Mentoring Up De-Identified Dataset

<p>We provide here the de-identified data used to evaluate the implementations of a Mentoring Up training. This dataset is currently being used in the publishing of a manuscript, "<i>Mentoring Up for Early Career Investigators</i>: Empowering Mentees to Proactively Engage in their Mentoring Relationships"</p><p>Variables include,</p><p>Values for average self-ratings of Mentoring Competencies using the MCA scale (Likert-type scale from 1 - 7), retrospectively thinking to BEFORE the training and AFTER the training. Subscales include:</p><ul><li>Effective Communication</li><li>Aligning Expectations</li><li>Assessing Understanding</li><li>Fostering Independence</li><li>Addressing Diversity</li><li>Promoting Professional Development</li></ul><p>Values also include responses to the following quantitative questions:</p><ul><li>Overall, how effective was the facilitator in guiding discussion during the workshop? (1 - Very Ineffective, 2 - Ineffective, 3 - Neither Effective nor Ineffective, 4 - Effective, 5 - Very Effective)</li><li>Was attending this workshop a valuable use of your time? (1 - Yes, 2 - No)</li><li>How likely are you to recommend this workshop to other colleagues? (1 - Very Unlikely, 2 - Unlikely, 3 - Undecided, 4 - Likely, 5 - Very Likely)</li><li>Have you made, or do you plan to make any changes in your own practices as a mentee or in your relationship with your mentor(s) as a result of this training? (1 - Yes, 2 - No)</li></ul><p>And the following short answer responses:</p><ul><li>Please describe any changes you plan to make as a result of this workshop</li><li>What aspects of this workshop did you find most useful?</li><li>What could be done to improve this workshop</li><li>What are the strengths and weaknesses of this training? Are there things you would like to see changed or added? If so, what?</li></ul><p>&nbsp;</p>