1. RCN Conference Telford. March 15-16 th 2016 An appreciative inquiry of expert mentorship: exploring the views of mentors to inform best practice guidance for the development of expert mentorship Dr. Sharon Black, Director of Nurse Education/Deputy Head of School, University of Lincoln, UK With: Dr. Alison Crombie and Dr. Ros Kane, Principal Lecturer, University of Lincoln

2. Aims and questions To discuss development, methods and findings from a recent study to understand what constitutes ‘expert’ mentorship. Research aim: To appreciate what constitutes expert mentorship and identify best practice guidance Research questions: What is expert mentorship and can it impact on student learning experience? How can expert mentorship best be supported? What are the key elements of expert mentorship that can underpin best practice? www.lincoln.ac.uk

3. Rationale A direct correlation between the quality of student learning and experience in practice and the quality of mentorship has been recognised. There is therefore a need to better understand what constitutes good practice in mentorship and how this can be fostered and promoted within healthcare organisations. www.lincoln.ac.uk

4. Setting One London university and one large inner London NHS teaching hospital; the two organisations being linked by their joint provision of pre- registration nursing programmes. www.lincoln.ac.uk

5. Methods Appreciative Inquiry (AI) to explore participant beliefs, values, experiences and understanding of expert mentorship. To look beyond the problem and involve people in the chance to explore the possibilities for change (Richer et al. 2010). Four propositions underlying AI: that it should begin with appreciation; it should produce applicable information; it should be proactive; it should be collaborative (Cooperrider et al. 2008). The aim of AI is to “generate new knowledge of a collectively desired future” (Cooperrider et al. 2008 pg. 5). A four phase approach was used to carry out this study

6. Phase one: Individual appreciative interviews. Mentors, practice education leads, link lecturers, students share their beliefs, values, experience and understanding of expert mentorship (Appreciating: discovery phase) Phase one: Individual appreciative interviews. Mentors, practice education leads, link lecturers, students share their beliefs, values, experience and understanding of expert mentorship (Appreciating: discovery phase) Phase four: Mentors, practice education leads, link lecturers and students review and agree best practice guidelines on expert mentorship (Sustaining: destiny phase) Phase four: Mentors, practice education leads, link lecturers and students review and agree best practice guidelines on expert mentorship (Sustaining: destiny phase) Phase three: Key statements about expert mentorship are developed. Key statements are scored in by mentors, practice education leads, link lecturers and students to determine the ideal. Researcher then develops draft best practice guidance (Co-constructing: design phase) Phase three: Key statements about expert mentorship are developed. Key statements are scored in by mentors, practice education leads, link lecturers and students to determine the ideal. Researcher then develops draft best practice guidance (Co-constructing: design phase) Phase two: Mentors, practice education leads’, link lecturers’, and students’ views of what could be with the right culture of mentorship are analysed (Envisioning: dream phase) Phase two: Mentors, practice education leads’, link lecturers’, and students’ views of what could be with the right culture of mentorship are analysed (Envisioning: dream phase) Expert mentorship (Affirmative topic choice) Dissemination

7. Ethical considerations www.lincoln.ac.uk Ethical approval was sought and granted, with access participants approved by the relevant University Head of Department, and the Chief Nurse and Deputy Chief Nurse at the NHS teaching hospital. Royal College of Nursing (2009) guidance on research ethics regarding information sheets, consent, confidentiality, data protection, right to withdraw, potential benefits and harms, storage of data, and presentation and dissemination of results was followed. All data were anonymised, treated confidentially and only accessible by the research team. Each participant was allocated a 2 digit number with an M (mentor), S (student), PEL (practice education lead) or LL (link lecturer).

8. Findings www.lincoln.ac.uk Global themeOrganising theme A certain kind of person  Emotional intelligence and creativity  Confidence  Motivation and passion  Valuing the student relationship The link lecturer role  Value and status of the role  Collaborative relationships An organisational philosophy of expert mentorship  Collective understanding and appreciation of time  Professional development and ongoing support  Ownership of the students  Selecting the right people  Need for acknowledgement

9. A certain kind of person “Someone that’s accessible and supportive, helping with development, it’s about recognising the ability to facilitate, to listen, emotional intellect, cognitive ability” M03 “They need to feel confident in what they’re saying, especially if they’re dealing with a very difficult situation; to feel that what they’re saying is the right thing and to express it in a way to the student that the student has confidence in them” ED03 “They inspire me to go for more and to learn more and to contribute more for their development...training our future workforces…I provide my experience to them, and that is very enjoyable for me as a person/nurse that I am doing it” M02 “ They can be bothered to show you something and they’re supportive in what you're learning and got the time and the patience. The same with teachers; you remember the ones that really make a difference” M01 www.lincoln.ac.uk

10. The Link Lecturer Role “I think the reason they [the link lecturer] were very good was that they were very available, so they were within the practice area at least once a week and made it very easy for us to contact them, kind of by giving us their email and just generally showing a lot of concern which was really refreshing” S02 “A core team of academics that are of a particular clinical area that are very clearly accessible, very clearly identifiable, that have got a strong strategy for how they manage their interactions with a clinical area” M03 “between us we work very closely, we communicate very closely.... there should be a lot more communication between practice and university” LL03 “good relationships here with our university partners” M03 “there’s a connection between them both [the university and the Trust], a collaborative relationship” ED05 www.lincoln.ac.uk

11. An organisational philosophy of expert mentorship “It’s not about the time, it’s about how you adapt and be innovated because at the end of the day, there is never a ward in London or any other hospital in the whole of the world that’s going to have time” ED05 “mentorship has got to have that key support in their corporate nursing and is part of their nursing objective. Here, we have our top 10 objectives and part of that is teaching and education” M03 “thinking about that from a perspective longer-term when your student gets to the end of their training, they’ll hopefully become a member of staff, because we very much see we’re training students to become staff members in our organisation” M03 “Growing our students through to be part of the trust....the sense of belonging to the trust....We want them to be high quality, motivated nurses at the end” ED03 www.lincoln.ac.uk

12. Selecting the right people “Everybody’s expected to be a mentor, and not everybody can mentor” S03 “I don’t think everyone should be mentors, I definitely don’t....You can see the difference between people who are a bit ambivalent toward it because they’ve go to do it as part of their job......and those who are quite keen and willing to help and share”S01 “people do take students because they have to, not because they want to and they know it’s part of their job” M01 “mentors should be selected... we can select a few people…The first thing they should do is recognise who wants to do it and find out why they want to do it.” M02 “placing more value on it [mentoring] which I think would happen if selection was harder perhaps” S02 www.lincoln.ac.uk

13. Rank Consolidated key statements 1 Having mentors who are committed, knowledgeable, competent, motivated, passionate about mentorship and wanting to mentor 2 Selecting mentors who are emotionally intelligent, creative, inspirational and confident 3 Providing mentors with professional development, ongoing support, and commitment to allocating protected time 4 Promoting a culture that supports teaching and learning in practice, taking ownership of the students and making them feel part of the Trust 5 Ensuring joint working between the Link Lecturers and mentors by having link lecturers who have a presence in practice, are available and make a tangible difference to the student and mentor experience 6 Articulating the mentor role and responsibilities in job and role descriptions, identifying expectations for mentors 7Having robust ways of evaluating mentors to identify good mentoring practice 8Taking ownership of the students and making them feel part of the Trust

14. Summary This inquiry reinforces the need for mentors to be committed, knowledgeable, competent, motivated, emotionally intelligent, creative, confident, inspirational and wanting to mentor students. This features highly in the co-constructed image of a mentor in their participation in the provision of expert mentorship. Resonates research carried out over 10 years ago (Watson, 2004) - it highlights need to select potential mentors based on their desire to mentor and on their personal attributes and skills. Willis Commission (2012) - mentors should be selected for their knowledge, skills and motivation Elcock (2014) - that the way in which staff are chosen to support students should be reconsidered. Students need to feel as though they are part of the organisation. Belonging is a pre-requisite for clinical learning because it effects student ability and influences their motivation to engage (Levett-Jones and Lathlean, 2008; Elcock, 2014). www.lincoln.ac.uk

15. Is the current system of mentorship fit for purpose? What would you like to see in new Mentor/Practice Teacher/Teacher Standards? Where do we go from here with mentorship? Thank you for listening www.lincoln.ac.uk Final Thoughts……. ?

16. Acknowledgements Thanks to NHS London for providing the funding for this research. Special thanks go to all the participants without whom the study would not have been possible. www.lincoln.ac.uk

17. References Cooperrider, D.L., Whitney, D. & Stavros, J.M. (2008) Appreciative Inquiry Handbook for Leaders of Change (2 nd Edn) Ohio: Crown Publishing Inc. Elcock, K. (2014) Ensuring a quality placement: the importance of a mentor British Journal of Nursing 23(5), 288 Levett-Jones,T, Lathlean, J. (2008) Belongingness: a prerequisite for nursing students’ clinical learning. Nurse Education in Practice 8(2): 103–11 Richer, M., Ritchie, J. & Marchionni, C. (2010) Appreciative Inquiry in health care British Journal of Healthcare Management 16(4) 164-172 Royal College of Nursing (2009) Research Ethics. RCN Guidance for Nurses London: RCN Watson, S. (2004) Mentor preparation: reasons for undertaking the course and expectations of the candidates Nurse Education Today 24(1), 30-40 Willis Commission (2012) Quality with compassion: the future of nursing education. Report of the Willis Commission on Nursing Education. London: Royal College of Nursing. Available from http://www.williscommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/495115/Willis_commi ssion_report_Jan_2013.pdf (last accessed March 2016) http://www.williscommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/495115/Willis_commi ssion_report_Jan_2013.pdf www.lincoln.ac.uk