Study For The Development Of Mentorship Program Nursing Essay
This paper highlights the gap in mentorship knowledge from the family physician perspective. It uses qualitative research methods to query primary care the mentorship experiences of primary care physicians, and their opinions for the development of the program for the creation for the opportunities for the practices of mentorship that ought to be meaningful to the physicians working as mentors and the mentees. The major research objective is the identification of important elements of membership schemes as the initial step in the process of improving mentorship programs for physicians providing primary care. In dealing with this topic, the paper has been subdivided into eleven parts, namely: introduction, problem statement, concept, literature review, research design, Target and accessible population, sampling and sample size, Data collection procedures, Data analysis techniques, Results or findings, Reliability and validity of the study, and articulated concluding paragraph.
Though the number of physician practitioners in Canada has slightly increased in the past 5 years, in other regions like Saskatchewan have been experiencing a significant shortage of family physicians. As a result, strategies are needed to counter this problem and alleviate this drift. This paper identifies important elements of programs dealing with mentorship; this forms the first step in ongoing development mentorship schemes for physicians providing primary care. The World Health Organization states that there are no standards of assessing optimal density of physicians. Nevertheless, “physician per 1000” (Roanne, et al, 2010). Has been used by World Health Organization in the description of global numbers of physician practitioners.
Physician mentorship can be much feasible and of much important strategy in addressing shortages in physicians, and reducing benefit interests in family medicine. This paper concentrates on qualitative findings of a method that is much mixed of research programs in mentorship by the physicians in Saskatchewan. To different individuals, mentorship has different meaning, as an effect, the implementation of mentorship program has proved to be very difficult, depending on how individuals have interpreted mentorship, parties involved in the process, and lastly the conditions through which mentorship has been introduced. Mentorship has been given a meaning of private and informal mentoring the development of the mentee vocation. The advantages of mentorship on to the vocation motivation include; the facilitation of vocation success, vocation involvement, makes one to be sel-directed, and the provision of positive attitudes towards protégé’s vocations. Mentoring process that is transformational starts with acknowledging mentorship as a link between equals in which either one or more of the involved is allowed to raise the awareness, alternative identification, and the initiation of acts, on top of developing themselves. Traditional mentorship is in most cases done by old, senior and wise mentors, who groom the junior mentees. There exist hierarchical values that may value seniors that are wise above the juniors that are unversed, (Clutterbuck & Megginson, 1999).
Research has shown that, recruitment and retention matters can be handled via exposure and education to family medicine through mentorship process. Senior experienced physicians do share their expertise and experience that tend to reduce stereotypes concerning family medicine. On top of all these, mentorship can also contribute to the ongoing career development that tends to facilitate a drift to the management of chronic illness. There exists potentiality in mentorship to help minimization of attrition by increasing physician practitioner’s job satisfaction. On the other hand, Canadian mentorship programs are much conspicuous when they are absent.
Most collages every now and then come up with programs that assist new students to adapt the transition they usually come across with when joining new institutions. Mentorship experience aims at creating an atmosphere that is on going for growth, learning and a community that lasts. The development of mentoring relation is meant to provide learners with chances of vocational development on top of networking. It also provides students with support during transition into new learning surrounding. Lastly, mentorship experience encourages both personal and academic growth.
The experience of the mentee exposes them to expanded views and in most cases acts as an introduction to role models that are much positive who have undergone similar experience. Via guidance and friendship, mentees get to develop individual and career relations that encourage experiences that are much significant and productive.
Becoming a mentor provides opportunities for the concerned people to Wau. (2011). put their vision, creativity and energy to work.” (Wau, 2011). Making a difference that is much significant in the life’s of others. Mentors in many circumstances benefit from personal satisfaction, in contributing something in the growth and success of others. They also find pleasure in challenge and stimulation of inspiring, providing support and encouragements to their mentees; as a result, making contribution to their personal and professional developments.
At Washington Adventist University, students and mentors are all matched based on the profiles they have. There are two orientations at the start of every semester. The first one is meant for new mentors, while the second for the new mentees. Every orientation covers several areas that are developed for the purpose of sharing tools for the mentee and the mentee. This is done to ensure the best is gotten from the mentorship experience.
It is much recommended that both mentors and mentee hold a face-to-face meeting not less than twice a month in every semester. This regular meetings help in the activation of mentorship relations, as well as offering opportunities to students’ chances of developing their network of support as they navigate through the collage experience. Mentors in most cases are requested to complete progressive forms at the end of every get-together. This data is used in enhancing and maintaining this kind of experience for both mentee and mentor, (Crosby, 2010).
At the conclusion of every mentorship program, mentors and mentees are needed to complete two electronic evaluation forms during the academic year. These evaluation observations are used for program improvement. On top of these, program staff provides help and solutions relation are not clicking, as well as offering ongoing support.
The mixed-methods research involved environmental scanning, qualitative interviews with professionals in the area of family physicians in Saskatchewan, responses of physicians to the survey of mentorship model, which were then piloted I the department of medicine in the University of Saskatchewan. The initial stage involved environmental scanning, interviews that were much qualitative and design. This was then followed by mentorship model survey distribution. The second stage was the survey analysis and model development, (Patrick & Sue, 2004)
Population and Sampling
Population sampling strategies that will be used to obtain the questionnaire and interview data will include; random sampling and stratified sampling strategies. Use of random sampling will ensure that a group of the entire population is going to be selected to represent it in the research being done. Stratified sampling strategies are the one which will be used to first subdivide the population to identifiable sectors such business community. Random sampling will cover a number that will be chosen randomly without much consideration and will cover a great area depending on the response of the respondent provision of relevant information.
This paper concentrates on physicians who provide primary care in Saskatchewan, who were invited to be engaged in the development of mentorship program model for PCPs by taking part in interviews that are much in depth. Out of 170 invitation letters that were sent to physicians in the medicine department in the University of Saskatchewan, forty nine responded positively to the letter of invitation. Amongst those who responded, 25 of them were sampled purposefully based on their sex, region, and years of experience. Among them, urban physicians were fourteen, while eleven of them from rural areas. In that group, eleven were men and the rest were women. Those with few years of experience were ten and 15 were seniors in the faculty. The definition of senior physicians was those who graduated from the school of medicine before 1980. While the juniors were those who graduated after 1995. Family physicians, who took part in this research, were those who were in possession of 4 mainpro-MI credits from “Saskatchewan Collage of family Physicians”, Roanne, T. et al. (2010). This was because the study attained the standard of the accreditation criterion as defined “Collage of Family Physicians of Canada” Roanne, T. et al. (2010), for continuing education. The participants were highly honored for their time by being awarded with honoraria.
Reliability and Validity of the Study
This is mainly concerned with the idea that the research design fully addresses the research questions and objectives’ that the researcher is trying to answer and achieve (White, 2000). The internal validity of the questionnaire was improved by asking the respondents of the pilot study for feedback to identify ambiguities and difficult questions; record the time taken to complete the questionnaire and decide whether it is reasonable; discard all unnecessary; difficult or ambiguous questions; re-word or re-scale any questions that are not answered as Based on the feedback, the survey questionnaire was significantly improved for its simplicity.
Reliability is all about consistency and research, and whether another research could be in a position to use your research design and similarly get same results, although slight difference will occur in the section of interpretation and conclusion in the judgment of individual researcher. Basing on the fact that the respondents of the interview were willing themselves to participate in the research and agree to be interviewed on the topic, the results can be generalized to the service providers Saskatchewan. In the manner that is similar, the interviewees were professionals in primary care provision, from different regions, sex and experience; there shared ideas can represent Saskatchewan’s primary care mentorship providers. As a result, the opinions of the interviewees could be generalized for the Saskatchewan Physician mentorship providers. This study can be reproduced when repeated under a similar methodology with no difficulty, as a result, is considered reliable.
The primary data collection methods used includes interviews and observation. Both the interviewer and the interviewee were able to clarify on issues of the research being done hence, being able to obtain information which is well elaborated, opinionated and authenticated. The interview process involved both focus group and in-depth interview. The interviews were primarily care practitioners. In-depth interview was to elicit vivid pictures of the perception of the participants on the topic of research. The researcher’s techniques of interviewing in these methods were motivated by the need to lean everything shared by the participants.
The obtained information was analyzed by the use of both qualitative and quantitative methods to ensure that the research was accurate and addresses the ongoing study for the development of mentorship program in Saskatchewan. The Use of both analytical methods were beneficial as qualitative methods will be used for analyzing and understanding of behavioral characteristics and the reasons which support such characteristic by different practitioners in the field of mentorship. The analysis will mainly concentrate on understanding how and why they behave so, but not what, when or where such instances takes place. While, quantitative will mostly be used for statistical analysis of the research which will be beneficial mainly for comparison and generation of trend of the growth of the services vis-à-vis the different factors which affect it within a given period, (Patrick & Sue, 2004).
The results showed both positive and negative issues concerning mentorship. The mentorship experience; development of program concentrated on matching mentees and mentors, integration of both informal and formal relations, and the determination for process evaluation of mentorship relations.
Most of the physicians highlighted the significance mentorship and gave a positive description of mentorship. Positive mentorship experience also included the point of being excised concerning primary care. In most cases mentorship do not always involve formal relations. The negative experiences with mentorship included the point of being anti-mentor. Mentees sometimes tend to be unhappy about the work of their mentor’s work. Though some physicians expressed disadvantages of and advantages of mentorship, others described the lack of mentors, and they expressed in clear manner, on how they felt the lack of mentors. One of the participants explained the absence of mentorship and the importance of having them.
Due to their experience and mentorship, physicians had some opinions that related to the improvement of mentorship scheme and model of the program. Amongst them are; matching mentees with mentors. There were different opinions on the best method way of matching mentees and mentors and vice versa. Several matching ways were suggested to the interviewees by the interviewer, and amongst them were; random selection to be done by the facilitator, the facilitator to pair them up basing on some factors of both mentees and mentors, using the profile list, and meeting and mingling reception. Random assigning was proved to be much difficult, though one participant expressed that the method is the best amongst all options. The suggestion was the creation of profiles of both mentor and mentee and then mediators is used in matching, (Depoy & Gitlin, 2005).
Another suggestion was informal and formal matters of programs. Most of participants looked upon mentorship as a process that is formal. It was suggested by the participants that there is need for integration of both informal and formal elements in the mentorship programs.
Evaluating the relationship was the other suggestion. The most significant but controversial element of mentorship was found to be relation evaluation. It was noted that evaluation has both advantages and disadvantages. Evaluation represents the process of getting the feedback on particular relations, particular programs or even both. Opinions differed on whether evaluation ought to be confidential or public. However, one participant expressed that need to be the responsibility of the of the faculty advisor, not of mentors. At the end, participants agreed that evaluation in mentorship is much complex hence no agreement on the best approach.
By looking at the respondents from family physicians, mentorship is looked upon as a vital and much meaningful program of deeds that stakeholders and medical educators in Saskatchewan need to implement. Mentorship program model research will be the concluding part of this study. Further research need to be undertaken to assist in evaluating this model once it has been fully implemented. This research will tend to have significant implications for the establishment of a mentorship program that will be national for family physicians all allover the country. The main elements for future research were identified by the respondents. The qualitative data that was analyzed were used in the generation of a survey, responses that can easily be integrated in the mentorship model improvement.
If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays website then please click on the link below to request removal: