Comparing Candidate and Clinical Faculty Cognitive Effect, Cognitive Affect, and Perceived Behaviors During Formal Mentoring
MetadataShow full item record
The candidate population for the study included students enrolled in clinical practice during the spring of 2009 in agricultural education certification programs at 14 different universities. Findings using a matched pairs t-tests were conducted to reach the heart of the study, the dyadic mentoring relationships between candidate and clinical faculty. Cognitive effect, an indicator of problem solving style was not found to be a significant factor in the study. However, cognitive affect, an indicator of interpersonal orientation found many significant differences. Significance was found at the 0.05 level in the areas of candidate expressed inclusion and clinical faculty wanted inclusion (t=5.27), candidate expressed total and clinical faculty wanted total (t=3.88), candidate wanted control and clinical faculty expressed control (t=-2.97). Significance was also found at the 0.01 level of significance for candidate wanted total and clinical faculty expressed total (t=-2.37). In the area of behavior a matched pairs t-test determined perceived psychosocial support (t=-2.86) and perceived total support (t=-2.32) to be significant.
Mentoring and clinical practice are extremely dynamic constructs as many different influences are present from personal preferences to the way people naturally and holistically function. When universities identify clinical faculty, attention should be paid to the matching of dyads in order to emulate an informal mentoring experience to the greatest extent possible. Although mentoring is extremely complex, the research indicates promise for agreement and promise for continued research to benefit not only individuals, but our entire profession. â
- Masters Theses