Supporting Students in Transition the Student Mentor Experience

Guy Collins, Rob Reeves, Vic Casambros FACE 2009

Foundations

• Poor preparation and adjustment to HE may ultimately lead to student early withdrawal, negative experience for student, and impact attrition levels (Davies & Elias 2003) • Yorke (2000) – evidence non-completion, insufficient attention to transition, not enough emphasis in inducting students on general FYE • Step Ahead built upon work by Abramson & Jones (2003) UCLAN model, based on work of Tinto (1975, 1987, 1993)

Context

• Step Ahead Project (established 2007) – Objective – Timing – Delivery – Content – Student mentors – Conversion & retention outcomes – Post 2008 a primarily Widening Participation targeted initiative

Context

• Decision to primarily target WP students reflective of universities own WP strategy:

‘widening access to Higher Education to those previously underrepresented…and how successfully students engage and participate in higher education once they have gained access’

(Staffordshire University 2007) • Johnes & McNabb (2008) – highlight certain WP groups, are at risk of higher attrition rates – this intervention therefore aim to support access, the transitional process, and conversely reduce attrition levels

The Student Mentor Role

• Recruited experienced existing students • Rigorous recruitment exercise • Structured preparatory training (compulsory) • Job description & temp contract of employment • Input in to resources • Lead workshops • Signpost services • Act as an ambassador – providing ‘real life’ experience • Support event Q & A • In addition to salary – receipt of certificate of achievement for own Personal Development Portfolio

Project Impact Upon Mentors

• Project & student attendee experience previously presented (Collins et al 2008, Collins 2009) • Research explore impact upon Student Mentors • Mentors wide geographical spread – cross campuses, competing demands, graduated etc • Previous experience involving ‘students’ in FtF focus group resulted in variable participation • Decision to use online asynchronous focus group – Computer Mediated Communciation approach • Place and time convenient to participant rather than that of the researcher

Project Impact Upon Mentors

• Underhill & Olmstead (2003) – comparing FtF & CMC focus found both types of Fg similar quality and quantity • Reid & Reid (2005): ‘more ideas and answers generated in CMC than in FtF discussions’ • Kenny (2004) highlighted extended contact duration enabled opportunity to ask broader range of questions with further refinement resulting in multi-threaded discussions • Kelsey (2000) may reduce participants social anxieties – concern evidenced to limit participation in other synchronous discussions

Project Impact Upon Mentors

• The data revealed that Student Mentor participation on the Step Ahead project provides additional benefits to university students as well as to those attending the actual events Thematic analysis of transcripts: • Transferable skills development • Self awareness • Influencing career direction

Project Impact Upon Mentors

• Transferable skills development

“The presentation skills, knowledge of the university and confidence in delivering this information to students have all

greater improved thanks to my time as a mentor” (Mentor 1)

“There are definitely study techniques that were advocated on the Step Ahead programme (time-management, referencing and bibliographical tips to name a few) that I will consider

implementing in any future courses” (Mentor 3)

“One things that improved most for me was my leadership skills in a classroom environment. Before the experience I considered that weakest skill. I'm very confident at the whole meeting new people,

giving presentations, organising games etc” (Mentor 5)

Project Impact Upon Mentors

• Self awareness

“In retrospect, my Step Ahead experience shows that I am not good at being very out-

going and chummy” (Mentor 6)

“realising how confident I had become in talking to students about university and Higher Education. This applied to me for both individual 1:1 student support over lunch for example and then to larger numbers of the students in the presentations

themselves” (Mentor 3)

“Talking in front of a large group of people was initially daunting for me and to be able to meet that challenge was a

source of pride and great satisfaction to me” (Mentor 7)

Project Impact Upon Mentors

• Influencing career direction

“will help me with future employment and helped me get a

job at the Student Union” (Mentor 4)

“It also helped me gain my current job as a student ambassador, and provided me with the skills to do that job and many other potential jobs should I wish to go on to do

them” (Mentor 5)

“I was in the middle of a degree, which I am now about to finish, when I did Step Ahead, and I certainly envisage doing

more student support work once I graduate” (Mentor 6)

Limitations of Approach

• Delayed participation and interaction due to extended access • ?One set date may concentrate minds and commitments – rather than stalled – need to use synchronous technology • Tendency for dialogue to be singular response rather than interaction – akin to survey response than Fg • Anxiety to contribute – fear being ‘judged’ on comments • Preference for FtoF focus group ?unfamiliarity with technique or lack of visual contact • ?Web camera incorporation – synchronous - < social anonymity and potential > interpersonal communication

Mentors Personal Journey

• Experience • Confidence • Leadership • Communication skills • Initiative • Career Change

Mentors Personal Journey

• Teacher Training • Senior Student Advisor • Students Union • Student Guidance • Community Work including YMCA, Creative Arts in the Community • Mental Health Nursing

Further research

Any questions, ideas or similar experiences?

[email protected]

www.staffs.ac.uk/stepahead