Helping Students Help Themselves: Strategies for Successful Mentoring Relationships Linda L. Black, Elisabeth C. Suarez, & Sondra Medina
Mentoring has long been heralded as a method of training and socializing the next generation of professional counselors and counselor educators. Yet, there appears to be a disparity between the promotion and the practice of mentoring in counselor education. The authors attempted to reconcile this disparity by suggesting a set of strategies that mentors and apprentices may use as they establish and maintain successful mentoring relationships. Implications for counselors and counselor educators are discussed.
For decades. counselors-in-training have been taught the skill and art of counseling through a variety of experiences and relationships. Students observed and interacted with the more experienced members of the counseling profession in academic and clinical settings. Often, these relationships (e.g .. instructor-student. advisor-advisee. counselor-supervisor) were formal and governed by their prescribed functions (Brown-Wright. Dubick, & Newman, 1997; Green & Bauer, 1995). A more informal type of relationship. mentortng, has long been recognized as a means to support and socialize developing counselors by attending to their personal and professional growth. Mentoring relationships have been reported to enrich the lives of students and mentors alike (Rakm, 1991) and to provide the profession a degree of continuity as the current generation learns from its elders (Green & Bauer. 1995). Despite its well-documented benefits. mentoring is still poorly defined (Jacobi. 1991; Tentoni, 1995) and infrequently practiced (Brown-Wright et al., 1997; Bruce. 1995; Johnson & Huwe, 2003; Mintz. Bartels. & Rideout, 1995). Graduate students report a lack of mentoring relationships in counseling (Brown-Wright et al., 1997) and counselor education (Bruce. 1995). Perhaps the lack of a clear definition of mentortng (Jacobi. 1991), confusion regarding the roles and functions of mentors and proteges (Black. 1998; Tentoni, 1995), and a lack of knowledge regarding the initiation ofmentoring relationships (Johnson & Huwe, 2003) have contributed to the discrepancy between the promotion and the practice of mentoring. Linda L. Black and Sondra Medina, Division oj Professional Psychology. University oj Northern Colorado: Elisabeth C. Suarez. Department oj Counseling, Denver Seminary. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Linda L. Black, Division ojProJessional Psychology, Campus Box 131, University ojNorthern Colorado. Greeley. CO 80609 (e-mail:
[email protected]).
44
Counselor Education & Supervision. September 2004 • Volume 44
The primary purpose of this article is to address this discrepancy by providing mentors and proteges with a systematic approach to mentoring. The desired attributes of mentors and proteges in numerous settings are reviewed, and a systematic process for developing a mentoring relationship is presented. The terms students and proteges are used to describe graduate students and recently graduated counseling professionals. The term mentors describes faculty members, advanced graduate students, and practicing professionals in the field of counseling or counselor education.
Review of the Relevant Literature An examination of the academic literature revealed two issues: (a) There is a substantial and diverse body of mentoring literature that focuses on the disciplines of business and teacher education that may be relevant to counselor training and (b) there is limited mentortng literature or empirical inquiry initiated by scholars in the disciplines of counseling and counselor education and supervision. Much of the research on mentoring has been conducted in the disciplines of business and teacher education. Researchers examined models of mentoring (Pollack, 1995), mentor functions (Chao, Gardener, & Walz, 1992; Kram, 1988; Ragms & Cotton, 1999), the costs and benefits of mentoring (Campbell & Campbell, 2000; Ragms & Scandura, 1999), the proteges' perspective (Eby, McManus, Simon, & Russell, 2000; Fagenson, 1992), and the mentoring needs of diverse populations (Burke & McKeen, 1996; Dreher & Chargois. 1998; Ragtns & McFarlin, 1990). Other researchers have demonstrated that the reciprocal nature of mentoring produced benefits for mentors and proteges alike. Proteges experienced improved job performance, satisfaction, and salary (Chao et al., 1992; Scandura, 1992); more rapid career advancement (Dreher & Ashe, 1990); and more frequent promotions with less position turnover (Kahn & Scott, 1997). In academic settings, proteges reported that mentoring increased their production of academic research (Hill, 1997) and increased their satisfaction with their graduate education (Clark, Harden, & Johnson, 2000; Johnson, Koch, Fallow, & Huwe, 2000). Mentors indicated that mentoring others caused them to continually update their knowledge. provided them with a sense of generativity (Green & Bauer, 1995; Levinson, Darrow, Klein, Levinson, & McKee. 1978), and rejuvenated their careers (Ragms & Scandura, 1999). We conducted a search of all articles published in the flagship journals related to counseling (Journal of Counseling & Development; JCD), counselor education (Counselor Education and Supervision; CES), and counseling psychology (The Counseling Psychologist CP; and Teaching of Psychology; TP). Articles from the journals' Counselor Education & Supervision. September 2004 • Volume 44
45
inception through 2002 were examined. From a total of 4.893 articles published in these four journals. 37 articles were identified that were related to the keywords mentors or proteges. The counseltng journals (JCD = 7 and CES = 7) accounted for 14 articles. and the psychology journals (CP= 16. TP= 7) contained 23 articles. These totals demonstrated that fewer than 1% of the articles in these journals addressed any issue related to mentors or proteges. Despite the paucity of these numbers. a positive trend seems to have developed. Most of these 37 articles (n = 27) were published in the 1990s. indicating a recent and increased interest in mentoring. Of these 27 articles. one third (n = 9) focused on an issue of diversity. The remaining articles focused on faculty-faculty mentoring, research issues. students' perspectives. personal accounts. mentoring as general concept or model, or the relationship of mentoring and career development. Additionally. the professional associations (e.g.. American Counseling Association and the American Psychological Association) seem to have recognized the importance of mentortng, as illustrated by their publishing of books devoted to mentoring (see Johnson & Huwe, 2003: Schwtebert, 2000). Definin~ Mentorin~
To provide a definition of mentoring relative to counselor education. we used the works of Black (1998) and Tentoni (1995). Based on those authors' work. we defined mentoring as a nurturing. complex. longterm. developmental process in which a more skilled and experienced person serves as a role model. teacher. sponsor. and coach who encourages. counsels. befriends a less skilled person for the purpose of promoting the latter's professional and/or personal development. The one-on-one relationship is initiated at the behest of the protege and is. in turn. accepted by the mentor. The relationship is marked by high ethical standards and clear boundaries. Both parties experience mutual benefits and personal and/or professional growth. Mentoring functions are carried out within the context of an ongoing. caring relationship between the mentor and the protege. Mentortng is not a single task or training episode. a group experience. or a preassigned relationship that is unidirectional in benefit.
Desired Attributes of Mentors and Proteges What Mentors Seek in Proteges
Researchers have identified that mentors valued proteges who had a resolute sense of self-esteem. self-confidence (Allen. Poteet. & Burroughs. 1997), and a positive outlook (Turban & Dougherty. 1994). In addition. proteges were likely to attract the attention of 46
Counselor Education & Supervision. Sepiember 2004 • Volume 44
mentors when they demonstrated dependability, career interests similar to those of the mentor (Cronan-Hillix, Gensheimer, CronanHillix, & Davidson, 1986), and a commitment to task completion and to the profession (Fagenson, 1992). These findings indicated that most mentors valued proteges who were interpersonally competent and professional in their approach to the relationship. What Proteges Seek in Mentors
Investigators have attempted to determine the role or function mentors believe they should playas well as the behavior they should display with the protege and the impact they should have on him or her (Allen et al., 1997; Chao et al., 1992; Kram, 1988; Ragms & McFarlin, 1990). Recently, researchers (Brown-Wright et al., 1997; Clark et al., 2000; Olian, Carroll, Giannantonio, & Ferren, 1988) identified factors proteges may desire or seek in mentors. Some of these factors (in no particular order) were (a) positive role modeling, (b) patience, (c) trust, (d) challenge, (e) accountability, (f) sponsorship, (g) flexibility, (h) humor, (i) sociability and interpersonal support within ethical or personal comfort guidelines (counseling), and Ul willingness to learn new concepts (e.g., technology). These factors may be translated into a variety of mentortng activities, which typically address the particular vocational (counseling skills, writing, presenting) or psychosocial needs (encouragement, befriending) of the proteges and may be delivered directly or indirectly. Most mentoring activities seem to blend vocational and psychosocial needs. For example, mentors may challenge, coach, and support their proteges to improve their counseling skills, undertake personal growth activities, or expand their personal awareness using supplemental readings selected by the mentor. In these examples, mentors engage their proteges indirectly; that is, their role is similar to that of a consultant. Mentors may also use more direct activities that are designed to improve the proteges' professional or personal situation. Mentors can use their professional status to advocate for or introduce proteges to noteworthy professional contacts or scholars (sponsorship). In academic settings, mentors often invite proteges to conduct research, thereby introducing proteges to the expanding environment of scholarly discourse. One might reason, then, based on the numerous positive factors previously listed, that almost anyone would desire a mentoring relationship that had the potential to be supportive, challenging, accountable, interesting, and reciprocal. However, a desire for and knowledge of mentoring are not sufficient for mentoring to be successful. Mentortng should be viewed as an active process in which mentors and proteges engage in a personal and environmental assessment before they initiate a mentoring relationship. Counselor Education & Supervision. september 2004 • Volume 44
47
Mentorins as a Process Swerdlik and Bardon (1988) contended that counselors were most likely to encounter mentoring in graduate school, yet Brown-Wright et al. (1997) and Clark et al. (2000) reported that not all students or emerging professionals are mentored. Johnson and Huwe (2003) recognized this disparity and added that those who were mentored "worked at initiating the relationship" (p. 10). They encouraged potential proteges to seek a mentor in a systematic manner. Mentors and proteges who take a structured approach to the establishment of the relationship were more likely to make successful mentoring matches (Johnson & Huwe, 2003). Kolbe (1994) recognized this point when she stated that mentors or proteges who had the preferred mentor or protege characteristics and behaviors were more likely to be successful (p. 67). Self-Assessment
Mentoring is a multifaceted relationship that requires more time, energy, and commitment than typical faculty-student relationships. Participants begin the process of establishing a mentoring relationship by asking what assets and liabilities they possess as mentors or proteges. An individual's honest self-appraisal can provide the opportunity to strengthen personal assets and address personal limitations before the relationship is initiated. The process of assessment and reflection should prepare mentors and proteges for the relationship that follows. During the self-assessment, mentors and proteges should focus on questions that address four areas: (a) the personal qualities of mentors or proteges, (b) factual knowledge about mentoring, (c) expectations regarding the relationship, and (d) goals for the relationship. The following questions, which address personal qualities, are based on the professional mentoring literature and are not meant to be exhaustive: • • • • • • • •
What are my personal strengths and weaknesses? How organized am I? To what degree do I project self-confidence or self-assurance? To what degree do I communicate clearly and directly? How do I accept or give critical feedback? How do I demonstrate respect for others' personal boundaries? To what degree do I have a positive outlook on my life and career? Do I want to commit time and energy to a longer term relationship? What are my diversity-related needs?
Mentors and proteges are encouraged to conduct an honest selfappraisal. Individuals in each group may wish to consider asking 48
Counselor Education & Supervision. September 2004 • Volume 44
a trusted colleague (mentor) or fellow student (protege) for feedback to ensure that an accurate appraisal has been completed. Candidly reflecting on personal strengths and weaknesses, although humbling at times, can lead participants to a clearer sense of what they have to offer others. Consequently, and more important, it may help the individual ldenttfy and focus on personal shortcomings that may have a negative impact on a mentoring relationship. Knowledge of the mentoring relationship, as well as of its initiation, functions, and roles, can clarify the confusion or uncertainty that participants may experience. The knowledge that most mentored graduate students actively initiated their mentoring relationship (Atkinson, Casas, & Neville, 1994; Clark et al., 2000) may encourage other students to take an intentional and prepared approach to seeking mentors. Without this knowledge, students might assume that they must wait passively until they are magically chosen by the mentor with whom they would like to establish a relationship. The following questions were designed so that individuals can assess their knowledge of mentoring: • • • • • • • •
What do mentors do? How do I define mentoring? How long are mentaring relationships? How do mentoring relationships begin and end? What would I have to offer a mentor or protege? What does it mean to be a role model? Do potential mentors or proteges know which topics hold interest for me? How well do I know others' interests?
The following questions address the specific needs of proteges: •
If I find a mentor, am I willing to approach him or her and
•
demonstrate my interest? What will I do if the potential mentor is not interested?
Through the process of assessing what is known about mentortng, mentors and proteges have a greater opportunity to align their expectations with the realities of the relationship. By tdentifytng the gaps in their knowledge, mentors and proteges may seek information or resources to educate and prepare themselves more fully. The third component of the self-assessment process examines the importance of particular mentor behaviors. Table 1 presents a series of questions drawn from the work of Kram (1988), Tentoni (1995), and Bruce (1995). Proteges and mentors distinguish the more salient mentor functions based on their personal needs. The questions focus on the psychosocial (e.g., encouraging, counseling, Counselor Education & Supervtston
>
September 2004 • Volume 44
49
TABLE 1 Mentors' Psychosocial and Vocational Functions Degree of Importance Item
Very Low
How important is it for your mentor to ... 1. share his or her experience2. provide feedback on your counseling behaviors" 3. invite your participation in research projects' 4. be genuine in a relationship' 5. support copresentations at conferences' 6. share his or her personal beliefs' 7. offer opportunities for advanced responsibilities (coteaching)' 8. be empathetic regarding your personal concerns' 9. recommend your participation on committees' 10. answer questions about client sessions11. be trustworthy' 12. model ethical behavior" 13. brainstorm a variety of client conceptuallzatlons14. give examples of ways to handle client concerns" 15. model appropriate counseling behaviors" 16. discuss personal as well as professional concerns' 17. be someone with whom you can be authentic' 18. introduce you to other colleagues in the field' 19. demonstrate good listening skills' 20. model appropriate supervision behaviors" 21. challenge you to be your best' 22. take a genuine interest in your thoughts and questions23. discuss your professional competence24. value your mentoring relationship' 25. identify you as his or her protege'
Low
Average
High
Very High
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2 2 2
3 3 3
4 4 4
5 5 5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
Note. Mentor functions are identified by notation. "Encouraqinq. 'Teaching. 'Sponsorship. 'Counseling. ·Coaching. 'Befriending.
50
Counselor Education & Supervtston
»
September 2004 • Volume 44
and befriending) and vocational domains (e.g., teaching. sponsorship, and coaching) of mentoring. Mentors and proteges may wish to examine these questions together in order to gain a more complete understanding of what each may be seeking from the relationship. Finally, mentors and proteges should examine their goals for the mento ring relationship. This includes analyzing what each person wants from the relationship and what they are willing to contribute to it. Answering the following questions should allow mentors and proteges to identify the desired outcomes each has for the mentoring relationship: • • • • •
What do I expect from this relationship? How long would I like this relationship to last? What am I willing to contribute to this relationship (e.g., time, focus on interests other than my own)? How similar or different is my potential mentor or protege to me? How important are these similarities and differences?
In communicating about the mentoring relationship, mentors and proteges should identify and discuss both their short-term and longterm goals for the relationship. This will allow each to approach goal attainment with flexibility and willingness to renegotiate priorities over time. This type of flexible interaction has the potential to add to the mutuality of the relationship. Mentors and proteges are encouraged to document the expectations of the relationship. Suggesting a schedule for contact and completion of activities or tasks reduces the likelihood that either partner will act or respond in haste. As the relationship grows and develops, mentors and proteges may wish to reassess and update their expectations to ensure that they reflect the current state of the relationship. Engaging in the process of self-assessment has the potential to empower both the mentor and the protege because each may recognize personal strengths and weaknesses and understand how these characteristics may affect the mentormg relationship. Furthermore, it allows mentors and proteges to appropriately and confidently establish relationships with other like-minded professionals. Environmental Assessment
Mentoring is an interactive relationship that takes place within a system. If mentoring is to be successful, faculty members must be willing to participate in the relationship and to be informed about the responsibilities of it. Many things compete for mentors' time and energy (Ragins & Scandura, 1999), and most mentors must balance the demands of their positions (e.g., clinical caseloads, program responsibilities, teaching. research and service requirements) with their availability to students. Although a discussion Counselor Education & Supervision· September 2004 • Volume 44
51
of competing mentor demands is beyond the scope and focus of this article, it is important to acknowledge that mentoring does not occur in a vacuum. The impact of these factors (e.g., negative perceptions of mentoring due to the cost/benefit ratio, limited availability, tenure expectations) affects the ability and desire of some mentors to form meaningful relationships with students. An analysis of the environment can alert mentors and proteges to the social and political norms of a setting. Mentors and proteges can assess whether or not the conditions are conducive for mentortng. These are questions that should be considered: Does mentoring occur here? If so, who gets mentored and by whom? How are mentors and proteges professionally involved with each other? Who is an effective/ineffective mentor? Is there evidence of copresentation, coauthorship, or cotherapy between proteges and mentors? What are the benefits/costs of mentoring in this setting? Conducting a systematic assessment will empower mentors and proteges to recognize and align their abilities, expectations, and responsibilities. Both can actively gauge their compatibility for this type of relationship based on factual information rather than on speculation. Seeking Contact
Mentors need to know potential proteges before they can be expected to be involved in a mentonng relationship. Proteges should be empowered to actively seek out and select mentors (Johnson & Huwe, 2003). Therefore, proteges are encouraged to make themselves known to potential mentors, because in mentoring relationships, professionalism and proximity matter. Proteges may make contact with prospective mentors by enrolling in their classes, signing up for advising time, attending the same conferences as the mentors attend. or volunteering for research or presentation opportunities. Once connected. proteges and mentors may evaluate the degree of similarity between their stated areas of interests, using the previously described assessment process. From these contacts, both proteges and mentors can determine the suitability of more frequent or more meaningful contacts. Establishing a Mentoring Relationship
After mentors and proteges have had formal and multiple interactions, it is appropriate for proteges to articulate their specific interest in a mentortng relationship. Proteges should schedule time with potential mentors to discuss their desires and goals. Mentortng relationships are mutually beneficial; therefore, mentors and proteges should be prepared to state what they are willing to bring to the relationship. The demonstration of mutual interests and the potential to contribute to the relationship signify to the mentor that the protege is willing to do more than just receive in the relationship (Allen & Poteet, 1999). 52
Counselor Education & Supervision' September 2004 • Volume 44
Proteges are urged to extend an invitation to their potential mentors (Johnson & Huwe, 2003), which the mentor may either accept or refuse. Mentors may decline the opportunity for any number of reasons, and proteges must be prepared for this possibility. Although the acceptance of a mentortng relationship can be exhilarating, the denial of this opportunity can leave potential proteges feelingwounded. The denial of a mentortng opportunity mayor may not be related to the protege (e.g., the mentor may lack institutional support. time, or desire to mentor anyone), and it is appropriate for mentors to articulate the reasons for turning down a request. The positive and constructive feedback is likely to aid proteges in their development. After personal reflection, proteges are encouraged to seek other potential opportunities for being mentored, perhaps in another setting. The Mentoring Relationship
Mutual benefits imply mutual responsibility and accountability for the relationship. A mentoring relationship initially involves hierarchy and a power differential. Mentoring relationships involve both individuals in getting to know one another personally, which involves some level of personal disclosure. Mentors and proteges should demonstrate and expect professional and ethical behavior within the relationship. Levinson et al. (1978) reported that many of the difficulties found in the mentonng relationship were connected to the behaviors of mentors. As role models, mentors are responsible for modeling professional and ethical behavior because they hold the position of power. Mentors who model ethical and professional behavior empower their proteges. As Peck (1999) stated. "Consciously or unconsciously, good mentors know that it is far more their task to empower than to teach" (p. 24). Accountability to the Developing Relationship
Thriving mentonng relationships demonstrate credibility, accountability. and professionalism. Both members must understand that they can depend on the other to complete tasks or activities in a timely manner, honor the relationship, and display motivation and competency. Proteges who demonstrate initiative, dedication, a strong work ethic, and a willingness to learn appeal to potential mentors (Allenet al., 1997). Professional and proficient behavior provides a basis for trust and marks the early stages of the mentortng relationship. As the relationship develops, what was once hierarchical becomes collegial. Accountability to relationship includes a commitment to communication, respect, and recognition of each other's needs. Proteges and mentors may experience a shift in roles and the degree of connection as the relationship matures and as separation becomes imminent. Commitment to continual evaluation and accountability within the relationship allows proteges and mentors to recognize and address Counselor Education & Supervision' September 2004. Volume 44
53
potential sources of stress as well as honor the gifts of a mentonng relationship.
Implications for Counselor Education Seeking a mentor can be a valuable activity for graduate students in counseling. The benefits to proteges and mentors are well documented. Currently, it is not known to what degree or in what manner professional counselors and counselor educators are being mentored or are acting as mentors. Empirical investigations that focus on the nature, frequency. and duration of mentortng relationships in counselor education are greatly needed. Furthermore. counselor educators and their students would benefit from Identifying interpersonal and professional variables that contribute to successful mentoring in the counseling and counseling education field. Students and emerging professionals need information and support to actively seek a mentoring relationship. Counselor education programs could benefit from developing procedures encouraging mentortng between faculty and students. We hope that the information and suggestions contained in this work will be shared among faculty and graduate students so that the promise of mentoring can be fulfilled.
References Allen, T. D., & Poteet, M. L. (1999). Developing effective mentoring relationships: Strategies from the mentor's viewpoint. The Career Development Quarterly, 48. 59-73. Allen, T. D., Poteet. M. L., & Burroughs, S. M. (1997). The mentor's perspective: A qualitative inquiry and future research agenda. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 51, 70-89. Atkinson, D. R., Casas. A., & Neville, H. (1994). Ethnic minority psychologists: Whom they mentor and benefits they derive from the process. Journal of Multicultural CoWlSeling and Development. 22. 37-48. Black. L. L., (1998). The development and validation of the mentor function scales for counselor education. (Doctoral dissertation. University of Northern Colorado, 1999). Dissertation Abstracts International, 59, 2864. Brown-Wright, D. A.. Dubick, R. A.. & Newman I. (1997). Graduate assistants' expectations and faculty perceptions: Implications for mentortng and training. Journal of College Student Development. 38. 410-416. Bruce. M. A. (1995). Mentonng women doctoral students: What counselor educators and supeIVisors can do. Counselor Education and Supervision, 35. 139-149. Burke. R. J., & McKeen, C. A. (1996). Gender effects in rnentortng relationships. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality. 11. 91-104. Campbell, D. E., & Campbell, T. A. (2000). The mentoring relationship: Differing perceptions of benefits. College Student Journal, 34, 516-523. Chao, G. T.• Gardener, P. D.. & Walz, P. M. (1992). Formal and informal mentorship: A comparison on mentoring functions and contrast with nonmentored counterparts. Personnel Psychology, 45. 619-636. Clark, R. A., Harden, S. L.. & Johnson. W. B. (2000). Mentoring relationships in clinical psychology doctoral training: Results of a national survey. Teaching of Psychology, 27. 262-268. Cronan-Hflllx, T.. Gensheimer. L. K.. Cronan-Hillix, W. A.. & Davidson, W. S. (1986). Students' views of mentors in psychology graduate training. Teaching of Psychology. 13. 123-127.
54
Counselor Education & Supervision. September 2004. Volume 44
Dreher, G. F., & Ashe, R A. (1990). A comparative study of mentortng among men and women in managerial, professional, and technical positions. Journal oj Applied Psychology, 75, 539-546.
Dreher, G. F., & Chargois, J. A. (1998). Gender, mentoring experiences, and salary attainment among graduates of a historically Black university. Journal oj Vocational Behavior; 53, 401-416.
Eby, L. T., McManus, S. E., Simon, S. A, & Russell, J. E. A. (2000). The protege's perspective regarding negative mentoring experiences: The development of a taxonomy. Journal oj Vocational Behavior; 57, 1-21. Fagenson, E. A (1992). Mentoring-Who needs it? A comparison of proteges' and non-proteges' need for power, achievement, affiliation, and autonomy. Journal oj Vocational Behavior; 41, 4!H30.
Green, S. G., & Bauer, T. N. (1995). Supervisory mentoring by advisers: Relationships with doctoral students' potential, productivity. and commitment. Personnel Psychology, 48. 537-561.
Hill, C. E. (1997). The effects of my research training environment: Where are my students now? The Counseling Psychologist. 25. 74-81. Jacobi, M. (1991). Mentoring and undergraduate academic success: A literature review. Review oj Educational Research, 61. 505-532. Johnson, W. B., & Huwe, J. M. (2003). Getting mentored in graduate school Washington. DC: American Psychological Association. Johnson. W. B.. Koch, C., Fallow. G. 0 .. & Huwe, J. M. (2000). Prevalence of mentoring in clinical versus experimental doctoral programs: Survey. findings. implications and recommendations. Psychotherapy. 37. 325-334. Kahn. J. H., & Scott, N. A. (1997). Predictors of research productivity and sciencerelated career goals among counseling psychology doctoral students. The Counseling Psychologist, 25. 38-67.
Kolbe, K. (1994). Avoiding a mentor mismatch. Working Woman, 19(10). 66-68. Kram K. E. (1988). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships and organizational life. Lanham, MD: University Press. Levinson, D. J .. Darrow. C. N., Klein. E. B.. Levinson, M. H., & McKee. B. (1978). Seasons oj a man's life. New York: Ballantine. Mintz, L. B., Bartels, K. M.. & Rideout, C. A (1995). Training in counseling ethnic minorities and race-based availability of graduate school. Projessional Psychology: Research and Practice. 26. 316-321.
Olian, J. D., Carroll, S. J., Giannantonlo, C. M.• & Ferren. D. B. (1988). What do proteges' look for in a mentor? Results of three experimental studies. Journal oj Vocational Behavior; 33. 15-37.
Peck. S. M. (1999). Golf and the spirit. New York: Harmony Books. Pollock. R (1995). A test of conceptual models depicting the developmental course of informal mentor-protege relationships in the workplace. Journal oj Vocational Behavior; 46. 144-162. Raglns, B. R., & Cotton, J. L. (1999). Mentor functions and outcomes: A comparison of men and women in formal and informal mentortng relationships. Journal oj Applied Psychology. 84. 529-550. Ragtns, B. R. & McFarlin, D. B. (1990). Perception of mentor roles in crossgendered mentoring relationships. Journal oj Vocational Behavior; 37. 321-339. Ragins, B. R, & Scandura, T. A (1999). Burden or blessing? Expected costs of being a mentor. Journal oj Organizational Behavior; 20, 493-509. Rakin, E. A (1991). Mentor, mentee, mentortng, building career development relationships. Nursing Connections, 4, 49-57. Scandura, T. A (1992). Mentorship and career mobility: An empirical investigation. Journal oj Organizational Behavior; 42. 169-174. Schwiebert, V. L. (2000). Mentoring: Creating connected. empowered relationships.
Alexandria. VA: American Counseling Association. Swerdlik, M. E .. & Bardon, J. I. (1988). A survey of mentortng experiences in school psychology. Journal oj School Psychology. 26, 213-224. Tentoni, S. C. (1995). Mentoring of counseling students: A concept in search of a paradigm. Counselor Education and Supervision. 35. 32-42. Turban, D. B., & Dougherty. T. W. (1994). Role of protege personality in receipt of mentoring and career success. Academy oj Management JournaL 37. 688-702.
Counselor Education & Supervision. September 2004 • Volume 44
55
