Content Analysis of Postdoctoral Mentorship Plans and Missed Opportunities to Align with Theory and Best Practices

Postdoctoral training holds an increasingly important position in securing high-impact research and academic positions in engineering and computer science. High-quality mentorship contributes to the success of postdoctoral trainees, but existing literature demonstrates postdocs from outside of the US, women, and racial minorities who experience stereotypes are provided less mentorship, and less successful outcomes than their white and male counterparts. Further, trainees who originate from outside of the US hold more than half of the postdoctoral positions in the US. Increasingly, funding agencies within the US require postdoctoral mentorship plans, but it is unclear to what end and if they are helpful or simply performative. Specifically, to date, no research has investigated the content of mentorship plans, their alignment to theory and existing research, or the needs of postdoctoral trainees particularly those from outside of the US, women, and racial minorities. As part of a larger project investigating postdoctoral mentorship, we analyzed 54 postdoctoral mentoring plans to identify how they align with recommendations from content supported by theory and literature. We find marginal alignment with best practices, with much room for improvement, including tailoring and specificity. From this work, a postdoctoral mentorship blueprint and rubric for plan evaluation are offered as tools to improve the uniqueness, specificity, and utility of mentorship plans.