1 / 20

Talent Development Pilot Project (Enhancement with Student Engagement )

Talent Development Pilot Project (Enhancement with Student Engagement ). Beverly J Pau Talent Development Project Manager Liverpool John Moores University. Background.

curt
Download Presentation

Talent Development Pilot Project (Enhancement with Student Engagement )

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Talent Development Pilot Project(Enhancement with Student Engagement) Beverly J Pau Talent Development Project Manager Liverpool John Moores University

  2. Background This project is linked to HEFCE’s Leadership, Governance and Management Fund (LGMF) 101 project ‘Learning from America. On campus Student Employment’1. With grateful thanks to Professor Phillip Sullivan who in his role as advisor has overseen and guided this pilot project . The Peer mentoring project at Liverpool John Moores University (LJMU) is modelled on the system at Northwest Missouri State University where its President states that TD has raised retention by around 10% and is key in increasing diversity in the student population1

  3. What is peer mentoring? • Peer Mentoring (PM) is a voluntary academic assistance programme that utilises peer led group study sessions to help students succeed in courses that have been identified as ‘ traditionally difficult’, where there are a large number of fails / low grades, and /or low retention rates • Peer mentoring supports high risk modules not high risk students • PM is NOT teaching.

  4. TD at Northwest Missouri State University The following facts are useful indicators for TD’s potential impact for LJMU • 30% of Northwest’s students use the TDC per year. • Over 80% will have used its six programmes before graduation. • Students have rated TD as the best university service for ten consecutive years. • The unions for support staff, academic staff, and students fully support TD. • TD is funded in full by improved retention, reduced student recruitment and re-recruitment costs, the practical benefits of having more satisfied students from all backgrounds and later, alumni donations. • TD at Northwest is free to all students

  5. Talent Development TD has four fundamental beliefs: • Students of all backgrounds can improve their learning and enjoyment of education. • Students’ understanding of subjects and study skills will improve with peer mentoring and coaching. This means that students who are vulnerable for whatever reason can be supported by their peers to succeed, and that “good” students can become even better. • TD works for all subjects. It is equally applicable to mathematics and the performing arts. In an environment such as this students thrive and are retained by the institution. • TD works well with large and small groups and with individual students.

  6. Why undertake Talent Development? • LJMU looks to see a return in investment in terms of improved achievement, retention and student satisfaction.

  7. Talent development pilot scheme SEMESTER 1 08-09 Two faculties – four modules Faculty of Education Community & Leisure • Foundation Science ECLCS1030 • Research Methods ECLCS2032 • Education Studies Intro to HE Studies ECLES1002 Faculty of Technology and Engineering • Engineering principles ENRCF1118

  8. SEMESTER 2 08-09 Two faculties – four modules Faculty of Education Community & Leisure • Research Methods ECLCS2032 • Education Studies, Modern Britain ECLES1005 Faculty of Technology and Engineering • Principles of Thermodynamics & Fluid Mechanics ENRCF1118 • Science & Materials BUEED 1002

  9. How we did it • 3 days training • Attendance at lectures and 2 hours mentoring on alternate weeks (where there are 2 peer mentors) • 2 review and update days – 1 per semester • Peer review of sessions and project manager to observe at least one session • Peer mentors feedback to lecturers on a regular basis

  10. Semester one stats • Three out of the four modules in Sem 1 had an increased mean mark in the PM cohort compared to whole module cohort. • About 1/3 of the 53 students on the module attended peer-led sessions. figures are better than in previous years – last year the mean mark was lower (40%)   Also, more of the students who failed this year have a mark over 30% (which is potentially eligible for compensation) than in previous years.

  11. What Students Had to Say A first year engineering student corresponding with his peer mentors: “ I was one of the students that was finding it very difficult with the subject. However because both of you helped me I passed the Module. I got 42/100 for the module, it was a really difficult subject. I got my results this week in the post, so I said that I would let you both know and say how thankful I am that you both helped me considering that I would have NOT passed the module without your help.”

  12. More student feedback One student who attended peer mentoring sessions for a Research Methods module, commented to her mentor “I was pleased I got 70 per cent, Caroline got 68 and Cathy got 58, so yes it really did help thank you!”

  13. What lecturers had to say “I think it makes a difference in that students have benefited from the extra sessions; having a student’s experience to learn from is invaluable” “Hopefully the system will continue with even more peer mentors “

  14. Mentor Feedback “will I be able to take part again next year as I found it great a experience and I felt like I helped my peers immensely?”  “ Peer mentoring has improved my confidence, public speaking skills and people skills” “ I have seen a bit of the pressures faced by lecturers”

  15. Student evaluation A student evaluation questionnaire at the end of the academic year found: • 92% of respondents who had attended PM agreed /strongly agreed that they were now more confident about doing well at university that at the beginning of the course • 64% felt they were a better student as a result of peer mentoring • 91% will use peer mentoring again • 100% would recommend peer mentoring to a friend • 64%agreed/strongly agreed that PM had helped them to complete their course

  16. Student Evaluation A student evaluation questionnaire at the end of the academic year targeting those who did not attend PM found: • 29% stated that peer mentoring times were not convenient • 32% were not aware of the Peer mentor support available for their module • 58% expected to do well in this class

  17. Issues Module leader engagement- all but one module leader or lecturer fully engaged in the process of peer mentoring

  18. Issues continued • Initial mentor drop out at training • overlapping timetables for mentors • Low numbers of student attendance at peer mentor sessions – need to target all students, not just those who attend lectures

  19. REFERENCES • www.hefce.ac.uk/lgm/build/lgmfund/projects/showasp?id=121&cat=12.

  20. Contact Details Beverly J Pau Talent Development Project Manager Liverpool John Moores University 0151 231 5298 b.j.pau@ljmu.ac.uk Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto No1 in B flat Minor, Op. 23

More Related