Turnbull Beverley J, Roberts Kay
School of Health Sciences, Charles Darwin University.
Collegian. 2005 Apr;12(2):33-8. doi: 10.1016/s1322-7696(08)60491-6.
Mentorship is generally identified in nursing literature as a positive strategy, and one that is said to be beneficial in increasing scholarly productivity. However, previous studies investigating the relationship of mentoring to scholarly productivity have produced equivocal findings. This relationship was examined as part of a study that considered constraints and/or facilitators of scholarly productivity among nurse academics. A survey questionnaire technique was used to establish current scholarly productivity levels, and frame and factor facilitating theory and analysis to identify major constraints and facilitators. Findings showed that while the majority of participants perceived mentoring as important to developing and increasing scholarly productivity, this was less so as academic rank increased. More than a quarter reported never having had a mentor. The burden of teaching and administrative over-load, and a cultural climate of non-support, were described as major disincentives to mentoring. Mentoring was more likely to occur where a collaborative and collegial network to support scholarly productivity existed. However, often it was seen as not available. A workplace environment that is appropriately supported by adequate resources may be as important as the research training that can occur through mentoring.
在护理文献中,指导通常被视为一种积极的策略,据说有助于提高学术产出。然而,以往关于指导与学术产出关系的研究结果并不明确。作为一项考察护士学者学术产出的制约因素和/或促进因素的研究的一部分,对这种关系进行了考察。采用调查问卷技术来确定当前的学术产出水平,并构建和运用促进理论与分析方法来识别主要的制约因素和促进因素。研究结果表明,虽然大多数参与者认为指导对学术发展和提高学术产出很重要,但随着学术职级的提高,这种重要性有所降低。超过四分之一的人表示从未有过导师。教学和行政工作负担过重以及缺乏支持的文化氛围被描述为指导的主要阻碍因素。在存在支持学术产出的协作性和同事关系网络的地方,指导更有可能发生。然而,人们常常认为这种网络并不存在。一个有充足资源适当支持的工作场所环境可能与通过指导所能获得的研究培训同样重要。