Recently, Professor Lv Zhenzhou from the School of Aeronautics at Northwestern Polytechnical University showcased his effectiveness in mentoring student talent development along with his teaching and research achievements on his personal webpage, prompting many netizens to exclaim him as "the teacher from another realm." Public opinion also expressed admiration for Professor Lv's craftsmanship spirit.
Compared to undergraduate students, the role and significance of mentors in graduate student education are more prominent. To some extent, prospective undergraduate students who intend to pursue further studies not only consider the prestige of the university but also eagerly anticipate encountering distinguished and supportive mentors.
In reality, the system of public disclosure of information in the education sector, especially in the aspects of admissions, teaching quality, and employment outcomes, has been comprehensively implemented. When choosing a university, prospective students have relatively transparent indicators to assess institutions, disciplines, and majors. However, understanding mentors often relies on brief introductions on official websites and fragmented information passed down by fellow students, leaving much to imagination regarding students' expectations of their mentors.
Although many universities have implemented a system of mutual selection between master's research supervisors and students, this process often occurs during tense phases such as interviews or the beginning of the academic year. Regarding the disclosure of personal information about mentors, there is no mechanism or requirement. Consequently, whether it's students selecting mentors or mentors selecting students, it often boils down to sheer luck. The difficulty in finding excellent mentors and good students reflects the current reality of graduate student mentorship selection.
The commendable aspect of Professor Lv's behavior lies in setting an example for increasing the transparency of information and improving the match between mentors and students in graduate admissions and selection processes.
Since universities have an obligation to disclose overall admission decision parameters, talent development quality, and employment outcomes, mentors naturally also have a responsibility to publicize their teaching, research, social service, and talent development effectiveness. Obviously, this cannot solely rely on spontaneous actions by mentors like Professor Lv. Institutions should establish a mechanism for disclosing mentor information, formulate a list of items that must be disclosed, and thereby meet the basic information needs of prospective students in choosing universities, departments, and mentors.
To some extent, the public disclosure of mentor personal development information will inspire mentors to have intrinsic motivation for student development and academic research. Those mentors who enter an academic "dormant" or educational fatigue period after obtaining tenure will also reveal their true colors through such public disclosure.
The nature of graduate student talent development determines the crucial role and function of mentors. The partial concealment of their personal information only widens the information gap. The mismatch between mentors and students not only brings about difficulties for students in integrating into their academic communities but also inevitably leads to the pain of mentors guiding students. Of course, while emphasizing the public disclosure of mentor information, specific requirements for optimizing the collection and utilization of student information should also be established to provide more comprehensive and detailed information for universities to admit students and for mentors to understand students.
