The perceptions of effectiveness of mentoring relationships in higher education

The purpose of this study was to measure the perceptions of effectiveness between faculty mentors and proteges involved in formal mentoring relationships in higher education. The subjects were drawn from a non-probability sample of 35 faculty mentors and 53 proteges active in the 1995-96 Mentor Program sponsored by the Office of Minority Student Services at Florida Atlantic University (FAU). The responses from faculty mentors (n = 17) represented a 48.6% response rate. The responses from proteges (n = 22) represented a 41.5% response rate. Four out of the seventeen faculty mentors who responded had more than one protege. The variable information was used only once for each faculty mentor, therefore, the analysis included 17 faculty mentors and 22 proteges.; Subjects were administered the 55-item Principles of Adult Mentoring Scale (PAMS); an instrument based on adult development psychology theories and the transactional process of learning with six behavioral mentoring functions: Relationship Emphasis, Information Emphasis, Facilitative Focus, Confrontive Focus, Mentor Model, and Student Vision. Faculty mentors completed the PAMS and proteges completed the protege version of the PAMS. MANOVA and ANOVA indicated that the faculty mentors' and proteges' overall levels of perceptions of effectiveness were similar as were the levels of perceptions of effectiveness for the six behavioral mentoring functions.; When compared to Cohen's mentor role competency scores for the PAMS, the behavioral mentoring functions revealed a variety of perceptions of effectiveness: Relationship Emphasis and Facilitative Focus for faculty mentors and proteges resulted in effective mean scores; Information Emphasis and Student Vision mean scores of faculty mentors resulted in less effective mean scores while Information Emphasis and Student Vision mean scores of proteges resulted in effective mean scores; faculty mentors' and proteges' mean scores for Confrontive Focus resulted in less effective scores while the Mentor Model mean scores of faculty mentors and proteges revealed very effective scores.; The composite mean scores and mean scores for each of the six behavioral mentoring functions appear to validate Cohen's mentor role norm competency scores for the six behavioral mentoring functions developed for the purpose of using the PAMS. Confrontive Focus behavioral scores in this study were consistent with findings from F. C. Stoner's January, 1996 study that revealed less effective mean scores for adult educators from Continuing Education, Higher Education, and Business and Industry (Stoner, 1996).; This is an initial study. The approach used here can be used by others in higher education. The research provides adult educators with data and reproducible techniques with which to assess, evaluate, and improve the interpersonal competencies of adult learners and mentors.