The Efficacy of the <i>Adaptive Mentorship</i><sup>©</sup> Model

doi:10.4236/ojl.2013.22003

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Open Journal of Leadership

2013. Vol.2, No.2, 21-26

Published Online June 2013 in SciRes (http://www.scirp.org/journal/ojl) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojl.2013.22003

The Efficacy of the Adaptive Mentorship© Model

Edwin G. Ralph1*, Keith D. Walker2

1Department of Curriculum Studies, College of Education, University of Saskatchewan,

Saskatoon, Canada

2Deparment of Educational Administration and Johnson Shoyama Graduate School of

Public Policy, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada

Email: *[email protected]

Received March 14th, 2013; revis ed Apri l 1 4th, 2013; accepted April 22nd, 2013

tive Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any me-

dium, provided the original work is properl y cited.

In this article the authors describe the Adaptive Mentorship© (AM) model that they designed, applied, and

refined during the past two decades. They developed AM to be used within a variety of management,

mentorship, coaching, supervisory, or training programs. After employing and researching it within edu-

cational settings, they received a federal grant to disseminate the model to a wider audience across the

professional and occupational landscape and to investigate its effects. The researchers summarize the re-

sults of that experience, including their recent analysis of the judgments of several panels of experts re-

garding the efficacy of AM model. The authors present these findings for the consideration of practitio-

ners, scholars, and researchers in any field interested in improving the mentorship offered in their own

organizations.

Keywords: Mentorship; Leadership; Management; Professional Coaching; Expert Panels

Introduction

Interest in the study of mentorship has increased in all fields

(Steers, Sanchez-Runde, & Nardon, 2010), from the business

and commerce sectors (Bauer & Erdogan, 2009) to the health-

and social sciences, applied sciences, and humanities (Allen &

Eby, 2007; Carnegie, 2011).

The personal life experiences of most individuals have con-

firmed that one of the best ways to help novices internalize the

main functions of any profession or occupation is through

mentoring them (Ellsum & Pedersen, 2005; Ralph & Walker,

2013). The literature has also shown that no single definition of

mentorship applies to all settings, but that every discipline em-

ploys unique terms to describe this helping-developmental

process within its own field (Rose, Ragins, & Kram, 2007).

Furthermore, mentorship programs have varied in terms of their

degree of effectiveness, because participants have not always

been adequately prepared to implement and/or sustain an effec-

tive mentorship approach (Schoonover, 2002). This fact pro-

vides further impetus for seeking ways to employ and/or en-

hance efficacious mentorship practices in every educational,

training, or preparation setting. We provide evidence in this

paper that Adaptive Mentorship is an effective model that men-

toring partners could adopt or adapt to enhance the quality of

the mentoring process.

Purpose of the Article

In this paper we briefly describe the Adaptive Mentorship

model, its rationale, and its implementation; and we synthesize

the results of the growing body of research that we and others

have conducted within various professions in several countries

regarding its potential to improve the mentoring process.

Literature Review

Although definitions of mentorship, coaching, supervising,

and training—both in the literature and across profession fields-

have varied considerably (Bozeman & Feeney, 2007; Rose &

Best, 2005), there is almost universal agreement that the proc-

ess of mentorship has certain characteristics (Brock, 2011; Chu,

2009). These commonalities are that: 1) it involves providing

support to help protégés develop personally and socially/pro-

fessionally; 2) it has functioned in family, community, and

organizational settings since ancient times; 3) it is practiced

both formally and informally in a variety of forms; 4) it can

yield potential benefits and drawbacks for mentors, protégés,

and the groups in which they participate; and 5) it is influenced

by a variety of contextual factors and conditions, not the least

of which is the quality of interpersonal relationships between/

among the participants (Yoo, 2004).

Some of the mentorship research has indicated that although

the relationship between mentors and protégés is typically posi-

tive (Chun, Sosik, & Yun, 2012), there is in many cases a defi-

ciency that arises within the mentorship transaction. The prob-

lem may emerge from inadequate/inappropriate guidance, un-

acceptable supervisory interventions, unproductive mentoring

responses, or poor leader communication (Taherian & Shekar-

chian, 2008). There has thus been a subsequent call for better

mentorship training and enhanced developmental relationships

(Asare, 2008; Myall, T. Levett-Jones, & J. Lathlean, 2008).

Our own research has confirmed that these mentorship diffi-

culties (Ralph, 1994; Ralph & Walker, 2010) could be reduced

*Corresponding author.

E. G. RALPH, K. D. WALKER

by the application of the Adaptive Mentorship model(Ralph &

Walker, 2011a), which we formerly called Contextual Supervi-

sion or CS (Ralph, 1998, 2005); and which we derived from

earlier contingency and situational leadership approaches (e.g.,

Hersey & Blanchard, 1988; Fiedler & Garcia, 1987). We assert

that AM has potential for application in any mentorship situa-

tion in any field (Ralph & Walker, 2011b, 2013; Ralph, Walker,

& Wimmer, 2009). In this article we summarize findings re-

garding AM’s efficacy, and we invite interested mentorship

leaders to consider whether this evidence warrants their possi-

ble implementation of the model.

The Adaptive Mentorship© Model

Adaptive Mentorship© is a model that guides mentors in ad-

justing their mentoring responses to appropriately match the

task-specific development level of protégés whom they are as-

sisting in the learning/working situation (Ralph & Walker,

2011b, 2012). We depict the AM model in Figure 1.

The outer border of the diagram represents the entire physi-

cal, psychological, social, organizational, and cultural context

within which the mentorship process functions. Many of these

influences cannot be changed by the mentor or the protégé;

however, the aspect that they can control is their own behav-

our. Thus, mentors can modify their mentorship action, which

consist of two dimensions shown in Figure 1: 1) their “task”

response (i.e., the degree of specific direction given to the pro-

tégé regarding the technical, mechanical, or procedural aspect

of the latter’s performance of the task being learned); and 2)

their “support” response (i.e., the degree of “human” or psycho/

social/emotional expression they provide the protégé learning

the skill-set).

By contrast, the factor over which protégés have most control

is their task-specific developmental level. It likewise consists of

two dimensions: their “competence” level (i.e., their actual

technical ability to perform the task in question), and their

“confidence” level (i.e., their degree of self-assurance, compo-

sure, psychological comfort, and security and/or safety in per-

forming the skill-set).

The heart of the AM model is represented by the shaded ar-

rows linking the D- and A-grids, which portray the mentor’s

matching of one of four typical “A” (adaptive) responses with a

similarly numbered “D” (developmental) level characterizing

the protégé’s performance of the particular skill/competency.

Of course, there are many more than four positions within each

grid, because there is a host of possible A/D combinations.

However, for conceptual/analytical purposes, we highlighted

these four combinations simply to reflect types within each

quadrant.

Implementing Adaptive Mentorship©

Applying AM consists of the following three phases.

HIGH

LOW

THE CONTEXT

MENTOR’S

ADAPTIVE

RESPONSE

PROTÉGÉ’S

DEVELOPM ENTAL

LEVEL

ADAPTIVE

MENTORSHIP

Edwin Ralph & Keith Walker

Figure 1.

The Adaptive Mentorship© model. The mentor synchronizes his/her adaptive re sponse indicated in the A-grid to appropr iat ely match the

ask-specific developmental level of the protégé sho w n i n t he D-grid (Ralph, 1998; Ralph & Walker, 2011a, 2012) . t

E. G. RALPH, K. D. WALKER

Determining the Protégé’s Development

First, the protégé/mentor pair ascertains the existing devel-

opment level of the protégé to perform a specific skill-set being

learned at the time. As illustrated in the “D-grid”, a protégé’s

task-specific level of development consists of both his/her com-

petence and his/her confidence levels to perform the task. The

D1 quadrant reflects an individual with “low competence” and

“high confidence” to accomplish the task (i.e., he/she does not

know exactly how to perform it, but is confident, willing, and

eager to try). A protégé at D2 is low on both competence and

confidence; a protégé at D3 shows higher competence and

lower confidence; while a protégé at D4 is high on both dimen-

sions for the particular skill-set.

A protégé’s developmental level may be identified: 1) by the

mentor’s formal and informal observations of the protégé’s

actual performance of the skill/task; 2) by the pairs’ informal

conversations about the protégé’s D-level; and 3) by the pro-

tégé’s answers to the mentor’s direct questions about his/her

progress. D-levels are: task-specific; changeable over-time; dif-

ferent for different skill-sets; and temporary indicators of a pro-

tégé’s stage at a specific point in time (Ralph, 1998, 2000a,

2005; Ralph & Walker, 2011a, 2011b).

Synchronizing the Mentor’s Response

Next, the mentor appropriately adjusts his/her mentorship

response to match the existing D-level of the protégé regarding

the particular competency: A1 matches D1, A2 matches D2,

and so on. The mentor’s “A” adaptive-response also has two

dimensions: the degree of support the mentor provides (i.e., the

psycho-emotional aspects of encouragement, reinforcement,

and praise to bolster the protégé as he/she attempts to develop

the particular skill-set). Support consists of genuinely positive

words and/or actions, and varies along a continuum.

The other A-element is task (i.e., how directive the mentor is

toward the protégé regarding his/her technical or mechanical

prowess in the task), which also varies along a continuum,

ranging for example, from telling, to demonstrating, to sug-

gesting, to questioning, or to delegating with respect to the

protégé’s skill-specific technique.

The key principle for the mentor to correctly match the A

and D quadrants is that his/her task response must be inverse in

magnitude to the extent of the protégé’s competence level; and

simultaneously, the extent of the mentor’s support is similarly

inversely proportional to the novice’s level of confidence for

particular task.

Monitoring the Protégé’s Development

Then, the mentorship pair continually and mutually monitors

the protégé’s ongoing level of development, which necessitates

that the mentor simultaneously adjusts his/her adaptive re-

sponse to match, in inverse proportions, the protégé’s changing

development level(s).

Research Results

During the past 23 years we and other mentorship scholars

and practitioners have conducted research investigating the

effectiveness of the AM model in a variety of mentorship set-

tings. We summarize this research in two categories: early and

recent phases.

Early Research

From 1990 to 2005, we conducted research on the model,

which we first called Contextual Supervision (CS) within ex-

tended-practicum (internship) programs of teacher education

(Ralph, 1991, 1993a, 1998, 2004, 2005). Our several reports

have documented the model’s application, the research results,

the subsequent refinements, and the caveats for implementing

the model (Ralph, 1992, 1994, 1996, 2000, 2002b). We gath-

ered data from mentors and protégés who used the model re-

garding their respective readings of self- and partner-locations

on the two A and D grids of the model, as they progressed

through the mentorship cycle. By recording these respective

plottings at different times during the learning period, we were

able to determine the developmental changes/adaptations of

each partner throughout the practicum. That research presented

the following findings: 1) AM helped mentors clarify their con-

ceptualization of the whole mentoring process; 2) it replaced a

“one-size-fits-all” approach by allowing mentors to vary their

adaptive behaviour according to the developmental needs of

their protégés; 3) it was intuitively appealing and relatively

easy to learn; 4) it offered mentors a tool to help analyze and

alleviate mentoring conflicts; and 5) it revealed that such rela-

tionship problems were often the result of mentors mismatching

their adaptive responses with protégés’ task-specific develop-

mental levels (Ralph, 1993b, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002a).

At the same time, however, we also found that there was a

small but persistent degree of mismatching between mentor

response and protégé developmental level. Ideally, if the AM

model functioned perfectly there would be a 100% agreement

of matching of D and A quadrants; yet, some of our previous

research (Ralph, 2004, 2005) showed that the mismatching

phenomenon could be reduced if the program provided partici-

pants with more workshop time to become acquainted with the

model, and if the college-based advisor made more deliberate

reference to the model during mentoring seminars and site-

visits.

Recent Research

We continued to apply the AM model in our teacher-educa-

tion internships (Ralph, Walker, & Wimmer, 2007, 2009, 2010),

but we also sought to broaden its application in other profes-

sional disciplines (Posner, 2004; Watt, 1998). In 2007, as a

conesquence of our receipt of a public-outreach grant from the

Social Sciences and Humanities research Council of Canada we

were able to disseminate the AM model both by means of

workshop presentations and publications describing the model

and its research results.

Results from a Variety of Professions

From 2007 to the present we have continued to apply the

model in our own mentorship of novice teachers during their

extended-practicum programs, and we have also been more

widely distributing the model through public presentations and

scholarly publications (Ralph & Walker, 2011a, 2012). As a

result of these dissemination efforts, leaders from several other

professional disciplines have implemented the AM model. Re-

cent reports documenting these experiences were: 1) applying it

in undergraduate advisory programs (Chrosniak, Ralph, &

Walker, 2013); using it to mentor university students in EAL

programs (Khoii, 2011); adapting it for teacher-candidates com-

pleting their extended-practicum (Chin & Kutsyuruba, 2011);

adapting it to guide young adults through developmental life

stages (Pullman, 2011); mentoring student nurses (Jennings &

E. G. RALPH, K. D. WALKER

Couture, 2011); implementing it within a medicine/nurse-prac-

titioner mentorship program (Ralph & Shaw, 2011); adapting it

for undergraduate pharmacy students (Hawrysh, 2011); em-

ploying it to enhance the mentorship of business students (Pos-

ner, 2004); adapting it to enhance a dietetic preceptors’ men-

torship program (Haskey, Floer, Walker, & Ralph, in press);

and adapting it to fit mentorship conducted in cross-cultural

settings (Johansson-Fua, Ruru, Sanga, Walker, & Ralph, 2013;

Johansson-Fua, Sanga, Walker, & Ralph, 2011; Ruru, Sanga,

Walker, & Ralph, in press).

The results of these research reports confirmed many of our

earlier findings, one of which was that the AM model offers

mentoring partners a sensible and sensitive frame work to con-

ceptualize mentorship as a developmental process. A second

point of agreement among most AM users was that this process

proved most effective when mentors adapted the degree of

support and guidance they offered to meet the variable learning

needs of their protégés. By contrast, the quality of mentorship

was shown to be less effective when there was a mismatch

between these elements. A third finding was that although most

AM participants acknowledged the clarity provided for their

overall understanding of the mentoring process, they still wan-

ted freedom to adapt and/or modify the model as needed in

order to fit the unique contexts and idiosyncratic conditions

connected to their particular work settings and/or cultures. They

expressed reluctance at being unnecessarily tied to rigid proce-

dures or structures that did not reflect their organizational back-

grounds (Johansson-Fua, Sanga, Walker, & Ralph, 2011; Ruru,

Sanga, Walker, & Ralph, in press).

Results from Panels of Experts

At the time of writing this article, we had conducted 48

Adaptive Mentorship dissemination forums, workshops, or

presentations at scholarly conferences, professional seminars,

practitioner meetings, or academic conventions in eight coun-

tries. At these gatherings that ranged from one hour to two days

in length, we typically described the AM model, its rationale,

its application, and its research record. Also at these sessions,

we collected feedback from a total of 573 respondents con-

cerning the AM model, who represented a wide range of pro-

fessions and occupations from the educational, industrial, and

governmental sectors. Those respondents were workshop at-

tendees, and who accepted our invitation to serve as members

of “panels of experts” (Srinivasan, Straus, & Adams, 2011;

Wiersma & Jurs, 2008), by virtue of the fact that they were all

scholars, researchers, or practitioners experienced in the proc-

ess of mentoring within their respective fields. As panel mem-

bers, they responded to two questions on a survey we circulated

at the conclusion of each workshop: 1) What to you are the

positive aspects of AM, and 2) What are the challenging as-

pects? The findings we derived from our analysis of these ex-

pert panels’ responses (Ralph & Walker, 2013) again confirmed

many of the previous AM results cited above. We noted in

these data that all pane lists identified one or more positive fea-

tures of the model; and that, overall, they provided twice as

many positive elements as they did challenging ones. We sum-

marize the main response-categories that emerged from this

study, below, and we also include sample comments in paren-

theses, which illustrate typical perspectives.

The three categories having the largest numbers of positive

aspects that panels identified were that the AM model: 1) pro-

vided a logical conceptual map of the entire mentorship enter-

prise (“It gives a simple and clear identification of where pairs

are at and how to generate discussion to address action”); 2)

helped mentors guide protégés’ learning (“It shows how the

mentor should adapt her style to match the learner’s stage”);

and 3) promoted the growth of both partners (“I like the idea of

open conversation between both the protégé and mentor, as to

where each is at and what they need from one another”).

The three largest categories of challenge that panel lists iden-

tified regarding the AM model were that AM leaders must be

careful to: 1) provide adequate time for partners to become

familiar with using the model (“To me, both the mentor and

protégé would need training to understand the model and to

effectively implement it”); 2) recognize that some partners may

resist the model (“The hierarchy relationship may cause diffi-

culty for the mentor or protégé to be honest”); and 3) acknowl-

edge the existence of unforeseen barriers or conditions that

might reduce the model’s efficacy (“I think AM may be seen by

some as too simplistic, because there are more factors at play

than just the protégé’s confidence and competence, i.e., you

might have to expand it beyond the 2 windows you show”).

Conclusion

To this point in our research into Adaptive Mentorship, the

accumulated evidence suggests that it is a viable model that can

clarify understanding and provide guidance to individuals using

it in their mentoring practice. Like any conceptual model in the

social sciences, however (Zais, 1975), it is imperfect and it has

advantages and disadvantages. Nevertheless, the results tend to

confirm that its benefits outweigh its limitations. In this light,

we believe that the following comment submitted by a member

of one of the expert panels in New Zealand aptly described the

efficacy of the AM model: “It is situational and contextual,

providing mentors with a framework for thinking about their

approach to their protégés. It is very “protégé-centric” and lets

mentors adapt/tailor their style to meet the needs of their men-

tees.”

We conclude by inviting interested mentorship leaders to

examine these results as they consider whether to adapt AM to

enhance their respective mentorship programs.

REFERENCES

Allen, T., & Eby, L. (2007). The Blackwell handbook of mentoring: A

multiple perspective approach. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

doi:10.1111/b.9781405133739.2007.x

Asare, A. (2008). A few good faculty: Inspiring and preparing contem-

porary dental educators. New York Sta t e D e nt a l J o ur n a l, 74, 23-27.

Bauer, T., & Erdogan, B. (2009). Organizational behavior.

http://www.flatworldknowledge.com/pub/1.0/organizational-behavior/2

8789#web-28789

Bozeman, B., & Feeney, M. (2007). Toward a useful theory of mentor-

in g: A conceptual analysis and cr itique. Administration & Society, 39,

719-739. doi:10.1177/0095399707304119

http://aas.sagepub.com/content/39/6/719

Brock, V. (2011). Secret history of coaching. International Journal of

Mentoring and Coaching, 9. ht t p: // w ww .em cc ou n ci l. or g /e u/ e n/ 40

Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (2011). Profes-

sional and graduate education: Preparation for the professions pro-

gram (PPP: Clergy study, engineering study, law study, medical edu-

cation study, nursing study, teacher education study.

http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/previous-work/professional-grad

uate-education

Chin, P., & Kutsyuruba, B. (2011). The potential of the Adaptive Men-

E. G. RALPH, K. D. WALKER

& K. Walker (Eds.), Adapting mentorship across the professions:

Fresh insights & perspectives (pp. 361-378). Calgary, Alberta: Te-

meron/Detselig/Brush.

Chrosniak, P., Ralph, E., & Walker, K. (2013). What role can question-

ing play in mentorship ?

http://dus.psu.edu/mentor/2013/02/role-questioning-play-mentorship/

Chu, C. (2009). Mentoring for leadership in Pacific education. Doc-

toral Dissertation, Wellington, NZ: Victoria University of Wellington.

http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10063/1103/thesis.

pdf

Chun, J., Sosik, J., & Yun, N. (2012, January 13). A longitudinal study

of mentor and protégé outcomes in formal mentoring relationships.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 1071-1094.

doi:10.1002/job.1781

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/job.1781/pdf

Ellsum, W., & Pedersen, C. (2005). Does coaching work without men-

torship in management development? Paper at ANZAM 2005: En-

gaging the multiple contexts of management convergence and diver-

gence of management theory and practice, 7-10 December 2005,

Canberra, Australia. http://eprints.usq.edu.au/1760/

Fiedler, F., & Garcia, J. (1987) New Approaches to leadership, cogni-

tive resources and organizational performance. New York: John

Wiley and Sons.

Haskey, N., Floer, S., Walker, K., & Ralph, E. (2013). Adapting the

handbook. Saskatoon: T ur ning P oint Global.

Hawrysh, D. (2011). Towards a mentorship model for pharmacy stu-

dents. In E. Ralph, & K. Walker (Eds.), Adapting mentorship across

the professions: Fresh insights & perspectives (pp. 345-360). Cal-

gary: Temeron/Detselig/Brush.

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. (1988). Management of organizational

behavior: Utilizing human resources (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice-Hall.

Jennings, A., & Couture, B. (2011). Supervision in nursing education:

A Canadian perspective. In E. Ralph, & K. Walker (Eds.), Adapting

men tor ship acr oss th e professions: Fresh insights & perspectives (pp.

329-344). Calga r y: Temeron/Detselig/Brush.

Johansson-Fua, S., Sanga, K., Walker, K., & Ralph, E. (2011). Men-

torship in the professions: A perspective from Tonga. The Interna-

tional Journal of Mentoring and Coaching, 9, 19-37.

Johansson-Fua, S. Ruru, D., Sanga, K., Walker, K., & Ralph, E. (2013).

Creating mentorship metaphors: Pacific Island perspectives. Learn-

ing Landscapes, 6, 241- 259.

http://www.learninglandscapes.ca/images/documents/ll-no11.pdf

writing development. In E. Ralph, & K. Walker (Eds.), Adapting

Men tor ship across the profes sions: Fresh insights & perspectives (pp.

307-327). Calga r y: Temeron/Detselig/Brush.

Myall, M., Levett-Jones, T., & Lathlean, J. (2008). Issues in under-

graduate education: Mentorship in contemporary practice: The ex-

periences of nursing students and practice mentors. Journal of Clini-

cal Nursing, 17, 1834-1842. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2007.02233.x

Posner, B. (2004). Reflections on experience: Editor’s introduction.

Journal of Management Inquiry, 13, 151.

doi:10.1177/1056492604265539

Pullman, E. (2011). Integrating a developmental perspective with the

Adapting mentorship across the professions: Fresh insights & per-

spective (pp. 379-394). Calgary: T emeron/Detselig/Brush.

Ralph, E. (1991). Aboriginal student teachers in the extended practicum:

Contextual Supervision. Teaching Education, 4, 113-121.

doi:10.1080/1047621910040116

Ralph, E. (1992). Improving practicum supervision: A Canadian ex-

perience. Action in Teacher Education, 14, 30-38.

doi:10.1080/01626620.1993.10463139

Ralph, E. (1993a). Enhancing Aboriginal teacher education: One prom-

ising approach. Can a di an Journal of Native Educa t io n , 20, 44-62.

Ralph, E. (1993b). Sensitive, sensible practicum supervision: A con-

textual application in Saskatchewan. The Alberta Journal of Educa-

tional Research, 39, 283-296.

Ralph, E. (1994). Helping beginning teachers improve via Contextual

Supervision. Journal of Teacher Education, 45 , 354 -363.

doi:10.1177/0022487194045005008

Ralph, E. (1996). Contextual supervision: Matching supervisory styles

with learners’ needs. The Canadian Administrator, 35, 1-11.

Ralph, E. (1998). Developing practitioners: A handbook of contextual

supervision. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press.

Ralph, E. (2000). Aligning mentorship style with beginning teachers’

development: Contextual supervision. The Alberta Journal of Educa-

tional Research, 46, 311-326.

Ralph, E. (2002a). Improving the application of contextual supervision:

An ongoing initiative. In R. Nata (Ed.), Progress in education: Vol-

ume 9 (pp. 1-12). New York: Nova Science Publishers.

Ralph, E. (2002b). Mentoring beginning teachers: Findings from con-

textual supervision. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education,

16, 191-210. doi:10.1023/A:1020809206376

Ralph, E. (2004). Developing managers’ effectiveness: A model with

potential. Journal of Manag em en t Inquiry, 13, 151-163,

doi:10.1177/1056492604265222

Ralph, E. (2005). Enhancing managers’ supervisory effectiveness: A

promising model. The Journal of Management Development, 24,

267-284. doi:10.1108/02621710510584071

Ralph, E., & Walker, K. (2010). Enhancing mentors’ effectiveness: The

Education, 45, 205- 218. doi:10.7202/045604ar

Ralph, E., & Walker, K. (Eds.). (2011a). Adapting mentorship across

the professions: Fresh insights and perspectives. Calgary, Alberta:

Brush Education.

Ralph, E., & Walker, K. (2011b). Helping novices develop in the hu-

Humanities, 9,121-132.

Ralph, E., & Walker, K. (2012). Enhancing mentoring across the disci-

scholarship of teaching & learning at the University of Saskatche-

wan, 10, 9-11.

http://www.usask.ca/gmcte/sites/default/files/Bridges%20May%202

012%20WEB.pdf

Expert panels’ views. Manuscript submitted for publicatio n.

Ralph, R., & Shaw, S. (2011). Dismantling barriers: Mentorship in

emerging nurse-practitioner roles. In E. Ralph, & K. Walker (Eds.),

Adapting mentorship across the professions: Fresh insights & per-

spectives (pp. 413-431). Calgary, Alberta: Brush Education.

Ralph, E., Walker, K., & Wimmer, R. (2008). The clinical/practicum

experience in professional preparation: Preliminary findings. McGill

Journal of Education, 43, 157-172. doi:10.7202/019580ar

Ralph, E., Walker, K., & Wimmer, R. (2009). Practicum-education ex-

periences: Post-interns’ views. International Journal of Engineering

Education, 25, 122-130.

Ralph, E., Walker, K., & Wimmer, R. (Eds.). (2010). The practicum in

professional education: Canadian perspectives. Calgary, Alberta,

Brush Education.

Rose, M., & Best, D. (Eds.). (2005). Transforming practice through

clinical education, professional supervision and mentoring. New

York: Elsevier.

Ragins, R. B., & Kram, K. (Eds.). (2007). The handbook of mentoring

at work: Theory, research, and practice. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Ruru, D., Sanga, K., Walker, K., & Ralph, E. (in Press). Adapting men-

torship across the professions: A Fijian view. International Journal

of Evidence Based Coaching and M e ntoring.

Schoonover, S. (2002). Six sigma leadership: The key to sustaining

contemporary qualit y p r o g r am s .

http://www.slideshare.net/Sixsigmacentral/six-sigma-leadership-the-

key-to-sustaining-contemporary

Srinivasan, R., Straus, S., & Adams, J. (2011). New research system

uses social media and other tools to gather, analyze expert opinions.

Science Daily: Your Source for the Latest Research News.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110614115642.htm

Steers, R., Sanchez-Runde, C., & Nardon, L. (2010). Management

across cultures: Challenges and strategies. New York: Cambridge

University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511810510

E. G. RALPH, K. D. WALKER

Taherian, K., & Shekarchian, M. (2008). Mentoring for doctors: Do its

benefits outweigh its disadvantages? Medical Teacher , 30, pp. 95-99.

doi:10.1080/01421590801929968

Watt, S. (1998). An examination of contextual supervision in a pre-

school practicum setting. M. Ed. Thesis. Burnaby: Simon Fraser

University.

Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S. (2008). Research methods in education (9th

ed.). New York: Pearson.

Yoo, In-Sung. (2004). Education: Mentoring swells into “a movement.”

USA Today.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2004-01-26-mentoring_x.

htm

Zais, R. (1976). Curriculum: Principles and foundations. New York:

Crowell.