This post is part of a series, describing the assessments used to develop the Institute for Research Design in Librarianship (IRDL).
Since I was interested in the satisfaction of both the mentor and the mentee, I also asked the mentee (the Scholar) some questions, about how the structure of the program may have supported them and their mentor. Like the questionnaire that we sent to the mentors, we sent one to the Scholars at the end of the year-long program, to give them time to reflect on the entire experience.
The structure of the response options on the questionnaire was like that of the mentor survey, mostly open-text responses, to give the Scholars space to communicate to us whatever thoughts they had in response to the questions. I asked the Scholars some of the same logistical questions that we asked of the mentor, such as if they were able to meet on their agreed-upon schedule and what modality they used for meeting (e.g., phone, video, email). I asked them to comment if their mentor did anything that they would encourage other mentors to do in a mentoring relationship. I also asked what they thought the most valuable contribution their mentor made to their research project.
From the feedback I learned that the Scholars appreciated that the structure of the program required them to be accountable on a monthly schedule for moving their research project forward. Interpersonally, they appreciated that their mentors were there to listen and offer practical advice and encouragement at the time of need. Even though it was clear that the formal program was just one year long, some of the Scholars and mentors commented that they planned to continue meeting after the program ended.
Linked here is the version of the feedback form in use from 2022-2024.
My reflection on the use of this tool for assessing the program
My initial interest in developing the mentoring program was to support the Scholars in their year of working independently, after finishing the summer workshop. As we heard from some of the Scholars from the first three years of IRDL, before I developed the mentoring program, research can be an isolating experience if you are the only one in your library doing that academic work, and having someone to talk to on a schedule can be useful.
As I was thinking about how to design the program it occurred to me that it wasn’t just about the Scholar (a focus on a single person), that the program needed to support the relationship between the Scholar and the mentor (a focus on the connection between two people). This awareness helped me develop materials to engage both the mentor and the Scholar. The feedback from the questionnaires demonstrated that the documents I created, monthly reflective prompts and “ground rules” for a successful mentoring relationship, were useful in keeping them on track, with clear expectations.
The cost of this assessment tool
Because LMU has an institutional subscription to Qualtrics, no grant funds needed to be used for the assessment.
Introduction post, Confidence scale, Research networks of the Scholars, External review, Post-workshop survey, Pre-/post-workshop research proposal evaluation, Mid-point check-in survey, Summative survey, Mentor feedback on the mentor program
