Lianne M Loosveld1, Pascal W M Van Gerven2, Erik W Driessen2, Eline Vanassche3, Anthony R Artino4. 1. Department of Educational Development & Research, School of Health Professions Education, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 60, 6229 ER, Maastricht, the Netherlands. l.loosveld@maastrichtuniversity.nl. 2. Department of Educational Development & Research, School of Health Professions Education, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 60, 6229 ER, Maastricht, the Netherlands. 3. Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, campus Kulak, University of Leuven, Etienne Sabbelaan 51, P.O. Box 7654, 8500, Kortrijk, Belgium. 4. Department of Health, Human Function, and Rehabilitation Sciences, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, 2600 Virginia Avenue NW, Suite 104, Washington, DC, 20037, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Essential to the professional development of mentors is making explicit and critically challenging the knowledge and beliefs underpinning their mentoring practice. This paper reports on the development of a survey instrument called MERIT, MEntor Reflection InstrumenT, which was designed to support mentors' systematic reflection on the how, what and why of their practice. METHODS: In 2019, a twenty-item survey instrument was developed and piloted. Initial validation data (N = 228) were collected by distributing the survey through the authors' network. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted and internal consistency reliability coefficients were calculated. RESULTS: The Principal Axis EFA with Direct Oblimin rotation (Delta = 0) resulted in four factors: 1) supporting personal development, 2) modelling professional development, 3) fostering autonomy, and 4) monitoring performance. The four factors explained 43% of the total variance of item scores. The Cronbach's alphas for the subscale scores were between .42 and .75. CONCLUSIONS: The MERIT can help mentors reflect on their beliefs and professional knowhow. These reflections can serve as input for the faculty development initiatives mentors undertake, which may ultimately improve their knowledge and skills as a mentor.
BACKGROUND: Essential to the professional development of mentors is making explicit and critically challenging the knowledge and beliefs underpinning their mentoring practice. This paper reports on the development of a survey instrument called MERIT, MEntor Reflection InstrumenT, which was designed to support mentors' systematic reflection on the how, what and why of their practice. METHODS: In 2019, a twenty-item survey instrument was developed and piloted. Initial validation data (N = 228) were collected by distributing the survey through the authors' network. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted and internal consistency reliability coefficients were calculated. RESULTS: The Principal Axis EFA with Direct Oblimin rotation (Delta = 0) resulted in four factors: 1) supporting personal development, 2) modelling professional development, 3) fostering autonomy, and 4) monitoring performance. The four factors explained 43% of the total variance of item scores. The Cronbach's alphas for the subscale scores were between .42 and .75. CONCLUSIONS: The MERIT can help mentors reflect on their beliefs and professional knowhow. These reflections can serve as input for the faculty development initiatives mentors undertake, which may ultimately improve their knowledge and skills as a mentor.
Authors: Johanna C G Jacobs; Scheltus J Van Luijk; Henk Van Berkel; Cees P M Van der Vleuten; Gerda Croiset; Fedde Scheele Journal: Med Teach Date: 2012 Impact factor: 3.650
Authors: Yvonne Steinert; Karen Mann; Brownell Anderson; Bonnie Maureen Barnett; Angel Centeno; Laura Naismith; David Prideaux; John Spencer; Ellen Tullo; Thomas Viggiano; Helena Ward; Diana Dolmans Journal: Med Teach Date: 2016-07-15 Impact factor: 3.650
Authors: Lianne M Loosveld; Erik W Driessen; Eline Vanassche; Anthony R Artino; Pascal W M Van Gerven Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2022-08-23 Impact factor: 3.263