2.5 Mentoring Styles

A Learner-Centered Mentoring Paradigm

Mentoring styles can affect how mentees learn from mentors. The learner-centered mentoring paradigm is recommended. The case study method is useful when prospective mentors are developing their own style of mentoring. Presented below are two case studies of faculty with distinct mentoring styles.

Case Study: What Just Happened?

Professor Daniels, a well-published and respected associate professor at a large, public university, had been assigned by his department to be Robert’s mentor. Robert, a second-year undergraduate student, was highly motivated to learn how to be an exceptional researcher. Their relationship started out on a mutually positive note, with a relaxed rapport. Yet, shortly thereafter, the level of interaction shifted dramatically. Professor Daniels expected Robert to shadow him, to work on his projects, and to research topics he would personally assign. As time progressed, Professor Daniels strictly gave Robert instructions, which Robert followed. As Robert’s responsibilities increased, he and Professor Daniels saw each other less. Before long, the communication between Professor Daniels and Robert changed from casual discussion to bursts of short reports. Few opportunities arose for Robert to raise questions, as  little conversation about his learning experience took place. Communication exchanges of any kind between mentor and mentee were brief, few, and irregular. Robert was bewildered and discouraged.

Reflection: What was missing in this relationship between mentor and mentee? What can Robert do to communicate his needs to his mentor? What can Professor Daniels do to facilitate this communication?

Case Study: On the Same Page

Linda, a high-achiever, realized she needed to learn and master several skills to achieve a future career in research. She approached Professor Sam, an esteemed and respected assistant professor, and asked her to be her mentor. At the first meeting, Professor Sam worked with Linda to put a contract in place. Linda walked away from the meeting with clear learning goals that were attainable and measurable. Each time they met, Professor Sam and Linda reviewed the progress they were making against Linda’s learning goals. They set aside consistent and regular time to talk about their level of satisfaction with the relationship, including how each felt they were progressing with their contractual obligations. There came a point in time, when Linda wanted to advance herself, and more of Professor Sam’s time was needed. Since Professor Sam had intentionally built in a reflection period into their regularly scheduled meetings, she and Linda had the opportunity to discuss issues regarding the progression of the research. Additionally, Professor Sam encouraged Linda to attend conferences, seminars, and workshops on her own. She explained these experiences could add to Linda’s knowledge base and experiential growth as a researcher.

Reflection: What were the strengths of this mentoring relationship?

These case studies illustrate two mentoring styles with different learning outcomes for each student. The top-down mentoring relationship between Professor Daniels and Robert—where students are first awestruck to work with a well-established expert, then question what to do, and are left “running after the professor”—is still frustratingly common in academia. In contrast, the relationship between Professor Sam and Linda reflect a collaborative learning partnership, where the mentor is less of an authority figure and more of a facilitator. The mentor purposefully created an atmosphere conducive to learning. Her mentee felt supported and encouraged to attain reasonable learning goals, contributing to her confidence, persistence, and identification as a researcher.

One of the biggest challenges for mentors is how to best assist their mentees in achieving their learning goals. For undergraduate college students, mentors must create a research environment that is learner-centered. The literature suggests that the more a mentor engages in facilitating the learning process, the more the mentee experiences a climate conducive to learning (Zachary, 2000). Instead of having the mentor take full responsibility for the mentee’s learning, the mentee learns to share the responsibility for the following:

1. the learning itself;
2. the priorities of the relationship;
3. the resources to become more self-directed with time; and
4. the setting in which learning takes place.

Over the course of the relationship, the mentor helps to develop the mentee’s self-direction from dependence to independence to interdependence (Zachary, 2000). As the relationship develops, a partnership evolves where mentor and mentee both share the accountability and responsibility for achieving the mentee’s attainable and measurable learning goals. At any time during the mentoring relationship, the mentor and mentee may diagnose, assess, plan, implement, and evaluate existing or new learning goals.

The learner-centered mentoring philosophy closely mirrors adult learning principles (Knowles, 1980). Elements of the learner-centered mentoring paradigm are further described in the table below.

Table 1: Elements of a Learner-Centered Mentoring Paradigm