Mentoring and People Who Need Mentoring

I've been asked (and I accepted) to be a mentor this year to a new faculty member at my university. It's a little weird that I have only two years under my belt, and I am trying to give advice to this new person. But maybe the person that is in charge of the program knows something I don't. My mentee seems like a nice person. They mix up departments so that you aren't paired with someone you normally see anyway. That has advantages of fresh opinions, but it also means that one of us will be trekking to the other's building for lunch or coffee from time to time. And it means that me sitting in on his class and vice versa may not be as meaningful. I'm excited about the opportunity to do this, though. It's a nice way to give back, it will probably help me better know what's going on in the university, and it's a good way to meet other faculty.

I got a review back from a journal yesterday. The editor gave me a third revise and resubmit. One reviewer is still not happy with the manuscript. This reviewer is the same one who asked for GFI and other statistics that are not used in SEM anymore. This time, the reviewer asked me to use confirmatory factor analysis to let factors emerge from the data, which is condemned in chapter 1 of almost every introductory SEM textbook. The reviewer said that it would be the "gutsy" thing to do. He/she was full of nuggets like that. My subject needs to "grow up." He/she was "exceptionally bothered--almost perturbed" by one aspect of the manuscript that he/she had not noticed before (complained that this was missing from manuscript, but told me in the first review to delete it). My favorite comment was, after a few introductory sentences praising the changes I had made, he/she transitioned to critique with "Now, what do I find problematic in this manuscript?" I don't mind healthy critique. It's not my favorite part of my job, but I know that my research needs it, and I know that it's a vital part of academia. And this reviewer did offer some helpful tips for cleaning up a table and has provided each review in less than three months (better than some). But I don't think that he/she will be satisfied until the manuscript fits some agenda, and he/she uses sarcasm to encourage me to get it there (and I only put about half of the borderline-sarcasm in this blog). Of course, I will revise the manuscript. I've invested too much time to not, and I have other articles waiting on this one. It will be interesting to write a response letter. I've already decided that I probably won't respond to the sarcasm/arrogance, but I have to write it in such a way as to argue for my position on thing that I'm not giving in on.