کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
2508517 | 1117610 | 2013 | 12 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
BackgroundStudent pharmacist mentoring programs have gained attention from colleges of pharmacy as a way to enhance the student experience. However, no evaluative models have been proposed or theoretical explanations described for use in improving formal mentoring programs in pharmacy or for guiding the construction of a literature base.ObjectivesThe objectives of this study were to investigate student expectations and preferences for formal mentoring programs and propose a model for evaluating formal mentoring programs in pharmacy education.MethodsFive, 60-minute focus groups were conducted in September 2009. Participants were PharmD candidates in their first 3 years of professional education. Discussion was facilitated using a question guide. Following transcription, an initial iteration of the model was used to code the data. A consensus-forming process was used to derive themes and identify representative quotes. Elaboration and specification of the final proposed model is presented.ResultsIn all, 28 students participated. Emergent constructs were identified from the data. Structures or inputs of the formal mentoring program included mentor and protégé characteristics and program structure. Mentoring processes included mentor functions, mentoring activities, and relationship development. Outcomes included both proximal outcomes in the form of mentor and protégé change, program satisfaction, and organizational learning; and distal outcomes comprised mentor, protégé, and organizational outcomes.ConclusionsThis formal mentoring evaluation model was useful in guiding analysis of protégé experiences and preferences for a college-sponsored program. The model can be used to guide college administrators and researchers on future theory-based inquiry into protégé; mentor; and organizational structures, processes, and outcomes for formal mentoring programs.
Journal: Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy - Volume 9, Issue 6, November–December 2013, Pages 654–665