Title
Mentoring the mentors: Implementation and evaluation of four fogarty-sponsored mentoring training workshops in low-and middle-income countries
Date Issued
01 January 2019
Access level
open access
Resource Type
journal article
Author(s)
Gandhi M.
Raj T.
Fernandez R.
Rispel L.
Nxumalo N.
Bukusi E.A.
Mmbaga B.T.
Heimburger D.C.
Cohen C.R.
Publisher(s)
American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
Abstract
A growing body of evidence highlights the importance of competent mentoring in academic research. We describe the development, implementation, and evaluation of four regional 2-day intensive workshops to train mid- and senior-level investigators conducting public health, clinical, and basic science research across multiple academic institutions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) on tools and techniques of effective mentoring. Sponsored by the Fogarty International Center, workshops included didactic presentations, interactive discussions, and small-group problem-based learning and were conducted in Lima, Peru; Mombasa, Kenya; Bangalore, India; and Johannesburg, South Africa, from 2013 to 2016. Mid- or senior-level faculty from multiple academic institutions within each region applied and were selected. Thirty faculty from 12 South America–based institutions, 29 faculty from eight East Africa–based institutions, 37 faculty from 14 South Asia–based institutions, and 36 faculty from 13 Africa-based institutions participated, with diverse representation across disciplines, gender, and academic rank. Discussions and evaluations revealed important comparisons and contrasts in the practice of mentoring, and specific barriers and facilitators to mentoring within each cultural and regional context. Specific regional issues related to hierarchy, the post-colonial legacy, and diversity arose as challenges to mentoring in different parts of the world. Common barriers included a lack of a culture of mentoring, time constraints, lack of formal training, and a lack of recognition for mentoring. These workshops provided valuable training, were among the first of their kind, were well-attended, rated highly, and provided concepts and a structure for the development and strengthening of formal mentoring programs across LMIC institutions.
Start page
20
End page
28
Volume
100
Language
English
OCDE Knowledge area
Educación general (incluye capacitación, pedadogía)
Scopus EID
2-s2.0-85059796681
PubMed ID
Source
American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
ISSN of the container
00029637
Sponsor(s)
Background and organizers of the “mentoring the mentors” training programs. Role of Fogarty International Center. The Fogarty International Center at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) supports six United States—based university consortia to provide mentored global health research training opportunities in LMICs through the Global Health Program for Fellows and Scholars. The six consortia are focused at Harvard University, Cambridge, MA; University of California Global Health Institute (UCGHI) based at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), the University of California, Los Angeles, the University of California, San Diego, and the University of California, Davis; University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; University of California, Berkeley; University of Washington, Seattle, WA; and Vanderbilt University, Memphis, TN. The GloCal Health Fellowship Consortium at UCGHI, which supports fellows from all 10 University of California campuses, initiated the “Mentoring the Mentors” training workshops in 2013 to train faculty across all international sites supported by the Global Health Program. All six of the consortia contributed resources and faculty to one or more of the four “Mentoring the Mentors” workshops held in Lima, Peru, in May 2013; Mombasa, Kenya, in June 2013; Bangalore, India, in November 2014; and Johannesburg, South Africa, in March 2016.
Expectations of funding agencies and research community to conduct business in English, not Spanish or Portuguese Reduced opportunities for researchers from indigenous communities (e.g. those from Quechua community in Peru vs. those from mestizo (“mixed race”) Peruvian community or of direct Spanish descent). As one Peruvian mentor expressed “Disparity is a relevant and important challenge in the Peruvian context. I literally know only three indigenous doctors” Failure of institutions to directly address the unconscious bias toward researchers from indigenous communities Issues of economic diversity are also important. As one mentor from Argentina expressed “Universities opening in poor areas may mean students may be the first person in their family to go to college. The important thing is for them to have a role model” Time difference between Latin America and the United States worked in faculty mentors’ favor, e.g. decisions could be made in real-time via email or phone call over the day The nomenclature of the word “mentor” was discussed at length with one investigator from Mexico stating “There is no word for mentor in Spanish” Mentorship should be defined—with all its varied and holistic facets—using terms in Spanish Government control over academic institutions means the government should be involved in changing the culture of mentoring and bringing mentoring as a focus to academia. As one investigator from Panama expressed, “in my country.. changes have depended on outside forces, by the Ministry of Science and Technology, for example. Perhaps to effect change in universities, we need to work with governmental governing bodies.” The importance of family and the interest of mentors in the mentee’s family life was raised in the life–work balance session with one participant stating “your career is nothing without family and we talk about that with our mentees” “North–South issues” when grants or projects involve collaborations between Africa-based investigators and United States– or Europe-based investigators as delineated in the following text Collaborations not balanced. Investigators in the North make all the important decisions regarding funding and aims of the project Populations of interest to North-based global health researchers (e.g. those at risk for or living with HIV; individuals with malaria or TB) are in Africa, but the inclusion of Africa-based investigators on the project is perceived as “lip service” only from North-based investigators (e.g. to gain access to the populations of interest) Time difference was major detriment to the North–South collaborations. As one Africa-based investigator expressed “I wake up in the morning and my collaborators have all made important decisions over email in the middle of the night my time. How is that collaborative?” The post-colonial legacy in East African countries represented at the workshop contributed to this disparity in decision-making power and control of the research project’s trajectory. Specifically, Africa-based investigators stated that “we were told we were inferior to white people”. This internalized perception may influence interactions with North-based investigators in terms of acquiescence and giving their collaborators’ opinions more weight Mentees from the North can be given more time than locally based mentees, taking away from the time needed to build up local research capacity Similarly, visitors from the North on the investigative team are given prominence during their visit (e.g. in meeting with institutional leadership), even when they are more junior in academic rank. As expressed in one quote, “How come an Assistant Professor from xx University in the U.S. is given more time with the Dean than I have had in the last 20 years?” Salaries funded from grants from the NIH or Europe-based agencies for Africa-based faculty are much lower in absolute U.S. dollars than salaries funded in the North and should be higher African country investments in research were seen as important: “If the grant money comes from the U.S. and not from Kenya, the people from the U.S. get to dictate the terms” “Paternalism,” hierarchy, and respect for elders were also seen as barriers for honest, open mentor–mentee relationships. As one mentor expressed, “Where the mentor is considered the sun and should be worshipped.. mentees must be unassertive and worship” An emphasis on propriety rather than openness can lead to “authority and value being given to a bad mentor instead of telling him the truth” Issues of hierarchy were predominant in the discussions at the South Asia–based workshop regarding the mentee–mentor relationship.
Fogarty International Center - D43TW009343.
Sources of information:
Directorio de Producción Científica
Scopus