Mentoring Program for Undergraduate Medical Students - Research Proposal Example

Proposal for a Thesis in the Field of Medicine in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Doctor of (course title) Degree Institution Date of submission Name of Student Address E-mail Telephone number Mentoring Program for Undergraduate Medical Students: Initiation, Development and Implementation Research Problem Even though mentoring is being considered as a fundamental to satisfactory and successful medical careers, medical students in many countries still lack such programs. India forms part of the many states and countries where mentoring has not been initiated. Mentoring in the medical academic field has been conducted in various ways in order to help build careers of medical students and newly recruited medical practitioners. These programs have been initiated, developed and implemented in some countries in the recent years. However, in India, the mentoring program has not picked up at all. This makes the country to lag behind in the expertise in the medical field since most of the students graduating from the medical field are not well equipped with the practical skills and the necessary ethics that are required of them in the field. Most of the development in different parts of the world have been documented and analysed in most literature. They have discussed the development of the mentoring program in the United States and European countries but little has been discussed of Asian countries and more especially India. That means the literature lacks deeper insight into the effects of initiation of mentorship program in India and the advantages and disadvantages that may be associated with the implementation of this program. This type of research therefore makes it difficult to evaluate the relative importance of mentoring program and the effect it has on the development of career and improvement of skills in the medical students in India. Is there another better way to study the attitude and interest of the medical practitioners and the leadership of medical schools in India on the significance of introducing mentoring program in the medical field? Can empirical research methods be employed in order to enhance professionalism and personal growth of undergraduate students pursuing medical careers? If so, what are some of the mentoring programs will be significant to medical undergraduate students in India and how can they be implemented in order to bring quality to young physicians? I intend to interview various prospective mentors in the university and in the health sector I will also conduct peer reviews with the students in the medical field in order to analyse the value of mentoring in career advancement. Moreover, I will review the literature of the past research to determine the good and bad sides of the mentoring process to the mentor and the mentee as well as the organization or institution which applies it. I will also access the government health ministry website in order to evaluate the key issues that the various stakeholders responsible for establishing the mentoring program are considering in order optimise the mentoring of the health workers and the students in the medical field. My hypothesis is that the absence of the mentoring program in the medical schools in India has added to the deterioration in the quality of health services and decreased productivity of the young graduate students absorbed in the health sector. I hypothesise that the involvement of the government of India through its policies will to a greater extent help initiate and implement the mentoring program in the medical school which will lead to the development of career and personal growth of students and young medical workers. My study also confirms that schools of health sciences could be assessed with respect to their ability to provide mentorships to their students as a quality characteristic. Moreover, my hypothesis is that mentoring of undergraduate students will foster their interest in a speciality which will help the country to curb any future projected shortages. This study is significant in that it will give an empirical foundation to understand the attitude and interest of the medical practitioners and the leadership of medical schools in India on the significance of introducing mentoring program in the medical field. It will also provide an insight into the benefit of the mentoring program to the students, the medical schools, government and the individuals who take part in the program as mentors. Further, intend to publish my research findings as an article in a professional journal about the mentoring program in India’s Medical Schools, which may encourage most researchers and people interested in the development of the mentorship program and its importance on to the people of India, to learn more on its development. I will also propose this research to the medical institutions and to the government department for implementation. Definition of terms Mentoring: It is a process where an experienced and highly skilled individual guides another person without experience and the required skills. Mentor: an elderly person with higher experience charged with the responsibility of guiding other people in their development and learning of ideas towards professional development. Mentee: A younger person who learns new ideas from an experienced person in order to develop his or her career and personality in a given field. Undergraduate: A student pursuing a first degree course in the university level. In this context it refers to particularly those pursuing medical careers like medicine, nursing, psychologists and pharmacy among others. Medicine: A course of study dealing with the study of how to handle and administer treatment to patients. Students who are taking medicine as a course of study are those whose future career is to be doctors. Medical school: This is a school where all the programs offered are fundamentally health science oriented. Programs offered in such schools are medicine, nursing, pharmacy, pharmacology, dentistry, etymology oncology among many other related health sciences. Informal mentoring: Is an arrangement in which the mentor and the mentee tend to find each. Formal mentoring: Is a mentoring program in which the mentor is trained before he or she goes into mentoring the mentee. Reciprocal process: This refers to a process which is two way. In this case it refers to mentoring program as a give and take process which benefits both the mentor and the mentee. Faculty: A department in the university charged with the responsibility of handling a specific field of study. In this case it refers to the faculty of medicine which deals only with the school of health sciences. Background Mentoring was first developed within large private sector corporations in the United States in late twentieth century. In the past two decades, mentoring has since been introduced in different medical sectors like nursing. However, for medical practitioners and medical students, formal mentoring programs were not in existence until late twentieth century (Buddeberg-Fischer B, Herta, 2006). The term mentoring has spread widely over time even in other fields and in many instances; no clear distinction has been made between mentoring and other terms like coaching and tutoring. Mentoring is a process where an experienced and highly skilled individual guides another person without experience and the required skills. The mentor is always considered to be an elderly or an experienced person as compared to the mentee. Mentoring is further described as process where the knowledge of the mentor is acquired and modified as required and the process should be protective and supportive (Garmel, 2004). For a successful relationship to exist between the two parties involved in the mentoring process, both parties must participate actively. Throughout the history of man, the role played by mentors in developing talents of others, teaching and inducing skills in yet more is quite evident. Malik (2000) says that many of the biographies of famous artist, musicians and scientists have mentors who have served as role models in shaping their destiny. The role of the mentors in changing the lives of the mentee is one successful activity which cannot just be got from any other person but one who has dedicated his life wholly for the purpose. In many contexts, the informal mentoring arrangements have continued to operate (Aagard and Hauer, 2003). In such informal processes, the mentor can find the mentee or the mentee find the mentor. In most government departments, mentoring was only introduced in the past two decades. This occurred because corporations and organizations began to realize the benefits of instituting formal mentoring programs because they promoted growth and development of employed workers (Ehrich and Hansford, 2003). Programs of formal mentoring bare a difference in focus, nature and their results. For example, study notes that some programs offer training to mentors while others do not train the mentors. There are cases where mentors are chosen for the mentees while in other cases it is the mentees who are selected to specific mentors. In addition, some mentoring programs selects places to meetings and decide how frequent they occur while in others, the decision solely lies on the participants. Moreover, there are some programs which are evaluated while other employs vague techniques which are not precise in evaluation (Jacobi, 1991). In connection with the evaluation of these programs, Jackson et al. (2003), sums up that most of them “consist of testimonials and opinions.” This thesis will seek to support their claim. Breaks can exist in the relationship between the mentor and the mentee, with its re-establishment in the future. Mentoring is a dynamic relationship which evolves with time and the parties must clearly define and redefine their roles continuously during this the period of evolution. The mentoring is considered as a process, not an outcome and the mentor-mentee relationship is to be non-competitive. While counseling, coaching or teaching are offered at a cost, mentoring is offered at no cost. It is a strategy which promotes career as a result of professional interpersonal relationship. As opposed to a teacher, supervisor or a coach who focuses mainly on enhancing and supporting the professional skills of the junior, a mentor actively partner with the mentee in order to help him or her to utilize the available potential at their disposal towards achieving professional goals (Ramanan et al., 2002). Coates et al. (2008) divides a mentor into three sections: as an advisor, as a role model and as a career counselor. They define an advisor as a member of the faculty responsible for providing the mentor with assistance in clinical electives schedule and to advise him or her on the residency of application. They consider a role model to be someone who serves a positive example for the student on how to approach a medicine career. On the other hand, a career mentor is a person who helps a student in his or her development, either personally or professionally. In the context of medical field, mentoring also involve the support given to the mentee to cope with stress and to satisfy work-life balance (Levy et al., 2008). While most authors view mentoring as a key to success and satisfaction in medical career (Cain et al., 2001), many countries, India included lack mentoring programs for health workers and medical students. A study on career development on upcoming physicians, graduates in the medical school stated that mentoring would help them to specialize at an early enough to make them adopt more focused strategies in planning for their careers (Buddeberg-Fischer and Herta 2006). Most studies reveal that there is a general acceptance that both mentors and mentees benefit from mentoring programs. Advancement of career and psycho-social support stand out to be the positive outcomes for the mentee (Hill and Boone, 2002). For example, in his research on career outcomes, Souba (1999) discovered than three quarters of the senior executives in the United States had gone through mentoring program earned about 28% more than their counterparts, appeared more satisfied with their work and are more likely to be mentors of others. Mahayosnand (2000) has also discovered that psychological supports such as advice and encouraged and social support obtained from friendship and feedback on performance, form part of positive outcomes of mentoring which are beneficial to employees. Being a reciprocal process it not only benefits the mentee but also the mentor. Study show that mentoring rejuvenates the career of mentors as it helps them to perfect the professional development and personal growth of the mentees (Hill and Boone, 2002). Douglas (1997) further outlines the benefits of mentoring program to the mentor as personal fulfillment, increased confidence and assistance in projects. According to Kalet and Krackov (2002), formal mentoring also benefits organizations through improved recruitment efforts, increased productivity, promotion of the services offered by the organization and motivation of the staff. While a considerable literature documents the benefits of mentoring, others are a little cautious. Under certain circumstances, mentoring relationship can negatively impact on the parties involved (Long, 1997). She further identifies other concerns regarding mentoring as poor planning, inadequate mentoring time, poor matching of the mentor-mentee pair, ignorance about the process, and inability to get access to the mentors especially from minority groups of people. Long further argues that mentoring can pose several difficulties to organizations in case of inadequate funding or when the funding is terminated before full establishment of the program. Other limitations of mentoring to an organization include difficulty in coordination of the programs within the initiatives of the organization, lack of support and the high costs associated with the mentoring process (Douglas 1997). A mentor is required to be available more often and should not be judgmental but be one who empowers, encourages and assists the mentee towards a personal and professional development. Researchers found out that a successful mentee is one who is able to set goals, accept correction, able to follow through, and reassess the benefits of being part of the mentoring relationship (Rose, Rukstalis and Schuckit, 2005). Other authors point out other difficulties faced by mentoring. Garmel (2004) argues that the short duration of the courses at the medical school makes it difficult for the students to meet and know their potential mentors. Taherian and Shekarchian on the other hand say that some superiors whom the students view as potential mentors are always in constant pressure of time which discourages the students from seeking mentorship from them. Moreover, there are mentors who put up solutions rather than giving the mentees opportunity to find their way out has also posed challenge to the mentoring program (Hauer and Teherani, 2005). Some researchers have reported that students with a high likelihood of finding a mentor are those who when they have made career choices chooses to go in for research (Aagard et al., 2003). While all papers agree with the vitality of the mentoring in medical education as promoting both personal and professional development, only Keyser et al. (2008) provides a tool for monitoring how medical institutions provide mentorship to their students. In the United States, mentoring for medical students is fully developed since there are enough resources available for the implementation of the programs (Coates et al. 2008). Furthermore, the most important factor is the positive attitude which prevails among the senior members of the faculty toward developing the careers of the junior members especially students. The reciprocative nature of the mentoring process makes it possible for it supports the undergraduate students in medical schools. In Switzerland, the experience of mentoring programs shows that members of the faculty and faculty authorities have the mentality that mentoring should be provided for only Masters and Doctorate degree student trainees (Buddeberg-Fischer and Herta 2006), and is to focus majorly on research (Buddberg-Fischer, Stamm and Buddeberg 2009). The high enrolment in the medical school is one of the challenges of implementation of mentorship in Europe. Switzerland alone has about 220 students enrolling in each university per year. The only way to make mentorship available to all students in these cases is to offer it in groups of about eight students and not individually. Most conceptual surveys centers mainly on the qualities needed for one to be a successful mentor. A confidential relationship coupled with the commitment of the mentor to the wholesome development of the mentee both personally and professionally development is seen as the major requirements. However, seldom is it mentioned the nature of appointment of the mentor, whether self-appointed or assigned. It is required that all senior members of the faculty take up at least one undergraduate student as a mentee. Research has been done with an aim of increasing the interest of students in pursuing careers as internship students in primary care settings (Dorrance et al. 2008). In the research, institutional faculty of the school of medicine launched a research initiative by medical students to increase the interest of the undergraduate students in their careers. Some studies have suggested feasible models for mentoring program which can be designed through use of tiers. The study suggests that younger students can be mentored by students in advanced levels while the advanced students are to be mentored by members of the faculty or other senior researchers in the medical field. It has been found out that students who mentor their colleagues find enjoyment in the process of educating others as they also develop ability to be role models for their mentees. Gender sensitivity is another factor that need to be considered when selection or assigning mentors for the students. It is better for the female medical students to the assigned female mentors as opposed to male ones. This is said to enable the female students to know how to combine the demands of the work together with the family commitment. This is the reason why it is important for the program coordinator to select qualified and highly suitable mentors to match up with the student mentees. Research Methods I will use mixed methods in my study. Firstly, it involved the review of the already accomplished study on the mentoring program in the medical field which was meant to help me to better understand the mentoring program. This literature was based on inclusion criteria and had to meet two different criteria. One of the criteria was to report original study findings and the second was to center on the mentoring program in the medical education including schools of health sciences and the university level. Among the databases used in search of literature included PsychLIT, medschool.vcu.edu, biomedcental, and meded.ucsf.edu. These databases were used for analysis alongside additional health references from the database of the health ministry of India. My search of the selected medical education databases mentioned above reveal 139 studies conducted in the period between the year 1997 and 2009. From the eligible research used in the study it shows that mentoring varies in the medical education and appears to be non-ordinary as compared to other fields of education. Conventional analysis of contents (Hsieh and Shannon 2005) was applied. After reading the data, the research was analyzed through a stepwise development of the coded sheet. The coded data was developed on the preliminary reading of the twelve articles in the medical educational mentoring. I then developed two different categories of coded data including the factual and descriptive data. In the factual data, the year and source of publication, sample size, country and the technique of data collection used were included. The descriptive data on the other hand contained report on the initiation and implementation of the mentoring program and its advantages and disadvantages to the mentor, mentee and the organization. The descriptive data was taken through analysis of contents in order to identify the different categories (Weber, 2000). The second part involved interviews with the stakeholders in the faculty of medicine and peer surveys. The survey among the undergraduate student in the faculty of health sciences was conducted. The data was collected in terms of education level from the second semester and the fourth semester students. I will use this survey to analyze the attitude of students towards a mentoring or counseling program. In an attempt to identify the topics that are that mostly concern the medical students, I will develop ten different items which seek to identify and determine the significance of each of the topics. Eight items will be developed to determine the mentoring needs and the forms that are most preferred by students. Interview will be conducted on students to come up with the willingness to accept the mentoring program. Different potential mentors in the medical school will be interviewed through telephone and personal contacts to establish their views on the implementation, advantages and shortcomings of the mentoring program. Research Limitations Several limitations are considered in this study. First, even though the responses during the interview and participation of the participants may be satisfactory compared with other studies in the medical education, bias in response is a potential possibility. Secondly, students who are to participate in the interviews are to be self selected and therefore may result into skewed results towards a serious need for the mentoring in the medical field. Thirdly, the stakeholders such as the faculty members interviewed may themselves have not gone through the mentoring program and therefore may not see the necessity of initiating the program and therefore gave a one-sided result. Lastly, the literature reviewed were limited to the united states and European countries where the mentorship has picked up well but did not cover other countries probably where the program has picked up recently. Tentative Time Schedule Submission of proposal for verification…………………….……………………… June 1, 2014 Proposal accepted by supervisor...…………………………………………………... July 1, 2014 Thesis director assigned………………………………………………..……. September 15, 2014 Completion of first draft………………………………………..…………....… December 1, 2014 Thesis director returns the corrected copy of the first draft…………..……..…… January 1, 2015 Completion of revised draft………………......……………………………… ….. March 15, 2015 Return of revised draft by thesis director………………………………………….. April 15, 2015 Final text submitted to the supervisor and thesis director………………..………….. June 1, 2015 Approval of bound copy…………………………………………...……………… August 1, 2015 Graduation………………………………………………………………….…….. November 2015 Working Bibliography Aagaard, E.M. and Hauer, K.E. 2003, ‘A Cross-sectional Descriptive Study of Mentoring Relationships Formed by Medical Students’, Journal Gen Intern Med, vol. 18, no. 4, pp.298-302. Buddeberg-Fischer, B and Herta, K. D. 2006, ‘Formal mentoring programs for medical students and doctors: A review of the Medline literature’, Medical Teaching, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 248-257. Buddeberg-Fischer, B., Stamm, M. and Buddeberg C. 2009, ‘Academic career in medicine - requirements and conditions for successful advancement in Switzerland’, BMC Health Serv Res, vol.9, pp. 70. Cain, J.M., Schulkin, J., Parisi, V., Power, M. L., Holzman, G. B. and Williams, S. 2001, ‘Effects of perceptions and mentorship on pursuing a career in academic medicine in obstetrics and gynecology’, Academic Medicine, vol.76, no. 6, pp. 628-634.  Coates, W., Crooks, K., Slavin, S., Guiton, G. and Wilkerson, L. 2008, ‘Medical school curricular reform: fourth-year colleges improve access to career mentoring and overall satisfaction’, Academic Medicine, vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 754-760.  Dorrance, K.A., Denton, G. D., Proemba, J., La Rochelle, J., Nasir, J., Argyros, G., Durning, S. J. 2008, ‘An internal medicine interest group research program can improve scholarly productivity of medical students and foster mentoring relationships with internists’, Teach Learn Med, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 163-167.  Douglas, C.A. 1997. Formal mentoring programs in organizations: An annotated bibliography. Greensboro: Centre for Creative Leadership. Garmel, G. M. 2004, ‘Mentoring medical students in academic emergency medicine’, Academic Emergency Medicine, vol. 11, no. 12, pp. 1351-1357.  Hill, J. A., Boone, S. 2002, ‘Personal perception on mentoring’, Clin Orthop Relat Res, no. 393, pp.73-75. Hsieh, H. F, Shannon, S. E. 2005, ‘Three approaches to qualitative content analysis’, Quality Health Research, vol. 15, no. 9, pp. 1277-88. Jackson, V. A., Palepu, A., Szalacha, L., Caswell, C., Carr, P.L., and Inui, T. 2003, ‘Having the right chemistry: A qualitative study of mentoring in academic medicine’, Academic Medicine, vol. 78, no. 3, pp. 328-348. Jacobi, M. 1991, Mentoring and undergraduate academic success: A literature review’, Review of Educational Research, vol. 61, pp. 505-532. Keyser, D. J., Lakoski, J. M., Lara-Cinisomo, S., Schultz, D.J., Williams, V. L., Zellers, D. F. and Pincus, H. A. 2008, ‘Advancing institutional efforts to support research mentorship: a conceptual framework and self-assessment tool’, Journal of Academic Medicine, vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 217-225.  Levy, B. D., Katz, J. T, Wolf, M. A., Sillman, J. S., Handin, R. I. and Dzau, V.J. 2004, ‘An initiative in mentoring to promote residents' and faculty members' careers’, Journal of Academic Medicine, vol. 79, no. 9, pp. 845-850. Long, J. 1997, ‘The dark side of mentoring’, Australian Educational Research, vol. 4, pp. 115-123. Mahayosnand, P. 2000, ‘Public Health E-Mentoring: An investment for the next millennium’, American Journal of Public Health, vol. 80, no. 8, pp. 1317-1318.  Malik, S. 2000, ‘Students, Tutors and Relationships: The Ingredients of a Successful Student Support Scheme. Medical Education, vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 635-41. Ramanan, R, Phillips, R., Davis, R., Silen, W. and Reede, J. 2002, ‘Mentoring in medicine: keys to satisfaction’, American Journal of Medicine, vol. 112, no. 4, pp. 336-341. Rose, G. L., Rukstalis, and M. R. and Schuckit, M. A. 2005, ‘Informal mentoring between faculty and medical students’, Academic Medicine, vol. 80 no.4, pp. 344-348. Souba, W. 1999, ‘Mentoring young academic surgeons, our most precious asset’, Journal of Surgical Research, vol. 82, pp. 113-120.  Taherian, K. and Shekarchian, M. 2008, ‘Mentoring for doctors. Do its benefits outweigh its disadvantages?’ Med Teach, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 95-99.  Weber, R.P. 2000. Basic Content Analysis. Newbury Park: Sage. Read More