MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1602614896 · doi:10.1111/j.1747-0080.2010.01443.x

Mentoring for professional development and the future of nutrition and dietetics

2010· article· en· W1602614896 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Claire Palermo

Notice bibliographique

RevueNutrition & Dietetics · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésAccreditationProfessional developmentMedical educationCompetence (human resources)MedicineNursingPromotion (chess)PsychologyPolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Mentoring, a supportive and reciprocal learning relationship, is widely recognised across many professions as a professional development tool.1-3 The profession of nutrition and dietetics in Australia values the role mentoring plays in professional development evidenced through the Accredited Practising Dietitian programme.4 Mentoring is a potentially powerful tool for practitioners and researchers. Mentoring appears to have the potential to develop skills, instill confidence and support achievement of professional goals and career directions.3, 5 Mentoring has been recognised as an important strategy to develop the profession of dietetics in Australia,6 America,7 Canada8 and South Africa.9 While the potential value and role of mentoring as contributing to practice improvement has been proposed, there is limited evidence on its effectiveness and outcomes. A recent study investigating the experience and effect of mentoring on professional development in the field of public health and community nutrition identified that mentoring improved confidence, competence (by 15%), enhanced professional support networks and increased capacity for public health nutrition.10 This is the only published study that has attempted to measure the effect and outcomes of mentoring in nutrition and dietetics. The present study identified that the key elements to the success of the mentoring intervention was the attributes and characteristics of the mentor and the mentoring circle format. It also identified the challenges in measuring the effectiveness and outcomes of mentoring programmes. The important attributes of the mentor identified in the present study included having experience in and a passion for the field of practice, facilitating a trusting relationship and providing effective feedback.10 These attributes are supported in the wider literature as important characteristics of the mentor and mentoring relationship. The mentor is a role model who promotes independence, encourages and motivates and is responsible for guiding their mentee through professional circles.11 The mentee also has a key role in determining the direction of the relationship and identifying outcomes.1 The mentoring relationship is based on reciprocity, trust and confidentiality whereby objectivity is maintained and equality promoted.11 The role of the mentor is to support the design of professional development plans, through active listening and asking questions. The mentee must commit to mentoring and driving their own professional development, accept feedback and take responsibility for their learning and development.1, 5, 11, 12 It is important for individuals in our profession to examine their skills as a mentor and advocate for the important role mentoring plays in professional development. While mentoring has traditionally been in the form of a more junior professional being placed with a senior experienced colleague, today peer and group mentoring models are described to increase efficiency and reduce mentor burden, and both formal and informal relationships are recognised.5 Mentoring circles, whereby a group of colleagues form together to support each other learn,13 create a safe and supportive environment for learning in my study.10 Having small groups made up of practitioners with similar roles and levels of experience creates a safe environment for learning. The confidentiality of the group and sharing between peers are also important for learning. As one person cannot provide all the relevant skills and experience throughout a career, multiple mentors may be utlised.14 The nutrition and dietetics profession must seek to acknowledge alternative forms of mentoring, including group formats, peer mentoring and the traditional one-to-one mentoring. We have a profession that is ripe for mentoring. We are at the edge of key research findings and innovative practice and have a business, food and nutrition, that is central to political debates across government, for example, obesity and environmental change. Mentoring has played a role in achieving our current success as a developing profession.14 It is through continued mentoring of our novices, through to our experts, which will enable us to achieve our goals. We must also rise to the challenge of measuring the effectiveness of mentoring relationships. The difficulties of measuring mentoring effectiveness have been acknowledged.15 The positivist paradigm offers little scope in measuring mentoring effectiveness.16, 17 It is generally not practical or ethical to randomise professionals to educational interventions, such as mentoring;16, 18 however, we need to learn from other innovative professional development endeavours, such as inter-professional education,19 and aim to measure the effect of mentoring practitioners on the health of the populations we serve. Qualitative and mixed-methodologies offer an approach to appropriately answer our questions in educational research.17 Using qualitative criteria has been suggested as a way to monitor the effect of mentoring.15 Portfolios offer a potential avenue for measurement of professional development. Portfolios are a collection of material that provide evidence of learning and identify future learning needs and opportunities.20, 21 Portfolios can be reliably used for assessment when qualitative assessment methodologies are applied.20 In the context of mentoring, assessment should be conducted independently to not affect the relationship. Portfolios could be considered as part of the mentoring package for our profession into the future. Mentoring is a potentially powerful experience for the nutrition and dietetics workforce. Mentoring may be viewed as part of a multi-strategy approach to workforce development that facilitates reflective practice in combination with workplace experience. The profession of nutrition and dietetics should embrace mentoring as a key element for continued success.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,757
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,658

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,023
Tête enseignante GPT0,390
Écart entre enseignants0,366 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations5
Publié2010
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueNutrition & DieteticsMême sujetInterprofessional Education and CollaborationTravaux en français237 207