\nFollowing the panel that focused on mentoring strategies and programs, a second panel focused on the importance of building an effective mentoring network. Speakers included Mary Deanne Sorcinelli and Yung Yun of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Sorcinelli is associate provost for faculty development and a professor in the Department of Educational Policy, Research, and Administration, and Yun is a lecturers and the director of new faculty initiatives in the Office of Faculty Development.<\/p>\n
Mentoring is key to addressing roadblocks such as getting oriented, increasing skills, navigating the tenure track, developing professional networks, and creating a work\/life balance, they pointed out. Moreover, mentoring has been proven to be one of the few common characteristics of a successful academic career, particularly for women and faculty of color.
\n\u201cPeople who advance the most have strong networks of support,\u201d Sorcinelli said.<\/p>\n
The University of Massachusetts team contrasted traditional mentoring\u2014a one-on-one hierarchal relationship in which a senior faculty member takes a junior faculty member under his or her wing\u2014with mutual mentoring, a network-based model of support that addresses specific areas of knowledge and expertise. \u201cThis constellation becomes your best mentor,\u201d Sorcinelli said. \u201cAll members of an academic community have something to learn from one another.\u201d<\/p>\n