Comparative study of informal mentoring in two higher education institutions (Kazakhstan and Türkiye)

Introduction

Taking the first steps into an academic path or making a move to a new academic job can be extremely complex and demanding (Staniforth & Harland, 2006), and involves both professional and personality development concerns. The requirements for research and teaching staff in the higher education sector include being in possession of high professional knowledge and skills, mastering modern pedagogical methods and techniques, as well as acknowledged personal responsibility for the quality of education, and ongoing development as creative and erudite professionals responsible for well-being of students and society in general.

To understand the experiences of academic staff at their early careers, learning their perspectives, thoughts, and actions are crucial (Dinkelman et al., 2006). Research indicates that work in higher education is mostly challenging and stressful for newly hired academics (Boyd et al., 2011; Cawyer et al., 2002). Most of the examinations and observations of teacher education have considerably neglected the questions of what a new academic needs to know and how he/she learns it (Dinkelman et al., 2006). A teacher’s grounding and education in this sophisticated multifunctional profession comprises a holistic, sustained and continuous process, directed to shape and model personal qualities, professional skills, knowledge and competences which are sufficient and appropriate to his/her personal needs as well as qualification requirements.

This holistic goal can be approached by a system of mentoring which can intensify the professional formation process of newly hired university teachers and building their motivation leading to self-improvement, self-development and self-realization.

It is equally crucial to emphasize the significance of conducting comparative studies, particularly in the field of education, among various Turkic countries. These research endeavors serve multiple decentralized objectives. Firstly, they contribute to the comprehension of educational policies implemented within individual countries as well as those pursued in other nations. Furthermore, such analyses enable research that aims to enhance, advance, and reform educational policies and experiences. They also aid in predicting the consequences and impacts of educational achievements and changes. Additionally, these comparative studies facilitate the development of tools and frameworks that assist in the effective implementation of educational initiatives.

In this research, the authors aim to explore how informal mentoring works in a Kazakhstani and a Turkish higher education institution and wish to contribute to implementing a formal faculty mentoring program at the university as a means for young academics’ professional growth and career development.

To address this aim, three main research questions are proposed:

The outline of this paper encompasses three critical sections: First, a literature review will explore mentoring in academia. Second, the methodology section will provide a detailed account of the research design and data collection methods, alongside the participant demographics and sampling details. Third, the findings and discussion section will present the research outcomes, followed by an in-depth analysis of these findings in light of the literature, ultimately culminating in a conclusive summary that highlights the significance and implications of the study’s contributions to the field of mentoring.

Mentoring in academia: Informal mentoring

Adaptation of a new entrant into higher education is not just a simple process. It is a multifaceted learning process (Cheng et al., 2012) “through which the individual acquires the knowledge and skills, the values and attitudes, and the habits and modes of thought of the society to which he belongs” (Bragg, 1976, p.9). Also, it is a joint process (Bauer & Erdogan, 2012) involving the organization influencing and shaping its new workers, who in turn need to define acceptable roles for themselves within their new organization or institution.

Research has confirmed the importance of learning (Taye, Sang & Muthanna, 2019) during the professional socialization of a newcomer because learning is “the core of organizational socialization” (Cooper‐Thomas & Anderson, 2006). As a learning and change process, mentoring for senior academics involves passing on “the organizational culture, best practices, and the inner workings of a profession” (Aishebli et al., 2020).

Thus, socialization, both professionally and at the organizational level, occurs through social interactions between newly hired faculty members and organizational ‘insiders’ (Li et al., 2011) in roles of peer colleagues and supervisors. These insiders, as the research indicates, are crucial in adaptation (Cooper‐Thomas & Anderson, 2006) as they provide information, feedback, and role models as well as social relationships and support. That is why organizational insiders are ‘useful sources of information’ (Cooper‐Thomas & Anderson, 2006).

The literature emphasizes the importance of mentoring in faculty by stating that it increases job satisfaction, expands newly recruited faculty members’ constellations of developmental relationships, providing them not only with career guidance but also psychosocial and emotional support with less work conflicts (Illes et al., 2000; Janasz & Sullivan, 2001; Mullen & Klimaitis, 2021).

In the modern theory of education, mentorship is given more importance as a mechanism for professional socialization and supporting junior faculty members’ academic practice in higher education context. A study carried out by Schriever and Grainger (2019) emphasized that in a supportive environment provided in mentorship mentees can receive guidance and career assistance, validation of their capability to contribute to research publications, and the opportunity to collaborate in co-authoring a journal article.

The concept of mentorship is complicated due to the numerous definitions and explanations. In the field of higher education, this concept became a ‘buzzword’ (Sands et al., 1991) and nowadays it is receiving renewed attention (Bhagia & Tinsley, 2000; Mullen & Klimaitis, 2021). In the sector, the term mentoring is being used and operated in a diversity of ways and with a variety of goals and aims for mentoring academics. Among these aims are successful induction, staff retention, a mechanism for on-going growth opportunity, and professional development (Van & Misawa, 2022).

Mentoring is a method of transferring knowledge, rendering help and support in the teaching and learning process as well as young academic’s career development. It is essential to note that it does not eliminate other methods such as, on-the-job education, research studies, additional participation in professional development and learning program courses, internships, etc. which in turn enhance its relevance. Mentorship is not a unidirectional relationship (Tammy, 2018), but rather a reciprocal process, a partnership, on the one hand, mentor’s activity, on the other hand – his/her mentee’s activity.

Traditionally, in the academic frame, mentoring, although being ‘a slippery concept’ (Daloz, 1986), renders “support in academic endeavors, and more importantly, provides help to the protégé in comprehending and overcoming the political and social barriers within the department, school or faculty” (Anafarta & Apaydin, 2016, p. 22). This view is also mirrored in the study of van der Weijden and colleagues (van der Weijden et al., 2015) who look upon mentoring as a way of preparing young academic researchers for a full professorship.

Clearly, newly hired young academics entering the sphere of higher education tend to be unprepared and uncertain as teachers and as academics (Cordie et al., 2020) despite university training in the variety of responsibilities of the contemporary academic (Beane-Katner, 2014). Plus they need the person who is an “expert-who-has-the-answers” (Portner, 2008). Mentoring is especially crucial in the induction period of a beginner since they have “little experience in teaching and are constantly developing their identity and competence as a teacher” (Olsen et al., 2020, p.14).

The system of mentoring encourages experienced faculty members and helps and assists junior academics in learning the roles as well as in understanding the institutional culture, thus offering professional stimulation to both, senior and junior staff member (Aishebli et al., 2020). Moreover, mentoring supports professional growth and renewal which leads to the empowerment of the faculty (Goerisch et al., 2019) and shapes the future of young teachers’ professions (Nakamura et al., 2009).

Academic mentoring has been traditionally natural and informal, independent of any institutional intervention (Dorner et al., 2021). It is characterized by spontaneous, voluntary, and often unstructured relationships between mentors and mentees, and has gained prominence within the context of higher education as a valuable avenue for personal and professional development (Aishebli et al., 2020; Hansman, 2016; Du & Wang, 2017; Parfitt & Rose, 2020). Informal mentoring in higher education fosters individual growth and career advancement, enhances a sense of belonging and engagement and offers more comprehensive insights into faculty role expectations (Goerisch et al., 2019). Informal mentors play a pivotal role in knowledge sharing within academic communities (Mullen, 2007). They facilitate the transfer of tacit knowledge and unwritten rules that are often critical for success in academia.

Although the concept of mentoring may not have been explicitly labelled in the higher education institutions in focus, the analysis of history reveals that the act of helping and assisting new individuals is not a recent phenomenon. It can be inferred that the establishment and recognition of mentorship as a social institution emerged as a result of society’s increasing needs in terms of theoretical understanding and generalizing the naturally occurring process of teaching and nurturing the younger generation: in Türkiye starting from Muallim Mektebi (Teacher school) to Darülmuallimin-i Aliye (Higher Teacher Institutes), in Kazakhstan pedagogical institutions and evening schools. Mentors serve a distinct societal function by nurturing individuals, fostering their intellectual and spiritual growth, and preparing them for active participation in work and life. The phenomenon of mentorship encompasses a crucial social and pedagogical element in promoting social development and preserving valuable traditional socio-cultural foundations.

Methodology

The primary focus of mentoring in the present research is investigating mentorship relationships as a support mechanism for professional socialization and career growth for new young academics through personal interactions and relationship building.

The design of the research is grounded in a qualitative research methodology with a perspective of an interpretivist paradigm. Thus, the research is projected towards qualitative data which reveals in-depth understanding of the respondents’ experiences and personal stories as well as the meanings they attach to their actions. For a qualitative research design both individual interviews and focus group interviews were used. The semi-structured interview method was used, which is flexible, accessible and intelligible and, more important, capable of disclosing important and often hidden facets of human and organizational behavior (Qu & Dumay, 2011, p. 246). Interviews in qualitative research strive to esteem the world from the participants’ perspective and to investigate and delve into the importance of people’s experiences (Kvale, 1996; Silverman, 2013).

One of the primary strengths of semi-structured interviews lies in their ability to elicit rich, detailed narratives from participants. As highlighted by Patton (2002), this method allows participants to express their experiences, emotions, and perceptions in their own words, providing a depth of insight unattainable through quantitative approaches. In our research, which delves into intricate aspects of informal mentoring, this depth of understanding is essential for capturing the complexity and subtleties of the participants’ experiences.

Semi-structured interviews also offer the advantage of adaptability during the data collection process. Charmaz (2006) argues that this adaptability permits researchers to explore unexpected themes and follow-up on participants’ responses in real-time, enhancing the depth of the data collected. In our study, which involves participants with diverse backgrounds and expertise in the field of higher education, the flexibility of semi-structured interviews ensures that each participant’s unique perspective is thoroughly explored and documented.

Findings

Academics’ conceptualization about mentoring

While the participants of the HEIs in both countries view mentoring as a form of support, help, and guidance for academic professionals, there are some slight differences in how mentoring is perceived and practiced.

In a Kazakhstani institution, mentoring is seen as a relationship where a mentor provides assistance and expertise to a mentee, primarily focusing on professional development and career advancement. This more narrow view of mentoring emphasizes mentor’s role as a supportive figure:

It [mentoring] is crucial because mentoring is showing assistance and support to the people who need it at the beginning of a career or study (Assistant lecturer 3, Kazakhstan),

...for me it [mentoring] means first of all support, help, being helped in difficult situations and supporting you throughout your induction period when you start to work. I think, it is very important to have a person whom you can ask about things, about how the things work and are structured (Assistant lecturer 1, Kazakhstan).

Data collected from a Turkish institution show that the participants consider mentoring as an influential and dynamic process that goes beyond mere support and guidance. It is seen as a social exchange where both mentor and mentee contribute to each other's growth and development:

Mentoring for me means as a kind of leadership, rather than creating followers you need to create new leaders, you need to convey your experience, your knowledge base to younger generation or those who a new in the field (Head of the department 1, Türkiye),

It [mentoring] is kind of a social exchange of ideas in practice (Professor 3, Türkiye):

For me, the notion of mentorship refers to guiding a faculty member who is a newcomer to an institution or who needs to gain experience through observation or trial about a range of issues in faculty environments. These issues may include technical ones such as getting hold of technological resources or facilities of the faculty; cultural ones like understanding the history, traditions, or cultural conventions of the institution; academic ones such as improving one's research skills by taking part in or assisting research projects; and lastly, social ones such as building networks in the field through conferences or social responsibility projects(Research assistant 3, Türkiye).

In this broader view, mentoring is seen as a reciprocal relationship that involves sharing knowledge, experiences, and perspectives, leading to mutual learning and growth:

You [as a mentor] are constantly reflecting on yourself too. So, it is a learning process. It’s a mutually developmental learning process both for the mentor and the mentee. It should be an interactive learning experience (Senior lecturer 2, Türkiye).

As one of the Turkish professors stated:

Informal relationships, informal networks are important for the newcomers to discover. Because when they [mentees] first start working in a new organization they may feel lost in many ways. The ways of doing things informally is an important aspect of an organizational life, so in this respect for the newly hired faculty or research assistances, I believe, they need to provide at least informal mentoring, because at Başkent University we don’t have kind of a formal mentoring.

Informal relationships and networks play a crucial role in helping newcomers navigate and adapt to a new organization. Starting a new position in an unfamiliar environment can often lead to feelings of being lost or overwhelmed. In such situations, informal practices and interactions become essential for individuals to understand the informal norms and ways of doing things within the organization. Thus, informal mentoring can help newcomers understand the unwritten rules, organizational culture, and expectations within the institution.

As a result of addressing the first research question, the following figure has been developed to visually represent the participants’ perception about faculty mentoring in two contexts (Fig. 2).

It is essential to recognize that the conceptualization and practice of mentoring can vary not only between countries but also within different academic institutions or disciplines. Factors such as organizational culture, institutional policies, and individual preferences can shape the mentoring dynamics in academia.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1

Academics’ perception about mentoring in two contexts

Discussion

The findings of this study, despite being conducted in two distinct contexts, highlight striking similarities that align with the existing literature. In relation to literature this current research has pinpointed that the results are mainly reflective of the literature studies regarding teacher-to-teacher mentoring in the context of the higher education. The results also indicate that this research made a significant contribution to the body of knowledge on this topic.

To start with, it was congruent with the literature that it is important to address the professional socialization of beginning teachers. The findings of the present research demonstrate that the questions of what a new entrant of the department need to know and how they learn it are neglected, also as was investigated in Dinkelman, Margolis and Sikkenga (2006). Almost right after their graduation new teachers face struggles in teaching, research and service responsibilities. That’s why it is particularly challenging and stressful (Boyd et al., 2011; Shahr et al., 2019; Everitt & Tefft, 2019).

The literature on faculty mentoring extensively made an attempt to identify mentor roles and characteristics. This typology included a mentor to be a guide, advisor, protector, assistant, helper, supporter, a means for professional networking, counseling, and many others. The interviews with beginning teachers pinpointed two sides of the roles of mentors in their departments: first, professional development which is seen in transferring knowledge, skills and competencies, encourage in acquisition of new experience, development of one’s motivation, and second, sociocultural induction which is seen in feeding with organizational culture, its values, norms and rules. These findings beg to acknowledge those findings examined during the literature review for this research (see for example Faurer et al., 2014; Hansman, 2016).

Commonly, the struggles, which new entrants face, are seen in uncertainty about the specific nature of new professional roles, difficulty in managing with the pedagogical skills specifically designed for adult learners and concerns about the adequacy of the professional and academic knowledge bases necessary for higher education work (MacPhail et al., 2019). One of the key challenges occurred in tertiary education for newcomers are underpinned by scholarship and research. To support the research development of new university academics the mission of departments is to provide effective support through mentoring and collaborative projects (Boyd et al., 2011). In many cases universities make stress on research area to prevail over teaching and there is too much pressure for junior university teachers to publish (Carmel & Paul, 2015). Consequently, university academics who work in a system that emphasizes the importance of research on teaching and other tasks tend to develop an ambivalent attitude toward teaching.

The analysis of the literature and in practice (in this research) on developing effective mentoring relationships concurred concerning its foundational principles: constructive professional interrelationship between mentor teacher and mentee teacher, the selection of a mentor should be made with the perspective of appropriateness of teachers in line with the principle of voluntariness. Additionally, mentors should possess a high level of empathetic understanding as well as keeping professional tact in the relationship with beginning teachers.

The practical benefits of our research findings have shed light on the significance of informal mentoring in higher education. This study illustrates how informal mentors serve as role models, facilitating the transmission of tacit knowledge and skills (Aishebli et al., 2020). Our findings reinforce this notion by demonstrating how informal mentors, often more experienced faculty members, serve as exemplars who share their tacit knowledge and expertise with mentees (Sambunjak et al., 2010).

The research findings also underscored the substantial impact of informal mentoring on career progression and faculty retention. This resonates with prior studies highlighting how informal mentorship contributes to the job satisfaction and professional growth of early-career faculty members (Haggard & Dougherty, 2015; Ragins & Verbos, 2007). The support and guidance provided by informal mentors enhance not only individual career trajectories but also contribute to a positive academic culture, potentially mitigating issues of faculty turnover (Eagan et al., 2011).

This research also shed light on the role of informal mentoring in fostering a sense of community and collaboration among faculty members (Eagan et al., 2011). Informal mentors often act as connectors, facilitating interactions among colleagues and contributing to a collaborative culture within academic departments.

Building on the findings of this research, we recommend future research endeavors that delve deeper into the theoretical foundations of informal mentoring. Investigating the cognitive processes that underlie informal mentorship, such as knowledge sharing and trust development, could contribute to the theoretical development in this area. Additionally, examining the impact of contextual factors on informal mentoring dynamics can enrich existing theories.

Conclusion

The purpose of this research was to explore how mentoring works in two higher education institutions, what the current problem issues are, and, thus, contribute to the growing research-based literature on this issue. This research provided insights into the issues and challenges of informal mentoring in two different contexts.

Despite the lack of established formal mentoring programs in both countries, the participants from two countries expressed a common sentiment regarding the potential benefits of a more systematic approach to mentoring. Mentors are considered as “guards of elite wisdom in society and helpers of the mentees throughout their journey by embodying the mentee’s hopes, shedding light on her path, interpreting uncertainties, warning of impending dangers and showing the inner face of unexpected situations” (Aslıer, 2020, p.69).

In terms of practice, our research highlights the pivotal role of informal mentoring in knowledge transfer, career advancement, and the overall well-being of faculty members within higher education institutions. Institutions should recognize the significance of these informal connections and consider ways to support and facilitate them. Mentorship programs, both formal and informal, should be designed to harness the power of these relationships in fostering a collaborative academic environment.

This study also points toward exciting avenues for future research. Investigating the cognitive processes that underlie informal mentorship, such as knowledge sharing and trust development, can contribute to the theoretical development in this area. Furthermore, examining the impact of contextual factors on informal mentoring dynamics is essential for tailoring mentorship approaches to specific settings.

In conclusion, this comparative study shed light on the similarities and differences in the practice of mentoring within two distinct contexts. It revealed commonalities in terms of the current state of mentoring and the challenges faced by mentees. However, it is important to note that this study represents only a snapshot of these two countries and their specific circumstances. To draw broader generalizations and make comprehensive comparisons across different countries, further research is necessary. Conducting additional research in diverse educational settings, will yield a more nuanced and region-specific understanding of mentoring practices globally. Such investigations can help pinpoint common trends, effective strategies, and potential areas for improvement in mentorship programs.