Long-term Outcomes for Teen Mothers Who Participated in a Mentoring Program to Prevent Repeat Teen Pregnancy

BackgroundEach year in the United States (US), one million adolescents are pregnant, of which approximately 20% are repeat pregnancies. Adolescent motherhood is associated with lower educational attainment, socioeconomic status and poorer health outcomes. A mentoring program called the Maikuru Program conducted from 2011 to 2015, was designed to teach young mothers under 20 years old how to face daily life challenges, to support them by pairing them with an adult mentor, and prevent a subsequent pregnancy during their teens. The goal of the present study was to examine educational attainment, employment and pregnancies of these adolescent mothers 1–5 years post program.MethodsFormer participants of the Maikuru Program were contacted by telephone and/or Facebook in 2016 to conduct a survey about education attainment, employment status, number of subsequent children delivered, and satisfaction with the program.ResultsNineteen of 51 participants (37%) were reached to complete the survey. Of those who responded, all were in high school or had graduated, nearly half were pursuing some form of higher education and 12 (63%) were currently employed. Nine mothers had given birth to another child; only two (10.5%) were known to be less than 20 years old at the time. All participants reported positive perceptions of the program and would recommend it to other adolescent mothers.ConclusionEducational achievement and employment were high among a modest proportion of adolescent mothers who had participated in a culturally tailored, teen mother-adult mentoring program. Repeat teen pregnancy was infrequent and the mentoring program was perceived as contributing to the success of those who responded to the follow-up. A future randomized trial based on this model may confirm these findings.     

A Stochastic Model of Consensus Reaching in Committee Decisions for Faculty Advancement,Promotion and Tenure: Does Diversity Matter?

PurposeThere are considerable gender and racial disparities in academic promotions regardless of academic qualifications, suggesting bias. The investigators studied the academic promotions process by simulating the work of Advancement, Promotion and Tenure (APT) committees and applying a mathematical model to assess the impact of diversity on consensus reaching.MethodThe study targeted academic faculty during an annual Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) meeting. Participants evaluated the academic dossier of a male Assistant Professor with a focus on community engagement during four simulations. All dossiers were identical, with the singular exception of the candidate's race (white vs. black). Committee composition varied with respect to racial diversity. Participants scored the candidate before and after the deliberations. The DeGroot Model was used to compare individual scoring to group convergence.ResultsWhile there was no statistically significant difference in the candidate's overall scores between the groups, the least diverse groups rated the candidate the lowest (p = 0.0595). Participants ranked activities related to diversity and equity as the least important. Moreover, criteria deliberated more heavily showed significant score changes after deliberation. Lastly, ambiguity about the review process at various institutions was reported by project participants, increasing the opportunity for bias in real world situations.ConclusionsWhile there was not enough statistical power to measure intragroup differences, the model shows promise in illuminating how individual perceptions, committee composition and group dynamics sway consensus reaching. The model also suggests that social research, community engagement and diversity work do not carry the same weight as traditional scholarship, impacting the career trajectory of minority scholars. The model can be used to evaluate bias not only in academic promotions but also in admissions, hiring and grant review. This will allow improved methods and processes for equitable academic performance reviews, enhancing the career trajectory and retention of minority scholars.     

Repaving the road to academic success: the IMeRGE approach to peer mentoring.

In recent years, academic health centers have made a considerable effort to encourage medical students and physicians-in-training to consider academic medicine as a career choice. For physicians, selecting a career in academic medicine may be the first hurdle, but the challenge of successfully maintaining an academic career is perhaps a more formidable task. Mentoring is a much-needed response to this challenge. But the success of traditional mentoring programs at academic institutions is often limited by, among other things, the availability of senior faculty who can serve as mentors. The authors describe the formation and organization of the Internal Medicine Research Group at Emory (IMeRGE), an innovative peer mentoring group within the Division of General Medicine at Emory University. This group, born partially out of the mentoring needs of our women and minority faculty, shared the primary goal of fostering a collaborative atmosphere among junior faculty, while simultaneously acquiring experience through advanced faculty development. The authors present our methods of garnering division support for designated time and financial resources, defining member responsibilities, developing a curriculum, providing peer support, and seeking advisors with expertise in the areas on which we wished to focus. In addition to the development of IMeRGE, the authors provide an overview of the pros and cons of traditional mentoring versus peer mentoring; discuss the challenges faced by IMeRGE and strategies for addressing these issues; and present the paradigm of IMeRGE as a template for alternative forms of academic mentorship.     

The Junior Faculty Laboratory: an innovative model of peer mentoring

Mentoring in academic medicine has been shown to contribute to the success of junior faculty, resulting in increased productivity, career satisfaction, and opportunities for networking. Although traditional dyadic mentoring, involving one senior faculty member and one junior protégé, is the dominant model for mentoring in the academic environment, there is increasing recognition that the sharing of knowledge, skills, and experiences among peers may also contribute to the career development of junior faculty. The authors describe the structure, activities, and outcomes of the Junior Faculty Laboratory (JFL), a self-organized, flexible, and dynamic peer-mentoring model within the Duke University Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development. As an innovative mentoring model, JFL is entirely peer driven, and its activities are determined by the real-time needs of members. In contrast to some other peer-mentoring models, JFL lacks senior faculty input or a structured curriculum, members are multidisciplinary, meeting times are project driven rather than preset, and participation in collaborative projects is optional based on the interests and needs of group members. Additionally, JFL was not formed as a substitute for, but as a complement to, the dyadic mentoring relationships enjoyed by its members. The model, now in its fifth year, has demonstrated success and sustainability. The authors present the JFL as an innovative, mentoring model that can be reproduced by other junior faculty seeking to foster collegial relationships with peers while simultaneously enhancing their career development.     

Addressing the gate blocking of minority faculty

There have been ongoing efforts to increase the presence of underrepresented minorities in medicine (URMM), including faculty development initiatives, mentoring programs and outreach efforts. However, URMM faculty face unique challenges that are crucial for academic institutions and leaders to recognize in order to improve retention of this group and allow for meaningful advancement in the field. This paper introduces the concept of gate blocking, defined as what happens to minority faculty as a result of the consequences of the minority tax and systems designed to advantage some and disadvantage others. In addition to defining gate blocking, the authors make recommendations to address this concern in academic medicine and promote the advancement and retention of URMM faculty.     

Overcoming a perfect storm: an academic cardiology section's story of survival.

Increasingly, academic institutions are grappling with financial pressures that threaten the academic mission. The author presents an actual case history in which a section of cardiology in an academic health center was confronted with huge projected deficits that had to be eliminated within the fiscal year. The section used eight principles to shift from deficit to profitability (i.e., having revenue exceed costs). These principles included confronting the brutal facts, managing costs and revenue cycles, setting expectations for faculty, and quality improvement. The section accomplished deficit reduction through reducing faculty salaries (nearly $2 million) and nonfaculty salaries ($1.3 million) and reducing operational costs while maintaining revenues by increasing individual faculty productivity and reducing accounts receivable. In the face of these reductions, clinical revenues were maintained, but research revenue and productivity fell (but research is being fostered now that clinical services are profitable again). These principles can be used to stabilize the financial position of clinical practices in academic settings that are facing financial challenges.     

Improving the retention of underrepresented minority faculty in academic medicine

BACKGROUND: Although several studies have outlined the need for and benefits of diversity in academia, the number of underrepresented minority (URM) faculty in academic health centers remains low, and minority faculty are primarily concentrated at the rank of assistant professor. In order to increase the diversity of the faculty of the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) School of Medicine, the UCSD National Center for Leadership in Academic Medicine, in collaboration with the UCSD Hispanic Center of Excellence, implemented a junior faculty development program designed in part to overcome the differential disadvantage of minority faculty and to increase the academic success rate of all faculty. METHODS: Junior faculty received counseling in career and research objectives; assistance with academic file preparation, introduction to the institutional culture; workshops on pedagogy and grant writing; and instrumental, proactive mentoring by senior faculty. RESULTS: After implementation of the program, the retention rate of URM junior faculty in the school of medicine increased from 58% to 80% and retention in academic medicine increased from 75% to 90%. CONCLUSION: A junior faculty development program that integrates professional skill development and focused academic career advising with instrumental mentoring is associated with an increase in the retention of URM faculty in a school of medicine.     

Examining the Gap Between Medical School Matriculation and Graduation Rates Amongst Self-Identified Minorities

PurposeDespite increasing diversity, data indicates that there is a gap between the matriculation or admission of and graduation rates amongst medical students who identify with racial or ethnic minority groups. The purpose of this study was to identify barriers experienced by minority medical students that may account for this gap.MethodsAn IRB approved online survey was created, and distributed electronically to minority medical students, residents, and practicing physicians. Information on demographics, family dynamics, academic struggles, health issues, financial difficulties and faculty diversity was collected via self-report.ResultsParticipants (n = 167) who completed the survey identified as Black/African/African American (60%), Hispanic/Latinx (26%), Asian (8%), and as Other racial or ethnic minority (6%). The majority of survey participants graduated within the traditional 4 years of medical school (83%) and 17% did not. The most frequently reported reason was to pursue academic advancement (42%) which included completing a research year, dual degree, or PhD. The second reason was due to academic deficiencies (38%), either course failure or failure of a board exam. The majority of respondents (59%) also reported not having enough faculty members who were members of racial or ethnic minority groups at their medical school.ConclusionsOur data suggests the majority of racial and ethnic minority medical students graduate within the traditional 4 years of medical school. However, if they do not, it is either due to academic advancement to become a more successful residency applicant, or due to academic issues. The majority of respondents reported that they perceive a lack of racial and ethnic minority faculty members in academics.     

Generation X: implications for faculty recruitment and development in academic health centers.

Differences and tensions between the Baby Boom generation (born 1945-1962) and Generation X (born 1963-1981) have profound implications for the future of academic medicine. By and large, department heads and senior faculty are Boomers; today's residents and junior faculty are Generation X'ers. Looking at these issues in terms of the generations involved offers insights into a number of faculty development challenges, including inadequate and inexpert mentoring, work-life conflicts, and low faculty morale. These insights suggest strategies for strengthening academic medicine's recruitment and retention of Generation X into faculty and leadership roles. These strategies include (1) improving career and academic advising by specific attention to mentoring "across differences"--for instance, broaching the subject of formative differences in background during the initial interaction; adopting a style that incorporates information-sharing with engagement in problem solving; offering frequent, frank feedback; and refraining from comparing today to the glories of yesterday; to support such improvements, medical schools should recognize and evaluate mentoring as a core academic responsibility; (2) retaining both valued women and men in academic careers by having departments add temporal flexibility and create and legitimize less-than-full-time appointments; and (3) providing trainees and junior faculty with ready access to educational sessions designed to turn their "intellectual capital" into "academic career capital."Given the trends discussed in this article, such supports and adaptations are indicated to assure that academic health centers maintain traditions of excellence.     

Using a productivity-based physician compensation program at an academic health center: a case study.

PURPOSE: With increased budget constraints, academic health centers (AHCs) have turned their focus on physician compensation. While many AHCs are concerned that compensation programs driven primarily by revenue generation will have a negative impact on their academic mission, little information is available to support this. The authors examined the effects on teaching and clinical productivity of an innovative compensation program for pediatrics primary care faculty at an AHC and related those effects to national standards for productivity. METHOD: A baseline productivity and compensation assessment was conducted for a group of 35 academic general pediatricians. The data were compared with Medical Group Management Association (MGMA) figures for general pediatricians. A productivity-based faculty compensation program using the work component of the relative-value unit (RVU) as the measure of productivity was designed and implemented. Productivity and compensation were measured after the first year of the program and compared with the baseline assessment. The numbers of hours precepting students and residents and the students' evaluations of their clinical experiences before and after implementation of the program were compared. RESULTS: The baseline assessment showed that over half of the faculty had productivity that fell below the MGMA 25th percentile, while the majority had compensation that exceeded this percentile. After implementation of the compensation program, 89% of the faculty increased their clinical productivity. The times faculty spent precepting and students' evaluations before and after program implementation were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Successful productivity-based physician compensation programs can be developed for AHCs.     

One year outcomes of a mentoring scheme for female academics: a pilot study at the Institute of Psychiatry,King's College London

Background

The professional development of under-represented faculty may be enhanced by mentorship, but we understand very little about the mechanisms by which mentoring brings about change. Our study posed the research question, what are the mechanisms by which mentoring may support professional development in under-represented groups?The study aims to: (i) to pilot a mentoring scheme for female academics; (ii) to compare various health-related and attitudinal measures in mentees at baseline, 6 months, and 1 year into the mentoring relationship and, (iii) to compare pre-mentoring expectations to outcomes at 6 months and 1 year follow-up for mentees and mentors.

Methods

Female academic mentees were matched 1:1 or 2:1 with more senior academic mentors. Online surveys were conducted to compare health-related and attitudinal measures and expectations of mentoring at baseline with outcomes at 6 months and 1 year using paired t-tests and McNemar's test for matched cohort data.

Results

N = 46 mentoring pairs, 44 (96%) mentees completed the pre-mentoring survey, 37 (80%) at 6 months and 30 (65%) at 1 year. Job-related well-being (anxiety-contentment), self-esteem and self-efficacy all improved significantly and work-family conflict diminished at 1 year. Highest expectations were career progression (39; 89%), increased confidence (38; 87%), development of networking skills (33; 75%), better time-management (29; 66%) and better work-life balance (28; 64%). For mentees, expectations at baseline were higher than perceived achievements at 6 months or 1 year follow-up.For mentors (N = 39), 36 (92%) completed the pre-mentoring survey, 32 (82%) at 6 months and 28 (72%) at 1 year. Mentors' highest expectations were of satisfaction in seeing people progress (26; 69%), seeing junior staff develop and grow (19; 53%), helping solve problems (18; 50%), helping women advance their careers (18; 50%) and helping remove career obstacles (13; 36%). Overall, gains at 6 months and 1 year exceeded pre-mentoring expectations.

Conclusions

This uncontrolled pilot study suggests that mentoring can improve aspects of job-related well-being, self-esteem and self-efficacy over 6 months, with further improvements seen after 1 year for female academics. Work-family conflict can also diminish. Despite these gains, mentees' prior expectations were shown to be unrealistically high, but mentors' expectations were exceeded.

     

A mentoring program for underrepresented-minority students at the University of Rochester School of Medicine.

Mentoring underrepresented-minority (URM) students poses a special challenge because most medical schools have few URM faculty and many non-URM faculty hesitate to be mentors for URM students. Some medical students perform less well in the clinical years than would be expected from their pre-clinical performances. One factor is some students' difficulty in adapting to the culture of medicine, which mentors can help students overcome. The University of Rochester School of Medicine created the Medical Student Mentoring Program to address the needs of URM students and non-URM faculty who could be mentors. The program, offered in 1995-96 and 1996-97, trained mentors, created a bicultural support group for URM students, and provided structured mentoring. Interviews were conducted with faculty and students to identify critical areas that influence the success of URM students in their clinical years; URM faculty, residents, and advanced students shared their experiences with the program students at reflection group meetings. Mentors participated in an initial orientation. Of the 42 students eligible during 1995-1997, 30 participated and were assigned to 15 mentors. At the end of the program's first year, the students and mentors gave their reactions, and although there were some differences in their viewpoints, overall they considered the program useful. Non-URM faculty appreciated the support and guidance that allowed them to mentor URM students more effectively. The program ran formally for two years, and some of the mentoring relationships continued into the third year. Loss of funding and change in administrative leadership contributed to the ending of this program. Mentoring continues to be a priority at the medical center, and a new mentoring program has been developed for URM and non-URM medical students.     

The advisory dean program: a personalized approach to academic and career advising for medical students.

Advising and mentoring programs for medical students vary in their official names, scope, and structures. Catalyzed by negative student feedback regarding career advising and a perceived disconnection between faculty and students, in academic year 2003-2004, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons implemented its formal Advisory Dean (AD) Program and disbanded its former advising system that used faculty volunteers. The AD Program has become a key element for enhancing the students' professional development throughout their student training, focusing on topics including, but not limited to, career counseling, professionalism, humanism, and wellness resources. Advisory deans and the dean for student affairs, familiar with resources for academic development, student support, and extracurricular activities, operate at the nexus of the program, providing personalized mentoring and advising for each student. Fully supported by administration and faculty, the program has shown early success according to student feedback. Early feedback from the Class of 2006, who had been involved in our AD Program for three years, has been encouraging. Out of 152 students, 104 (68%) provided feedback, with 93 (89%) of the respondents reporting the AD Program as a valuable initiative. Expecting to further improve on this early positive response, the AD Program will continue to foster an environment conducive to a seamless transition from student to physician.     

Mentoring program for minority faculty at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.

Research indicates that having a faculty mentor and being part of an active network of peers are critical ingredients of successful academic medicine careers. Minority physicians, however, often do not have mentors, and the problem is greatest for minority groups underrepresented in medicine. The University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine in 1994-1996 undertook to learn the extent of mentoring programs in its departments and divisions and to compare the experiences of underrepresented-minority faculty and others. The results were used to establish a system for mentoring and networking support for minority faculty members. Examining the reports of division and department heads on their formal mentoring programs, it was clear that these leaders considered a mentor essential for career development, but many reported having no systematic plan for mentors for junior faculty. In looking at the reported experiences of minority and non-minority assistant professors (matched for promotion track, department, appointment date, and, where possible, gender), it was found that approximately half of either group did not have mentors. As a result of this information, the school established a faculty development program to meet the faculty members' demonstrated needs: annual career development meetings with new minority faculty; assistance in identifying and assigning mentors; assistance in developing research skills; and monitoring of the retention of minority faculty. As experience with the program produces additional insights into the needs of minority faculty--and particularly of junior faculty--the program will be adjusted and expanded to meet these identified needs.     

Empowering junior faculty: Penn State's faculty development and mentoring program.

Empowerment of faculty is essential for academic success. The Junior Faculty Development Program (JFDP), sponsored by the Office of Professional Development of the Penn State College of Medicine, was established in 2003 with the goal of promoting the development and advancement of junior faculty so they can achieve success in their academic careers. The program consists of two components: a curriculum in research, education, clinical practice, and career development, and an individual project completed under the guidance of a senior faculty mentor. The curriculum provides faculty with knowledge, skills, and resources. Mentoring provides relationships and support. Together, these elements combine to empower junior faculty to better manage their careers.The effectiveness of the program has been demonstrated by several measures: participants evaluated the program highly, demonstrated increases in their perceptions of their own abilities, and completed tasks important to the advancement of their careers. Participants stated they were better prepared to advance their academic careers and that the individual projects would contribute to their career advancement.On the basis of this experience, the authors suggest that faculty development programs should empower faculty so that they can more effectively chart a successful career in academic medicine. This report describes an empowerment model, and the design, implementation, and evaluation of the Junior Faculty Development Program in 2003-04 and 2004-05. The authors offer this program as a model for the benefit of other institutions and for one of their most valuable assets: junior faculty.