“By creating we think, by living we learn” Patrick Geddes
A formal mentoring relationship as envisaged above and based on the implicit assumption that this is not a relationship between equals will not always be appropriate for all staff. For example, the strategy as outlined in the merger document refers to all research active staff and the School Research Committee acknowledges that there are benefits to be gained from all staff having access to an appropriate mentor. In the case of experienced researchers, who are themselves likely to be acting as mentors to less experienced or more junior members of staff, it would be more appropriate to allow for a peer based system of collateral mentoring. These are not the only situations where a different form of mentoring or supportive working relationship is called for. For example, those who are not yet research active and hence outside the scope of the mentoring scheme as proposed in the merger document but would like to develop a research profile should also be enabled to access a support system to help them do this. Mentoring should thus be seen as one part of a spectrum of support that can be offered by staff to each other within a strong collegial environment. Moreover, developing such support mechanisms can in itself aid the development of just such a culture.
Experienced researchers, just as much as less-experienced ones can benefit from mentoring and resources should be made available for them to not only be mentors but to be mentored too. However, they should be given the opportunity within the main mentoring scheme to establish mutual, collateral mentoring relationships where each adopts the role of mentor for the other if they choose. Such collateral pairings should be resourced at the same level as other mentoring arrangements.
The development of a strong research culture in the School is dependent on not only supporting the development of the existing research active staff but also enabling others to develop a stronger research consciousness. Appropriate ways of supporting those who would like to become research active are also required.
There are staff within the School who are research active and who, though not necessarily experienced enough to take on a the full mentoring role as described above, are nevertheless in a position to offer help, advice and support to staff less experienced than themselves in the spirit of peer collaboration and mutual support. For example, staff who are pursuing research as part of their own higher degree study who want to meet to discuss their research with others and how it is progressing should be encouraged to do so. Those who are close to completing a higher degree by research are in a good position to offer collegial, non-threatening support to those who are about to embark on one. Similarly, those who have started to get work published are sometimes in a better position to understand and support the anxieties of the unpublished than those who have established research and publication records. Heads of Departments, in conjunction with the Associate Dean for Research are well placed to encourage and support such activity which could be a pre-cursor to the taking of a more formal mentoring role.
Alongside such collegial activity as the support circles described above, mutual support groups for those who are working towards publication should be encouraged. Established research mentors have an important role in supporting staff towards publication but writing circles can offer constructive mutual feedback with an emphasis on the reader's rather than a writer's perspective. Such feedback at an earlier stage in the drafting process than would perhaps be expected from a mentor can help build confidence to move on towards placing papers before more critical audiences
del.icio.us
digg
reddit
facebook
stumbleupon