Master Level Engineering

Abstract

Mentorship programs constitute a modern and multidisciplinary approach which is adopted in various academic contexts with an intention to encourage the students partaking the respective courses. It involves faculty mentors, experienced student mentors and the new masters’ level engineering students. The proposed masters' level Engineering Mentorship program is an inclusive training program that primarily aims at developing appropriate competencies amongst both mentors and mentees in the masters' level programs. The purpose of this report is to analyse a possible mentoring program that can be implemented for the masters’ level engineering students. The main findings of the analysis of the mentoring program suggest the engineering directors and mentorship project coordinator play a key role in defining the mentorship process. Based on assessments performed on a master’s degree engineering students in Taiwan and their feedback, the success of the program should be exclusively based on the participants while allowing for the autonomy of students so that the students could effectively choose their mentorship partners.

Introduction

The process of mentoring is ideologically considered as a series of meaningful interaction aimed at sharing of knowledge, experience, personal growth, professional advancement and social support between the experienced individual (mentor) and the protégé (Holland, Major and Orvis 2012). Mentorship programs have evolved based on the context of feedbacks and observations on the defunct nature of engineering mentorship programs implemented in most institutions. This report was requested by the director of engineering and it aims to provide information regarding the most appropriate mentoring program model that can be implemented for the masters-level engineering students.

Findings

There are various mentoring models which can be adopted as a basis for implementation of the engineering program initiative for the targeted group of students. The anticipated relationship between the mentor and mentee can incorporate the big brother/sister model which allows for the experienced mentor to guide the new student (Poor and Brown 2013). That said peer-to-peer mentorship program can be adopted to facilitate bilateral communication and sharing of information based on peers' expertise, perceptions and experiences (Lin 2014).To alleviate the demotivation problem amongst mentors, it is important to train them on how to participate in the programs and the benefits they should get. This way, they will not only increase their satisfaction in the mentorship programs but will also impact the mentees more as illustrated by the chart below.

Another mentorship program can be gotten from Kram's theory which argues that the mentoring process encompasses two aspects; Psychological and Career Mentorship Categories. The career mentoring category is primarily concerned with the improvement of the protégé's professional development while ensuring that the student adequately lays relevant plans to advance their careers within an academic setting (Lin, 2014). On the other hand, psychological mentoring encompasses the establishment of a friendly environment whereby the experienced member can provide social support, counselling, serve as a role model and help improve the mentor's sense of self, mainly through affirmation. Through Kram's theories of mentoring the main phases of mentoring should include;

This phase is established as masters students enrol in their respective engineering fields. Cultivation: It is through this phase that the mentor and mentee get to learn the character, attitude and analyses the potential of their partner. It is during this discovery phase that their emotional connection grows as opportunities for meaningful interactions start being realized Separation: At some point over the mentoring program, the relationship between the mentor and mentee has to be brought to a closure to allow for both to work autonomously with the mentor still available for guidance and consultations. Redefinition: After the separation, the relationship between the mentor and mentee needs to be redefined. This allows for fostering of a new type of relationship that takes a new form to foster further advancements based on voluntary decisions. Based on assessments performed on masters engineering students in Taiwan and their feedback, the success of the program should be exclusively based on the participants while allowing for the autonomy of students to choose their mentorship partners (Lin, 2014). The primary aim of the mentorship program is to enhance its success rates in improving retention of students in the engineering fields while also ensuring the career and psychological developments of the students.

Conclusion

In designing an appropriate mentorship program, the dedication of both the mentor and the mentee is the key element that determines the impact and success rate of the mentorship program. The mentorship programs should be specifically designed to meet the requirements of the specific students and their respective academic qualification levels (Holland et al., 2012). A better-designed mentorship program should aim at improving student retention rates by creating strong career connection with their fields of study to create a connection between the mentorship program and the student outcomes. This can be solely achieved by taking into consideration the needs and expectations of students as well as the mentors and mentees.

Recommendations

The brother/sister mentoring model should be implemented. Mentorship matching will be done based on the aligned similarity between the mentors and the mentee, i.e., career paths, similar interests, information from application forms, recommendations, randomness, algorithms, mentor's choice or even the coordinator's judgment.

The choosing of mentorship partners should be subject to review provided that a single party can justify a reason for the review. The initiation of the mentoring relationship can be improved through the signing of binding contracts which declare the responsibilities of each party. It is at this stage whereby, the mentors' and mentees' goals can be redefined, and opportunities for interactions are realized. This information will be used when designing the policies related to the mentorship program structure such as; frequency of meetings, the intention of the mentorship relationship, length of the mentorship program, mentoring content, mentoring program monitoring by the project coordinator, resolution of arising conflicts and other mentorship related work variables.

Looking for further insights on Mapping Future Success? Click here.

References List

• Holland, J.M., Major, D.A. and Orvis, K.A., 2012. Understanding how peer mentoring and capitalization link STEM students to their majors. The Career Development Quarterly, 60(4), pp.343-354.
• Lin, Y.N., 2014. Perspectives on peer-mentoring from Taiwanese science and engineering master's students. Education, 135(1), pp.79-92.
• Poor, C. and Brown, S., 2013. Increasing retention of women in engineering at WSU: A model for a women's mentoring program. College Student Journal, 47(3), pp.421-428.