Mentoring Undergraduates: Professors Strategically Guiding the Next Generation of Professionals[*]

Types of Mentoring

In the empirical literature several different types of mentoring are delineated (i.e., academic, youth, employee). Although all three types of mentoring have similarities, the focus of each type is unique. Academic mentoring focuses on academic adjustment, retention, and overall educational success (Johnson, 2007; Ragins, 2002). Youth mentoring highlights a relationship with youth at risk, attempting to deter risky youth behavior (DuBois & Karcher, 2005). Mentoring employees is an attempt to facilitate career development and assist new entrants into the workplace, (Eby, 1997; Eby, Allen, Evans, Ng, & DuBois, 2008). A meta-analysis of the mentoring research demonstrated that of all three types of mentoring, academic mentoring produced the strongest positive outcomes (Eby, Allen, Evans, Ng, & DuBois, 2008).

Academic achievement, grade point average, school absence, drop out rates, satisfaction with the university academic experience, attitude towards the school, time spent on educational pursuits, and number of semesters to graduation were all related positively to academic mentoring (Crane, & Prentice-Dunway, 2007). Given these positive academic outcomes, institutions would do well to be more strategic in developing mentoring relationships and rewarding faculty who engage in this endeavor.

On university campuses across the United States there is within one area of the university a purposeful and strategic focus on mentoring. Specifically, a concerted effort towards a high level of mentoring seems to be happening within athletic programs. In fact, faculty in the academy may have much to learn from athletic coaches on university campuses. Over the years I have been surprised at the level of care and concern athletic coaches demonstrate towards the “entire person.” Legendary UCLA basketball coach, John Wooden recently published a book on mentoring, speaking about the power of mentoring and being mentored (Wooden, Yeager, & Maxwell, 2009). As a mentor, Wooden set the bar high and was a role model of mentoring done with excellence. While coaches’ primary motivation may be winning games, they do not limit their interest to an athlete’s performance. My son in law, a university basketball coach, was in my office the other day. While he could only remember the names of a few of his former teachers, there was not one coach whose name he had forgotten. Although he had fewer coaches than teachers, he spoke about the level of concern his coaches had regarding his class attendance, study habits, exams, and grades, as well as his friendships, family, and extra-curricular activities. His teachers were interested in him pursuing history or literature; yet, few of them took many opportunities to ask him any questions beyond their disciplines. To be clear, I am not arguing that university athletic coaches are admirable models that academics should emulate. Justified and serious criticisms of university athletic programs and their negative impact on undergraduate educational outcomes and the aversive economic costs to universities have been made (Sperber, 2000). However, I do believe faculty might learn valuable lessons about mentoring from university coaches. What could happen in the academic world if professors showed the level of commitment to the academic interests of their students as athletic coaches demonstrate towards their athletes? If students were encouraged and pushed academically as athletes are in training for their sport, what level of academic growth and productivity could we see in students’ lives?

Beginning of the Relationship

How does a mentoring relationship start? In a public university with more than 20,000 students, developing a relationship where student and mentor can both benefit from their interaction is essential. First and foremost, students need to understand that the possibility that such a relationship can exist.

Finding the right protégé to mentor is important. While I am interested in the professional and educational development of all of my students, as a mentor, I choose to be selective and look for a very small number of only the most promising undergraduates. Students who are looking for a faculty mentor also are likely selective in the characteristics they expect from a mentor. During the course of my career, I am sure there have been numerous students who have not appreciated my philosophy of education or my personality. As a result of my “person,” they looked for other faculty if they were interested in being mentored. I look for students with strong academic potential, an intrinsic desire to learn, a schedule that allows them time to work with me on projects, at least one year left before graduation, and a personality and intellectual interests that mesh well with mine.

Like any relationship, the demonstration of care and interest communicated towards the student is central to faculty-student mentoring. Different students have different needs, and the needs of any one student will change over time. In general, as relationships develop, people disclose more private and personal information about themselves (Altman & Taylor, 1973). In my own experience, the communication that takes place within mentoring relationships, similarly, deepens as time progresses. While some mentoring relationships remain focused primarily on career and academic pursuits, other associations become more personal over time. I frequently assess students I mentor, trying to ascertain what they expect from me, what I can expect from them. In this sense I continue to evaluate students’ interests and motivation to continue on and obtain more meaningful experiences. The evaluation of the student’s motivation takes place in the context of the ongoing and unique relationship that develops with each student. Mentoring is not a particular set of experiences or a specific body of information that an older wiser person gives to or teaches to all protégés. The essence of mentoring is this strategic relationship that has the possibility for significant personal and academic growth. It is two people bringing together their shared interests along with a desire to learn from each other.

Early communication with mentees is task oriented and academically focused, often centering on courses, minors to take, or career plans. Later, student concerns move to graduation and employment opportunities. Most students lack a basic understanding of career options. The process of finding an internship or evaluating career opportunities leaves undergraduates with numerous unanswered questions. While they may have a general sense that they like “working with people,” they do not know where to start when it comes to applying their knowledge and people skills. Given the stage of development of most undergraduates, one can assume that students are in a process of identity formation, that they are to some degree uncertain of the specific people skills they possess and how those can be effectively used within the human service field.

Regardless of the many questions students might raise, their queries primarily deal with issues of identity. Who am I, what unique skills and knowledge do I have, what component of the human service field most interests me, what goals should I set for myself? Significant questions about one’s identity take time.

Given that I mentor academically focused students, questions typically arise about the need for graduate education. Discipline specific concerns as well as why one program might be better than another for a specific student, where these programs exist, as well as when to apply are later student concerns. The fact that graduate assistantships offer significant economical benefits that impact the decision to apply to a certain program is something of which most undergraduates are not aware. Students and their parents are enthusiastic when they hear that graduate school funding is easier to obtain than undergraduate funding. The graduate application process, writing personal statements, letters of reference, admissions interviews, examining the strengths and weaknesses of different programs and the faculty research interests are all useful pieces of information for students applying to graduate schools.

Involvement in the Process of Research

One method I use to select students arises from an introductory marriage and family course I teach. The course is offered in a large lecture format and examinations are challenging because the course covers such a broad body of information. When talking about marriage and family research I typically discuss some of the more interesting findings from studies I previously have published. For example, I recently showed a videotape of a married couple discussing a relationship issue and then described how I showed participants a video of their heated discussions with their spouses as one component of a marriage education program (Long, Angera, Hakoyama, 2006). Understanding the research process is essential in the lives of future practitioners and scholars, as these experiences are one of the primary reasons students later seek out research experiences in their fields of interest (Landrum & Nelson, 2002). Finding the right students and offering them opportunities to be involved in a program of research is often the beginning of a longer term mentoring relationship.

In class when I discuss my research I talk about undergraduates who currently are working with me, and the types of activities they are doing. Initially, I do not ask for volunteers directly. By the end of the term I typically have approached one or two students. I ask about their professional and educational goals, and whether or not they are doing volunteer work in the field. If students seem interested in discussing these issues more, I ask them to drop by my office during office hours. I do not set up a specific meeting time because I want students who take initiative and are motivated learners. If students follow up with me, it typically leads to coffee, discussions about research opportunities I currently have, and issues beyond academic concerns.

While early student research experiences can be tedious and seemingly unimportant, over time, the work grows more meaningful. Early in a mentoring relationship, I strategically give students some of the tedious research tasks, because I want to understand their level of commitment to the process. Some students quickly lose interest in a project and that is fine. Different students have different goals and interests at this stage of their academic careers; I am looking for students with specific interests. There is research that suggests that engaging undergraduate students in research ought to be reserved for those who are committed and dedicated (Evans, Perry, Kras, Gale, & Campbell, 2009). Although the tasks may be tedious, the importance of those tasks is essential to the final product. For example, accuracy in the time consuming and mundane aspect of transcription has significant implications when later analysts are trying to develop an understanding of the data that is grounded in a person’s lived experience. While mundane work is initially part of the process, students need to be involved in more than busy work that faculty dislike.

Students also complete work in collaborative groups, helping each other, learning the same academic processes together. There have been times when my undergraduates were more motivated and competent than the graduate students with whom they were working. As the complexity of the work increases, time spent with a student usually increases and the faculty-student relationship becomes more interdependent. I aim to understand the specific abilities a student might have, or the experiences they would like to have, and then try and provide those opportunities. For students with an interest in family law, I might have them speak to or interview with the intensive probation officer in our county, observing the practice of law and the involvement of the state in the lives of families. For those who demonstrate an affinity for the research process, they may go to professional meetings to meet faculty and students from other institutions. They also might participate in the presentation of a paper at a state or regional meeting. At the end of a semester, the small group of research students and I usually have breakfast at a local restaurant where conversations are more spontaneous and less task oriented.

For students the outcomes from mentoring can be more meaningful than courses they might take. When asking Jessica about the tasks she had undertaken with me, her response was enlightening.

Reciprocity in Mentoring

For the faculty-student relationship to flourish, the interaction between faculty and students must benefit both participants. Mentors need not be solely altruistic. Expecting faculty to act in selfless ways with students when there are already excessive demands on faculty is an unrealistic expectation. I am a mentor of undergraduates because the benefits significantly outweigh the costs. Students and faculty both benefit from the exchange.

I have students helping me with my scholarly activities on a regular basis. These are people that I learn from, curious people, students who ask questions and raise issues that I might never consider on my own. They learn something about the discipline and the process of research; they put together the proposal to do research with human subjects, analyze data, develop surveys, read and understand scientific literature, interview and transcribe interviews, and assist in the facilitation of marital education programs. These activities are a joint venture. I might have them read a previously approved Internal Review Board (IRB) proposal and then ask them to begin completing an IRB proposal for an upcoming project.

Over the years, numerous faculty members have asked if I pay these students for their work and the answer is no. I do not pay these students for their work because I am convinced that this experience enriches their own academic interests and opportunities. For students, these experiences are a crucial component of their academic identity and impact who they will become as future scholars. For faculty, the relationship allows them assistance in the pursuit of their own scholarly endeavors. Earlier in my academic career my own needs were necessarily more self-focused. A program of research, service, leadership responsibilities, and the development of new courses, consumed the majority of my professional time. As time passed and I became established as a professor and researcher, it freed me up to invest more time in the next generation of scholars. My ability to be a productive faculty member greatly was enhanced because I mentored. In the mentoring relationship, students get to do a lot of what they might only read about, or what might be reserved for graduate students. Undergraduates often have lives that are less complex and encumbered than graduate students, and because mentoring opportunities are rare among undergraduatess, they often seem more thankful and excited about the process. With academically focused and motivated students, these experiences often stimulate an intrinsic desire to learn. Students become excited themselves about the process of creating new knowledge.

For me, at a generative stage in my own development, I am reminded of an inspiring comment from Erik Erikson:

The typical example of generativity in middle adulthood is parenting one’s offspring, socializing, guiding the next generation. The experience of parenting can be fulfilling and unique, providing a feeling that one is caring for the next generation. A similar generative experience can evolve while mentoring undergraduates. As an academician, one’s academic “gene pool” can live on. Even now, I clearly see the legacy of my own undergraduate mentor, Barrie Palfreyman, his influence on me impacting the lives of another generation of students.

Need for Mentoring Outcome Research

There is a need for additional mentoring research. I have highlighted the importance of a mentoring relationship with undergraduates as a reciprocally beneficial experience within the university. The mentoring relationship itself needs to be studied from student and faculty points of view. If mentoring is a bidirectional relationship then research also must examine the positive outcomes mentoring provides faculty. Research also could examine institutional implications of mentoring undergraduates. A clearer understanding of faculty and institutional benefits might increase faculty involvement, and strengthen university policies that support mentoring. Does mentoring undergraduates actually increase the productivity of faculty? What are those contextual and personal variables that are positively and negatively related to rich mentoring relationships for faculty and students? Is there an empirical intergenerational influence that comes from mentoring relationships? Are faculty who were mentored, more likely to mentor?