In the ever-evolving landscape of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), internships hold immense value as critical gateways for budding professionals to gain hands-on experience and develop the skills necessary for thriving careers. However, despite their importance, many internships suffer from systemic challenges that hinder their effectiveness, often stemming from the complexities and pressures placed upon mentors. A groundbreaking study led by Schneider, J.R., Aaby, T., Boessenkool, S., and colleagues, published in the International Journal of STEM Education in 2024, has illuminated the multifaceted difficulties mentors face when guiding interns, offering deep insights into how these challenges ripple through the internship experience and impact its overall success.
The research investigates mentor challenges through a rich qualitative approach involving a series of focus groups, an innovative method that allowed the investigators to obtain nuanced perspectives directly from those on the front lines of internship programs. By engaging mentors from varied STEM disciplines and institutional backgrounds, the study comprehensively mapped the key stressors and obstacles they encounter, highlighting a critical disconnect between organizational expectations and individual capabilities. Mentors disclosed experiences ranging from unclear roles and responsibilities to inadequate institutional support, all of which conspire to limit the potential of these formative learning opportunities.
Central to the study’s revelations was an understanding of the cognitive and emotional load mentors bear. Mentoring, as the researchers explain, transcends mere technical supervision; it involves fostering growth, managing interpersonal dynamics, balancing labor and learning, and navigating administrative hurdles. The high cognitive load often requires mentors to juggle conflicting priorities—delivering project outcomes while catering to individual learning needs—a balancing act that can lead to burnout and diminished mentoring quality. Recognizing these pressures is paramount to creating internship frameworks that are sustainable and rewarding for both parties involved.
The study’s findings also touch upon the inadequacy of formal training and resources for mentors. Participants frequently reported receiving little to no structured guidance on effective mentoring strategies, leaving them to rely on intuitive or ad hoc methods developed through trial and error. This gap creates inconsistency in internship experiences, whereby some interns thrive under highly dedicated mentors, while others are left adrift due to the mentor’s unpreparedness. The authors argue that this heterogeneity undermines equity within STEM fields, as access to quality mentoring often influences career trajectories.
Beyond individual struggles, structural issues compound the problems mentors face. Organizational cultures that prioritize immediate research output or operational metrics over educational goals pressure mentors to optimize productivity at the expense of mentoring quality. Such environments foster an implicit hierarchy, where mentoring is viewed as ancillary rather than integral, disincentivizing engagement. The study provides compelling evidence that institutions must evolve to value mentoring as a core mission, implementing policies that allocate time, recognition, and rewards aligned with mentoring responsibilities.
Moreover, the social dynamics inherent in mentoring relationships surface as a complex layer of challenge. Mentors must adeptly navigate diverse mentee backgrounds, expectations, and communication styles while fostering inclusivity and psychological safety. This requirement introduces subtle demands on mentors’ emotional intelligence and adaptability, skills rarely emphasized in STEM training. The research underscores the necessity for mentors to develop cultural competence and interpersonal acumen to nurture truly supportive and empowering internship contexts.
The investigation also emphasizes the often-overlooked issue of feedback loops within internships. Quality mentorship hinges on effective two-way communication, yet many participants described feedback mechanisms as inconsistent or underdeveloped. Without structured avenues for mentor-mentee dialogue, misunderstandings and disengagement proliferate. The authors advocate for embedding frequent, purposeful feedback opportunities into internship designs to reinforce learning, clarify expectations, and build trust, thereby enhancing educational outcomes and professional growth.
Another dimension unveiled by the study is how the variability of internship formats—ranging from short-term summer placements to extended part-time engagements—affects mentoring strategies and challenges. Short internships intensify pressure to deliver immediate value and rapid skill acquisition, yet limit relationship development, while longer internships require sustained commitment and evolving goals. Mentors must therefore tailor approaches dynamically, a complex competency the research suggests should be explicitly supported through training and resource provision.
The paper also addresses mentor motivation, uncovering a mixture of intrinsic and extrinsic drivers. Many mentors expressed a strong personal commitment to fostering the next generation but were also motivated by institutional incentives or expectations. However, the misalignment between motivations and institutional reward systems often results in frustration. Bridging this gap through recognition programs, career advancement integration, and resource allocation for mentoring can rejuvenate mentors’ enthusiasm and effectiveness, argues the study.
Technological advancements were discussed as potential mitigators of mentoring strain. Digital platforms for project management, communication, and feedback can streamline interactions, facilitate documentation, and provide data for continuous improvement. The researchers caution, however, that technology should augment—not replace—the human elements central to mentoring, and must be implemented thoughtfully to avoid adding complexity or depersonalization.
Perhaps one of the most critical contributions of the study lies in its strategic recommendations for improving internships by holistically addressing mentor challenges. It advocates for institutional reforms that institutionalize mentoring as a valued, supported function within STEM organizations. Proposed measures include formalized mentor training programs, dedicated mentoring time allotments, embedding mentoring success metrics in organizational evaluations, and fostering communities of practice where mentors can share knowledge and support.
The widespread adoption of such reforms promises transformative impacts. Internships could evolve from inconsistent, uneven experiences into reliable, high-quality training grounds that propel diversity, equity, and inclusion in STEM fields. Improved mentorship not only benefits interns by enhancing skill development and career readiness but also bolsters mentors’ professional satisfaction and retention, thereby creating a virtuous cycle of excellence and innovation.
Furthermore, the study sheds light on the critical role of feedback data collection and analysis in iterative internship improvement. By systematically gathering insights from both mentors and interns, organizations can identify persistent gaps, tailor interventions, and track progress over time. This data-driven approach aligns with contemporary educational best practices and positions internships as dynamic learning ecosystems rather than static engagements.
As STEM disciplines continue to push the boundaries of knowledge and technology, the competency and readiness of the next generation become paramount. This study’s rigorous examination of mentorship challenges offers a roadmap for stakeholders—including academic institutions, research labs, and industry partners—to rethink and revitalize internship programs. By doing so, they ensure that internships fulfill their full potential as incubators of talent and catalysts of innovation.
Ultimately, the work of Schneider and colleagues serves as a clarion call to move beyond superficial fixes and engage deeply with the human and organizational dimensions of STEM internships. Their comprehensive analysis highlights that creating better internship experiences is not merely about improving intern outcomes but about fostering an environment in which mentors are empowered, supported, and motivated to cultivate future leaders with the knowledge, skills, and resilience to thrive in an increasingly complex scientific landscape.
Subject of Research: Mentor challenges in STEM internships and their impact on internship quality, based on qualitative focus group analysis.
Article Title: Creating better internships by understanding mentor challenges: findings from a series of focus groups.
Article References:
Schneider, J.R., Aaby, T., Boessenkool, S. et al. Creating better internships by understanding mentor challenges: findings from a series of focus groups. IJ STEM Ed 11, 60 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00518-y
Image Credits: AI Generated
