LITERATURE REVIEW

Table of Contents
Women & Underrepresented Groups in STEM
1. It’s Not You, It’s Me: An Exploration of Mentoring Experiences for Women in STEM
a. Practices
b. What to Keep in Mind
c. Link to Article
2. Female Peer Mentors Early in College Increase Women’s Positive Academic Experiences &
Retention in Engineering
a. Practices
b. Keep in Mind
c. Link to Article
3. Designing and Implementing an Indigenous Mentoring Program for Faculty Who Mentor
a. Practices
b. What to Keep in Mind
c. Link to Article

Graduate Student Methodologies

4. STEM Education: A Tale of Two Paradigms
a. Practices
b. What to Keep in Mind
c. Link to Article
5. Observable Features of Active Science Education Practices
a. Practices
b. What to Keep in Mind
c. Link to Article
6. Establishing Effective STEM Mentoring Relationships through Mentor Training
a. Practices
b. What to Keep in Mind
c. Link to Article
7. The Role of Peer Mentors in Promoting Knowledge and Skills Development in Graduate
Education
a. Practices
b. What to Keep in Mind
c. Link to Article

Undergraduate Student Methodologies

8. Special Issue: Mentoring Undergraduate Students
a. Practices
b. What to Keep in Mind
c. Link to Article
Faculty-centric Methodologies in STEM
9. Peer Review of Teaching: What Features Matter? A Case Study within STEM Faculties

2
 LITERATURE REVIEW
a. Practices
b. What to Keep in Mind
c. Link to Article
10. Self-Study as a Method for Engaging STEM Faculty in Transformative Change to Improve
Teaching
a. Practices
b. What to Keep in Mind
c. Link to Article

A Summary of Key Concepts

11. Significant Mentor Practices
12. Primary Methods of Support
13. Ways Mentorship Can Fail
14. Essential Mindsets

*Click on the “Literature Review” heading to return to Table of Contents.

DISCLAIMER: The red text highlighted from this point on outlines specific definitions and key concepts we
believe are necessary for faculty members.

3
 LITERATURE REVIEW
1. It’s Not You, It’s Me: An Exploration of Mentoring Experiences for Women in STEM
Although the number of women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) continues to
grow, men still represent a significant majority of those employed in these industries. Mentoring programs
have been identified as a useful tool to alleviate this gap and therefore have been developed in an effort to
attract and retain women in STEM. However, research suggests that women are still being mentored less
often than their male colleagues. To understand this issue in depth, 36 women holding managerial positions
in STEM organizations in the United States and Canada were interviewed and their experiences with
mentoring were discussed. The results suggest that women do have access and indeed find potential mentors
but they perceive significant barriers that prevent these initial meetings from developing into long-term
mentoring relationships. Specifically, four Barriers to the Development of Mentorship (BDM) were
identified including: Need for Fit, Demonstrating Capability, Commitment of the Mentor, and Trust in the
Mentor. BDM might help researchers and practitioners understand why women are under-mentored and
consequently underrepresented in STEM workplaces. Implications of these findings are discussed, such as
how to improve formal mentoring programs to overcome BDM and better serve women in STEM.
a. PRACTICES |
i. Cultivate a personal relationship, fit or connection to develop & exist between mentee
and mentor.
ii. Analyze the need of the mentee to be perceived as capable/independent.
iii. Mentors establishing a wholehearted investment
iv. Trust between mentor and mentee
b. KEEP IN MIND | The interviews corroborated four significant barriers women face in relation
to mentorship in their careers:
i. Need for Fit
1. Similar values and cultural backgrounds, a similar “view of the world,” a personal
connection; in other words, a relationship that would go beyond the boundaries of
the workplace to establish a personal compatibility between mentor and protégé.
ii. Demonstrating Capability
1. Intentionally push back against the notion that having a mentor at their workplace
could be perceived as a sign that they aren’t confident or competent enough to be
strong professionals or independent.
iii. Commitment of the Mentor
1. One way in which the mentor can show his/her commitment to the developing
mentorship is by being truly available for the protégé. There needs to be
proactivity on the mentor's behalf specifically.
iv. Trust in the Mentor.
1. For the interviewed women, trust in the mentor grows naturally from the personal
connection they develop with their mentors. In other words, it appears that two of
the BDM identified in my study, Need for Fit and Trust in the Mentor, are
intertwined.

4
 LITERATURE REVIEW

Figure 1. Table identifying the primary “Barriers to Development of Mentoring” and the
language that internalizes them.

c. LINK TO ARTICLE | Saffie-Robertson, Ma. C. (2020). It’s Not You, It’s Me: An Exploration
of Mentoring Experiences for Women in STEM. Sex Roles, 9/10, 566–579.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01129-x

5
 LITERATURE REVIEW
2. Female Peer Mentors Early in College Increase Women’s Positive Academic Experiences & Retention
in Engineering
The scarcity of women in the American science and engineering workforce is a well-recognized problem.
However, field-tested interventions outside artificial laboratory settings are few. We provide evidence from a
multiyear field experiment demonstrating that women in engineering who were assigned a female (but not
male) peer mentor experienced more belonging, motivation, and confidence in engineering, better retention
in engineering majors, and greater engineering career aspirations. Female mentors promoted aspirations to
pursue engineering careers by protecting women’s belonging and confidence. Greater belonging and
confidence were also associated with more engineering retention. Notably, grades were not associated with
year 1 retention. The benefits of mentoring endured beyond the intervention, for 2 y of college, the time of
greatest attrition from science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors.
a. PRACTICES |
i. Ingroup (Upper Class Female Student) vs. Outgroup (Upper Class Male Student)
Mentorship
ii. Same-Gender Group Mentoring
b. KEEP IN MIND |
i. Same-gender peer mentoring during the transition to college appears to be an effective
intervention to increase belonging, confidence, motivation, and ultimately retention of
women in engineering.
ii. Not all peer mentors are equally effective even though the objective content and
frequency of mentor–mentee interactions may be similar. Shared identity matters for
retention and other engineering outcomes.
iii. Female mentors protect women’s feelings of belonging and connection to other peers in
engineering during their first year in college, when they are most vulnerable to
self-doubt.
iv. Better performance in engineering courses (higher GPA) does not necessarily correspond
to stronger feelings of belonging or more intentions to pursue engineering careers and
advanced degrees.
v. Feelings of belonging and self-efficacy—predict retention in engineering majors and
engineering career intentions.
vi. The benefits of same-gender peer mentors endured long after mentoring had ended,
inoculating women for 2 y of college, the window of greatest attrition from STEM
majors.
c. LINK TO ARTICLE | Dennehy, T. C., & Dasgupta, N. (2017). Female peer mentors early in
college increase women’s positive academic experiences and retention in engineering.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(23), 5964–5969.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1613117114

6
 LITERATURE REVIEW
3. Designing and Implementing an Indigenous Mentoring Program for Faculty Who Mentor AI/AN
Students in STEM Fields: Process, Outcomes, and Lessons Learned
The participation rates of American Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/ANs) in science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) doctoral programs have historically been and continue to be low.
According to the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics 2016 Survey of Earned Doctorates,
AI/ANs earned just 0.423% of the science and engineering doctorates awarded to U.S. citizens and
permanent residents, but constitute 0.73% of the U.S. population (National Center for Science and
Engineering Statistics, 2019). The National Science Foundation (NSF) recognizes that increasing the degree
attainment of AI/AN STEM graduate students is in the nation’s interest in order to prepare a diverse,
globally engaged STEM workforce. AI/AN students offer a unique perspective that relates to STEM fields
which can contribute to research directions that have potential for new inventions and insights. At the same
time, AI/AN students who earn terminal degrees can become influential advocates for their communities;
they can speak with authority as a member of their STEM field as well as a guardian of tribal sovereignty in
policy-making.
a. PRACTICES | The Indigenous Mentoring Program (IMP) created 9 modules for faculty
i. Indigenous Mentoring Models
1. Exercised Indigenous mentoring systems & examples to share knowledge and
work with AI/AN grad students
ii. Indigenous Research Methods.
1. How research can contribute to Indigenous communities large scale and the
connections at the individual level
iii. Indigenous Student Services
1. Campus & community-specific services for Indigenous students
2. Cultural awareness activities
iv. Visiting Students Home Communities.
1. Provide understanding to mentors of their students’ lived realities, ties to their
communities
v. Interface with Prospective Students.
1. Provides mentors with campus-specific recruiting practices, learn about student
preferences for program & share external venues for recruitment
vi. Informal Gatherings for Mentors & Mentees.
1. Campus and community-specific venues/activities for strengthening relationships
with mentees
vii. Training on Cultural Humility
1. Helps mentors explore the difference between cultural competency-- the will and
actions to build understanding between people; to be respectful and open to
different cultural perspectives, strengthen cultural security and work towards
equality in opportunity-- and cultural humility: a lifelong process of
self-reflection and self-critique whereby the individual not only learns about
another's culture, but one starts with an examination of her/his own beliefs and
cultural identities

7
 LITERATURE REVIEW
viii. Presentation of Research & Services to Tribal Community Leaders.
1. Teach and validate mentors around decolonized research
ix. Resources on Mentoring Indigenous Students
1. Provides more literature on Indigenous communities and students
b. KEEP IN MIND | Faculty claimed the Indigenous Mentoring Program (IMP) content helped
them teach more inclusively, connecting course material to student's lives.
i. It created a community of faculty who share the same mentoring interest, and are
encouraged to connect with new faculty & graduate students about specific challenges &
successes that come from working with AI/AN students. Additionally, psychosocial
support greatly improved mentor relationships and student's academic experience.
ii. The development of close relationships between faculty and students demonstrated in the
IMP can be stripped and used as a template for the diverse and human-centered approach
faculty can take when working with students who identify under protected minority
groups (e.g. race, gender, etc.).
c. LINK TO ARTICLE | Brown, B., & Komlos, B. Z. (2019). Designing and Implementing an
Indigenous Mentoring Program for Faculty Who Mentor AI/AN Students in STEM Fields:
Process, Outcomes, and Lessons Learned. New Directions for Higher Education, 2019(187),
67–77. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.20337

8
 LITERATURE REVIEW
4. STEM education: A Tale of Two Paradigms
Higher education in STEM disciplines has been in a turbulent period for several decades. Pressures for
reform include declining STEM student enrollments, high attrition rates from STEM curricula, and the rise
of powerful alternative teaching strategies shown by cognitive science and educational research to promote
learning and curricular retention better than traditional teaching methods do. In addition, research has shown
that online and face-to-face courses on average produce comparable learning outcomes, and hybrid courses
that combine the best features of both are more effective than either face-to-face or online courses by
themselves. Motivated by these and other pressures, many faculty members have adopted the new teaching
methods, and distance education had become widespread well before the 2020 coronavirus pandemic forced
most educators at all levels to teach online. Many faculty members and administrators have resisted change,
arguing that the traditional approach has always worked well and needs no major revision. Before the
pandemic, most STEM courses were still being taught using the traditional methods, and many course
instructors are eager to return to them. These different responses to calls for education reform have led to
heated debates among university instructors and administrators regarding how STEM curricula and courses
should be designed, delivered, and assessed, and the role technology should play in all three functions. This
essay outlines two competing paradigms on each of these issues—the traditional paradigm, which has long
dominated STEM education, and the emerging paradigm, which has become increasingly common in the
last 30 years but is still not predominant at most universities and colleges. Elements of the emerging
paradigm were rarities in STEM education a half-century ago, but their incidence has been steadily rising
and more and more research has demonstrated their superiority over their traditional counterparts for
promoting most desirable learning outcomes. There needs to be active training and established pedagogy
disseminated to faculty who are tasked with cultivating students.
a. PRACTICES | Balanced emphasis on traditional content and developing skills at critical,
creative, multidisciplinary, and metacognitive thinking, communication, and teamwork
i. Inductive curriculum and course organization
ii. Coverage of professional skills (critical/creative thinking, communication & teamwork
iii. Explicit and observable learning objectives
iv. Active student engagement and peer accountability
v. Mentor/instructional design predicated on replicable educational research
vi. Instructors with substantial experience and skill in discipline or pedagogical expertise.
Activity is shared between the instructor and the students—discussing, explaining,
brainstorming, questioning, reflecting, computing, etc.
b. KEEP IN MIND | Techniques for teaching professional skills to STEM students and assessing
the students’ mastery
i. Brainstorming exercises
ii. Explanations of Unexpected Results
iii. Problem-Formulation Exercises
iv. Instructional design based on replicable quantitative and qualitative research, cognitive
science, and the instructor’s experience
c. LINK TO ARTICLE | Felder, R. M. (2021). STEM education: A tale of two paradigms. Journal
of Food Science Education, 20(1), 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4329.12219

9
 LITERATURE REVIEW
5. Observable Features of Active Science Education Practices
Although research findings support elevated learning outcomes for students who engage in active science
learning, faculty members are still resistant to using these practices. In this article we describe the
observable features found in 17 evidence-based, active, science instructional practices to address the
discrepancy between the effectiveness of these practices and instructors’ willingness to use them. We assert
that if university science instructors are aware of the observable features found in evidence-based practices,
they would be better positioned to use these features in their teaching. Further, we hope that personal
exploration of the observable features found in active practices will provide a foundation for an in-depth
analysis of research and theory that supports student learning. The identified observable features include
student and teacher actions as well as learning contexts. Further, we explore the patterns identified through
our analysis of the observable features. These patterns include: multiple observable actions, varied learning
contexts, prevalent observable actions, and the importance of student communication. Interpretations of
these patterns are provided along with suggestions for incorporating the observable features into personal
practice.
a. PRACTICES | Observable Actions & Modes of Engagement
i. Facilitating dialogue (Faculty)
ii. Facilitating activities (Faculty)
iii. Waiting (Faculty)
1. Presenting inquiries to students & giving them time to generate an answer
iv. Explaining (Faculty)
1. Short digestible lectures on inquired topics (Formal/Informal)
v. Reading (Student)
vi. Writing (Student)
vii. Observing (Student)
viii. Speaking (Student)
ix. Building/Manipulating (Student)
b. KEEP IN MIND | Identified four patterns based on analysis of the observable features within
active practices.
i. Active practices incorporate multiple observable actions
1. short, targeted instructional sequences
a. Short sequences infuse traditional lecture with strategic insertions of
student interactions, engaging students with content and with each other
through writing, speaking, and observing.
2. extended instructional practices
a. A purpose of these extended sequences is to engage students in activities
that align with science practices including iterative problem solving,
hypothesis testing, planning and execution of experiments, and design
testing.
ii. Varying activities across contexts provides learners with opportunities to develop and
assert ideas, listen to ideas of others (i.e., peers and instructor), and evaluate personal
understanding through comparison with others.

10
 LITERATURE REVIEW
iii. Several observable actions (i.e., student speaking, writing, and reading and instructor
facilitating discussion) are prevalent across many of the reviewed strategies.
iv. By increasing opportunities for student communication, instructors increase opportunities
for engagement, thereby increasing learning opportunities. Student communication,
specifically discussion, is foundational to the learning process and can be used by
instructors for the purposes of assessment and knowledge construction.
c. LINK TO ARTICLE | Roseler, K., Paul, C. A., Felton, M., & Theisen, C. H. (2018).
Observable Features of Active Science Education Practices. Journal of College Science
Teaching, 47(6), 83–91.

11
 LITERATURE REVIEW
6. Establishing Effective STEM Mentoring Relationships through Mentor Training
Science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) mentoring programs typically have the goals of
generating interest and excitement in STEM topics and careers and supporting STEM career achievement
persistence. These outcomes are fostered through positive and trusting relationships with mentors. Mentors
in STEM programs often have extensive subject matter expertise in a STEM content area, but they may lack
the knowledge, attitudes, and skills that are important for establishing an effective mentoring relationship
with a young person. The purpose of this review is to describe (1) a set of topics recommended for inclusion
in STEM mentor training, based on a literature review, and (2) the current state of implementation of these
recommended training topics among STEM mentoring programs in the United States. Training for mentors
should prepare them with the knowledge they need to support their mentee being successful in a STEM
education or career while fostering the skills they need to establish an effective mentoring relationship.
a. PRACTICES | We have identified four major topic areas to include in the training of STEM
mentors:
i. Knowledge and attitudes regarding disparities in STEM career achievement
ii. Mentor roles that promote STEM outcomes
iii. Behaviors to promote mentees’ positive attitudes about STEM
iv. Program specific topics.
b. KEEP IN MIND | (Review heavily source material: EEPM)
i. The article heavily refers to the Supplement of Elements of Effective Practice in
Mentoring. In the section designated for mentor training, the Supplement posits 13
specific recommendations for training in STEM mentoring programs. They are as
follows:
1. STEM mentoring programs that involve mentors and mentees conducting STEM
activities together should require training not only in how to develop an effective,
close mentoring relationship with one or more mentees, but also training on other
topics. Because of the increased training demands on STEM mentors, pre-match
mentor training will need to last more than a minimum of two hours.
2. STEM mentoring programs often focus their training on the role of being a
positive role model to mentees with the goal of building mentees’ sense of
belonging in a STEM field and establishing their scientific identity. Two
additional key roles need to be incorporated into mentor training content.
a. Mentors need to be trained to be a connector or advocate for their mentees
to connect them to other people, places, experiences, or opportunities
related to STEM.
b. Traditional mentor training should be included in STEM mentor training
with a focus on the importance of being a trusted, adult friend to mentees
in order to establish a caring, supportive mentoring relationship.
3. Because communal goals may be highly valued by female, first-generation, and
racial and ethnic minority students, mentor training needs to include strategies to
highlight communal opportunities in STEM for programs targeting these
populations.

12
 LITERATURE REVIEW
4. Because female and minority students frequently encounter negative stereotypes
and lower expectations of their intellect and abilities, additional topics for pre- (or
post) match training for mentors in a STEM mentoring program are needed to
help mentees overcome barriers to success in STEM coursework or common
challenges experienced when exploring or entering STEM careers. These topics
include:
a. Cultural awareness training on negative stereotypes and lower
expectations, unconscious biases, and diversity and inclusion;
b. Strategies for supporting feelings of self-efficacy and belonging;
c. Communicating admiration and respect for mentees;
d. Talking with their mentees about traditional barriers to STEM education
and STEM careers including race, gender, socioeconomic status, and
disability;
e. Teaching and providing feedback on workplace norms and behaviors in
ways that are culturally responsive and empowering for youth;
f. Fostering a growth mindset in youth
5. Mentors can be trained to help build sustained career interests in STEM by
communicating a meaningful passion for their work, as well as a strong sense of
purpose participating in a deeply fulfilling, positive, and meaningful career.
6. Because STEM mentoring programs are often group-based and conducted at
program sites, mentor training should address how to establish a caring,
supportive, and individual mentoring relationship with each member of the group.
7. STEM mentoring programs that include conducting scientific experiments or
going on field trips may need to develop risk management policies and mentor
training on these policies to protect the safety of mentees and mentors.
8. STEM mentoring programs may consider adopting or adapting general or
STEM-specific mentor training materials that have been informed by empirical
research or are themselves empirically evaluated.
9. When STEM mentoring programs have matches conduct STEM activities or
experiments together, ongoing mentor training is likely needed in the following
topics:
a. Facilitating STEM activities. Training could be conducted in advance of
the meeting or just-in-time, and virtually (e.g., online videos, video or web
conferences) or at an in-person, instructor-led workshop.
b. How to conduct the program’s STEM activities in a safe and successful
way
c. Being cautious about using an overly technical vocabulary with mentees
without providing them with definitions or explanations
d. The importance of simplifying explanations and instructions so that they
are developmentally appropriate for the target audience of mentees.
e. The scientific method, critical thinking, and continuing problem-solving

13
 LITERATURE REVIEW
10. Because many STEM mentoring programs involve having mentees work in
authentic STEM settings or with STEM professionals serving as mentors, some
additional mentee training topics should be addressed that may support a positive
mentoring relationship, but are not necessarily central to being a mentee.
a. Bioethics in research with human subjects
b. Professional ethics (licensing, plagiarism, authorship credit)
c. Coursework prerequisites
d. Scientific research methods
e. Career opportunities
f. Networking skills
11. STEM mentoring programs that include conducting scientific experiments or
going on field trips may need to develop risk management policies and mentee
training on these policies to protect the safety of mentees and their mentors.
12. STEM mentoring programs provide parents or guardians with training on how
they can support and encourage the mission, goals, and activities of the STEM
mentoring program, as well as provide support to the STEM mentoring
relationship.
13. STEM mentoring programs that include conducting scientific experiments or
going on field trips may need to develop risk management policies and parent or
guardian training on these policies to protect the safety of mentees and their
mentors.
c. LINK TO ARTICLE | Stelter, R. L., Kupersmidt, J. B., & Stump, K. N. (2021). Establishing
effective STEM mentoring relationships through mentor training. Annals of the New York
Academy of Sciences, 1483(1), 224–243. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.14470

14
 LITERATURE REVIEW
7. The Role of Peer Mentors in Promoting Knowledge and Skills Development in Graduate Education
The objective of this study was to explore the role of peer mentorship in facilitating graduate student
resiliency, knowledge acquisition, and development of academic competencies. We conducted a qualitative
case study, using in-person interview data from sixty-two students recruited from four professional faculties
(Education, Medicine, Nursing, and Social Work) at a large Canadian University. We identified four broad
themes derived from a thematic and constant comparative analysis of interview data: (1) knowledge
sharing, (2) skills development, (3) academic milestones, and (4) program supports. While the majority
of the students interviewed had not participated in any formal peer-mentoring program, they recommended
that any future program incorporate mentorship training and include access to collaborative spaces and
targeted opportunities for students to develop these relationships.
a. PRACTICE | Formal University Sanctioned Peer Mentoring
i. Graduate students reported that peer mentorship promoted the development of learning
environments that emphasized community, collaboration, and shared purpose. Students
believed that peer mentors facilitated their access to essential procedural and disciplinary
knowledge and helped them to develop academic and research skills and achieve key
academic milestones.
b. KEEP IN MIND | Elements of Peer Groups Impact Equitable Access
i. Elements such as culture, race, geography, time & distance from peer groups have a
dramatic impact on equitable access to peer mentorship. Hence, the potential value of
formal programs designed by the university to provide equitable access to peer mentoring
for graduate students is essential-- especially for international and distance students, who
may experience additional challenges in forming supportive peer relationships.
c. LINK TO ARTICLE | Lorenzetti, D. L., Nowell, L., Jacobsen, M., Lorenzetti, L., Clancy, T.,
Freeman, G., & Oddone Paolucci, E. (2020). The Role of Peer Mentors in Promoting Knowledge
and Skills Development in Graduate Education. Education Research International, 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8822289

15
 LITERATURE REVIEW
8. Special Issue: Mentoring Undergraduate Students
The compendium of research reviewed provides practitioners and researchers with an evidence-based view
of the influence of mentoring on the academic and social integration of undergraduate students. The authors
sought to address four specific goals:
i. Identify & understand how empirical knowledge & theory have advanced since the last
comprehensive review
ii. Identify & provide clarity about the characteristics that serve to meaningfully distinguish
mentoring relationships & programmatic efforts
iii. Integrate theory & research in a way that could provide tentative hypotheses regarding
the relationship between the various characteristics & outcomes of mentoring
iv. Offer evidence-based practices for the administration of formal mentoring programs
a. PRACTICES | Orientation & Retention Programs, Mentoring for Social Justice & Equity, Peer
Mentoring
b. KEEP IN MIND | Different Frameworks to Approach Mentoring
i. Typology Frameworks | Developmental networks are differentiated based on their
diversity, or the extent to which supporters are from different social spheres, and strength
of relationships. More diverse networks provide individuals with a less redundant and
broader range of information. Stronger ties often mean more intimacy and stronger
investment in the mentee’s career development.
ii. Process-Based Frameworks | The Multicultural Feminist model of mentoring has five
dimensions that should govern mentoring relationships, intended to empower mentees
and recognize identity. This model suggests that mentoring relationships should (a)
rethink and challenge power structures and dynamics; (b) embrace the principles of
relational mentoring, emphasizing honesty, network development, and open conversation
about multicultural issues; (c) place a high value on collaboration; (d) integrate
dichotomies, encouraging a congruent sense of self and validating personal experiences;
and (e) incorporate a political analysis that challenges the status quo, particularly racism,
sexism, classism, and heterosexism.
iii. Outcome-Based Frameworks | five interrelated constructs: (a) the context of the
relationship, (b) mentor characteristics, (c) protege characteristics, (d) stages of the
relationship, and (e) outcomes of the relationship for the mentor, mentee, and
organization
c. LINK TO ARTICLE | Crisp, G., Baker, V. L., Griffin, K. A., Lunsford, L. G., & Pifer, M. J.
(2017). Special Issue: Mentoring Undergraduate Students. ASHE Higher Education Report,
43(1), 1–117.

16
 LITERATURE REVIEW
9. Peer Review of Teaching: What Features Matter? A Case Study within STEM Faculties
Peer Review of Teaching (PRT) programmes have been implemented in the Higher Education context to
ensure teaching is a collaborative, evolving and inspiring activity in an era of ever shrinking resources.
These programmes are reported to have many benefits but are notoriously difficult to implement and even
more difficult to sustain, with research implicating the mechanics and specific characteristics featured in the
programmes as vital to their ultimate success. This paper addresses this issue through first, detailing one
version of a PRT programme implemented at one institution and second, by reporting on how the
participants of this programme viewed its specific characteristics. Data from participant interviews and
forms provide both confirmation of the efficacy of certain features, such as receiving feedback and having
the opportunity to observe others and also provide more detail on some lesser researched features, such as
the relevance of discipline and number of observations.
a. PRACTICES | Elements of Constructive Peer Review
i. Feedback-oriented observation: From the perspective of a pedagogical & disciplinary
expert who observed faculty lectures. Scan student/mentee participation
ii. Active Learning: Application of reformed pedagogy with the assistance of Expert
Reviewer
iii. Congruous/Complementary partnership between pedagogical & disciplinary expertise: A
triad (at minimum) between staff members who are from common and diverse
disciplines. Having a group of three offers faculty ‘teaching-related’ insights and
disciplinary insights in a constructive manner
iv. Sense of Belonging: Identifying elements of knowledge sharing that are curated via
observation and trial & error
b. KEEP IN MIND | Faculty Experience
i. A teachers’ primary allegiance is to their discipline and this strongly influences the
translation of teaching practices into the disciplinary culture.
ii. Faculty mentors are shown to feel moments of isolation and rigidity in their approach to
teaching. However, adaptation of the faculty level network proposed here can ease their
anxiety and improve their versatility when it comes to approaching student mentorship.
1. Just as students aren’t expected to excel in a vacuum, neither are faculty
members.
c. LINK TO ARTICLE | Georgiou, H., Sharma, M., & Ling, A. (2018). Peer review of teaching:
What features matter? A case study within STEM faculties. Innovations in Education &
Teaching International, 55(2), 190–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2017.1342557

17
 LITERATURE REVIEW
10. Self-Study as a Method for Engaging STEM Faculty in Transformative Change to Improve Teaching
The overarching goal was to explore how to broaden STEM instructors’ adoption of interactive teaching
with evidence-based teaching practices. This study examined the experiences of STEM faculty learning
interactive teaching strategies while also learning and applying self-study methodology in a year-long
faculty self-study learning community. We used self-study methodology as an innovative design to support
STEM faculty’s research about their teaching. Drawing on multiple sources of data, the researchers found
that although participants reported that learning self-study methodology was unique and complex, they
embraced the problematic and sophisticated nature of self-study to examine their teaching while recognizing
the close link between teaching and research. As they reflected on their professional identities as teachers,
they gained a better understanding of their role in their students’ learning. Supporting faculty’s small
changes in teaching can lead to larger changes over time. Self-study methodology can reinforce the change
process. The self-study learning community design may be useful as a catalyst for developing an advanced
teaching trajectory for STEM faculty and useful for faculty from various disciplines. Implications for
impacting individual and institutional capacity in higher education are discussed.
a. PRACTICES | (PAIDIA)
i. Personal Situated Chosen Inquiry: When faculty willingly problematize their teaching &
learning-- a choice of inquiry situated in their ability to teach that also responds to their
positionality in a socio-cultural-historical-political context
ii. Accountability: Potentially reform his/her practice based off input/support from *critical
friends
iii. Integrated Critical Creative Collaboration: Learning style that promotes diverse ways of
seeing/knowing with others as a means of extending professional learning
iv. Design ↔ Dissemination: Clear and transparent sharing of self-study research as it
unfolds in real-time
v. Improved Learning for Self and Others: Intentional & deep questioning about the status
quo in their practice as means to improve contribution
vi. Authenticated and Invited Leadership: Facilitator of exercise authenticated self-study
research by participating & inviting leadership to engage
vii. Critical friends: A diverse group of faculty whose input and feedback is situated around
the critical inquiry and reformation of pedagogy in question. Typically members who are
also performing self-study research.
viii. Self-study Methodology: Self-study is about the study of changing one’s role in teaching
by examining oneself, rather than the study of the effectiveness of instructional strategies
by examining only student outcomes.
1. This is a reflexive practice for communities of faculty designed to aid
understanding the value of locating oneself in the experiences of others as a form
of demonstrating an ethics of care and trust. PAIDIA also supports being reflexive
together through thinking deeply about and questioning our professional practice
and selves in dialogue with significant others
b. KEEP IN MIND | Faculty Perspective on Self-Study as Research

18
 LITERATURE REVIEW
i. Faculty members recognized themselves as the designers of their teaching and as
pedagogical enactors and yet also appreciated what others contributed to their learning. In
this sense, the collaboration and the learning are inextricably linked. Participants were
able to make linkages between education research and their own teaching while they
embraced the problematic nature of teaching as work that is always in development.
ii. Faculty reported that working with critical friends did help them reframe their thinking
about teaching and understanding teaching as research. Additionally, institutional support
increases the likelihood of genuine faculty development, as well as improves retention,
productivity, career agency, and satisfaction
c. LINK TO ARTICLE | Samaras, A. P., Hjalmarson, M., Bland, L. C., Nelson, J. K., &
Christopher, E. K. (2019). Self-Study as a Method for Engaging STEM Faculty in
Transformative Change to Improve Teaching. International Journal of Teaching & Learning in
Higher Education, 3(2), 195–213.

19
 LITERATURE REVIEW
KEY CONCEPTS
Reminder: Mentorship, and its effectiveness, are intimately linked with cultivating connections with the people
being mentored. Mentees aren’t a monolith. You cannot copy & paste your approach between them.

A. Significant Mentor Practices (Review 6b)

a. Make known & establish a whole-hearted investment in your mentee.
i. If you do not have the capacity to develop a strong relationship with your mentee, the
estrangement that follows may deteriorate their sense of belonging & direction. If you’d
like to mentor, it’s imperative that you are present.
b. Establish clear lines of communication and availability.
i. This directly applies to articulating and respecting one another’s communication styles.
c. Design learning objectives and action plans
i. It is imperative that mentors are organized and tactical about the potential frameworks
they apply for mentee development in a way that orients the needs of all parties involved.
d. Expand the relationship beyond academia. Make it personal
i. Trust can be built when mentees see that you take an interest in who they are, in addition
to what they can produce.
ii. This can most easily occur when mentors share more about who they are, humanizing the
dynamic and orienting the narrative around two (or more) people who are mutually
conducive to one another’s goals, versus one person solely learning (leeching) off
another.
iii. Share failures & insecurities as well as avenues for success
e. Operate as the EPICENTER
i. More diverse networks provide individuals with a less redundant and broader range of
information
ii. There is a prevalent feeling of isolation among graduate students, especially those
coming from underrepresented (UR) backgrounds (race, gender, sex) that should be
addressed when first connecting with a mentee.
1. Who are you? Interests? Hobbies? Family? Favorite Food? Pronouns?
iii. Get to know who they are and allow them to prescribe to you what their needs may be.
1. Design an action plan that is oriented around agreed upon goals in the realms of
community, academia, career, etc.
2. Use your knowledge of community resources/groups/organizations (at the student
level) and peer faculty to deepen their entrenchment within the institution and the
surrounding area.
iv. Advocate
1. The development of your mentee doesn’t end with mentorship. Effective mentors
should also function as sponsors: advocating for someone in the same
organization — talking to other senior leaders, peers and colleagues and making
room for their protege to advance in the organization.
2. There are real and crippling financial stresses to attending graduate school and
doing research. It’s imperative you are conscious of the financial contract you &
20
 LITERATURE REVIEW
your mentee have and, if possible, support them monetarily (at the department
level) with funding should initial plans change.
v. Integrate them within established peer groups, if possible

B. Primary Methods of Support for:

a. Faculty
i. Critical friends: A diverse group of faculty whose input and feedback is situated around
the critical inquiry and reformation of pedagogy in question. Typically members who are
also performing self-study research as an avenue of advancing pedagogy in mentoring.
1. To extrapolate, faculty mentors should not embark on mentoring in a vacuum.
Connect with other faculty who are also encouraged in developing mentees and
work with them to (1) accelerate their own methodology and approaches (2) build
a community of peers who understand and support the success of their endeavors.
ii. Reflexive Observation
1. Generate a feedback-oriented community with members whose pedagogy can be
observed, reviewed and revised.
b. Protege
i. Peer mentorship is imperative for proteges to guide recent admits on a fast track to
acclimatization.
ii. Make sure to check in with other mentees who share the same mentor or who are in the
same field and/or different ones to get an understanding of (1) the university (2) the
present peer community within the department (3) do’s and don'ts of research
methodology.
1. This is not only helpful at face value, but directly correlates with feelings of
self-efficacy and belonging within the institution.

C. Ways Mentorship Can Fail:

a. Lack of communication and availability-- being “hands off” as a mentor or not discussing
needs/objectives as a mentee
b. Dismissive behavior/demeanor that belittles the intellectual contribution of mentees
c. Culturally myopic in regards to mentor/mentee’s identity and background
d. Refusal to integrate mentor/mentees within their respective established networks
e. Overwhelmed/Isolated faculty who do not communicate their needs to peers & mentees
f. No established community of critical friends to assist in the progression of faculty mentoring
relationship(s)

It is the responsibility of both the mentor and mentee to invest in the relationship via effective communication.
Neither should be tasked with the sole responsibility of progressing the relationship, and both should have
trusted peers whose feedback and experience are trusted

D. Essential Mindsets
a. Mentorship is an iterative process

21
 LITERATURE REVIEW
i. As long as those involved are committed to revising and re-revising their approach to
developing other human beings, there’s no limit to what can be learned and applied
1. Mentors do not have all the answers and their advice should never be seen as
100% prescriptive.
2. Mentees are students, not infants. They should not be treated as though they are
incompetent nor should any mentor allow their mentee to adopt a style of
unhealthy dependency.
b. Mentorship is an individual process
i. What works for one mentee may not work for another. Connect with mentees as people
first, then proteges, then students.
ii. This requires (1) cultural competency & (2) cultural humility
1. cultural competency: the will and actions to build understanding between people;
to be respectful and open to different cultural perspectives, strengthen cultural
security and work towards equality in opportunity
2. cultural humility: a lifelong process of self-reflection and self-critique whereby
the individual not only learns about another's culture, but one starts with an
examination of her/his own beliefs and cultural identities
c. Mentees/Mentors are not alone
i. All parties involved in mentorship should be integrated within a community of people
who are in the same dynamics and experience a variety of effective and ineffective
results.
ii. Listen & use other’s experiences to inform and improve on their own relationships.
d. The squeaky wheel gets the oil
i. It is imperative to establish consistent and dependable communication from the get-go
(e.g. weekly, biweekly, monthly, in person, via email, etc.).
ii. As issues arise, disclose them as necessary. Don’t leave mentors/mentees in the dark.
iii. Ask questions about learning/mentoring styles to gauge where each person is starting
from vs. where they each want to be with respect to one another.

22