Impact of Peer Coaching and Mentoring on Student Attainment

1. What exactly are peer coaching & mentoring and can they really impact on student attainment? Jill Andreanoff – 1st May 2014 Mentoring Unit, Outreach and Widening Participation, Office of the Dean of Students

2. How much do you really know about coaching and mentoring?

3. Enter Question Text Question 1 – What is the difference between Coaching and Mentoring? • Coaching is about short term goals and mentoring is a longer term activity. • Coaches do not have to have direct experience/expertise of the subject in hand whereas mentors do. • Coaching is goal specific and mentoring is a more holistic approach. • Coaching is where a line manager has identified a training need to be addressed and mentoring is where the learner themselves have identified a need that they wish to work on. • Coaches are external to the organisation whereas mentors are internal employees who have been trained. 0 of 30 0 of 0

4. DefinitionsMentoring and Coaching “Mentoring is an arrangement where an experienced individual provides one-to-one support and encouragement over a period of time to another person in order to assist them set goals; develop their skills; manage their own learning and development; and maximise their potential to become the person they want to be” (Courtney, 2001) “Coaching is a collaborative relationship formed between coach and coachee for the purpose of attaining professional or personal development outcomes which are valued by the coachee. Coaching seeks to overcome an individual’s sense of self-limitation by facilitating a process of learning and development through increasing their self-awareness about the choices and actions they make” (Careers Research & Advisory Centre, 2012)

5. Enter Question Text Question 2 – Which of these statements is the most accurate? • A mentors role is to pass on their knowledge and expertise. • A mentors role is to give good advice based on their own experience and knowledge. • A mentors role is to listen and ask challenging questions. • A mentors role is to guide the mentee to make the correct choices/decisions. 0 of 30

6. Enter Question Text Question 3 – In face to face mentoring what should be the correct ratio of conversation between the mentor and the mentee? • 60:40 Mentor : Mentee • 40:60 Mentor : Mentee • 50:50 Mentor : Mentee • 30:70 Mentor : Mentee • 20: 80 Mentor : Mentee 0 of 30

7. Enter Question Text Question 4 – What should the mentor do if…? A mentee tells their mentor that they have the choice of applying for a Masters in Occupational Psychology or a taking job in a Mental Health Unit and asks which they think is best. Should the mentor……. • Suggest that further study will widen their options in the long term. • Say that working in a Mental Health Unit will provide excellent experience • Ask them what their parent’s view is. • Ask them why these are the only choices. • Talk through the financial implications of both these options. 0 of 30

8. Mentoring & Coaching ProjectsOutreach and Widening Participation School Mentoring A range of programmes across all age groups, involving one-to-one mentoring with the aim of raising aspirations and attainment of pupils from Widening Participation (WP) backgrounds. National Scholarship Programme Mentoring To support WP students at the University of Hertfordshire for the duration of their studies. Peer Coaching To support students who are not achieving as well as they could with study skills and motivation or work experience/placements. Technology Mentoring One to one mentoring with UH staff provided by trained students in order that they can make the best use of technology in their work/teaching. Support with Camtasia, advanced Excel etc.

9. Background Information • 2011/12 : Pilot scheme – Retention Mentoring - Law School & Accounting & Finance Group • 2012/13 : Peer Coaching (financed by individual Academic Schools) – 6 Schools • 2013/14 : Peer Coaching (financed by seven Academic Schools) Currently 93 trained coaches in total supporting 155 students

10. Qualitative Outcomes “My coach helped me achieve a more formal academic writing style.” (Humanities student) “I was getting 2:2s but got a 2:1 because of [my coach].” (LMS student) “I got 69% - one mark off a first (…) without [my coach] I would  have failed! Still in total shock!” (PAM student) “My marks went up, I got 68% in my Law exam.” (Law student) “The coach’s essay writing techniques helped me to achieve a 2:1 for a piece of coursework.” (Education student) “I was able to get a 10% increase in marks for my essay writing assessment.” (BS student)

11. Quantitative Data 2012/13 Data : 85 responses were received out of 159 students who were coached – a 54% response rate. Paired sample t-tests used. • Large statistically significant increase in the coachees’ confidence to attain good grades. • Large statistically significant increase in coachees’ confidence manage the requirements of their course. • No statistically significant difference found in the coachees’ confidence in completing their studies. • Coaches reported improved grades too!

12. Quantitative Outcomes The relationship between frequency of meetings and ratings given by coachees on the help received from their coach was investigated using a Spearman Rho (non-parametric) test. There was found to be a positive correlation between the frequency of meetings and the ratings given for revision, balancing work/study and time management. An even stronger correlation was found between the frequency of meetings and the ratings given for organisational skills and essay writing.

13. Other Findings 81 of the 85 respondents would recommend the programme to others. 50% of student coaches would like a coach again next year. (NB. The remaining students have either graduated or feel prepared enough to manage without one) The most requested support was for: revision; exam preparation; and essay writing. In reality most support was given for: organisational skills; time management (balancing work/life/study); and, in particular, motivation.

14. Quantitative DataGraphs

15. Quantitative DataGraphs (Continued)

16. Considerations Cannot attribute all benefits to the coaching relationship No control group for comparison - 2012/13 A larger sample size would produce even more conclusive results Group work could be utilised to accommodate more students Presented at HEA Student Mobility Retention & Success & National Education Opportunities Network Conferences – May 2013. Papers: HEA Compendium of Effective Practice Social Mobility Special Issue of Widening Participation & Lifelong Learning

17. School of Humanities data All the students (across all years) who received marks less than 50% in Semester A improved their marks in Semester B. The majority of those who received marks between 50%-60% improved their marks in Semester B – one did not change. For those who had previously achieved marks of over 60% in Semester A – 4 improved, 1 stayed the same and 2 went down. 4 students were also receiving one-to-one AS support / 2 students withdrawn.

18. Plans for 2013/14 Applied Collaborative HEA Teaching Academy Grant to support Peer Coaching for BME/ Joint Honours/ International students 2014/15. 7 academic Schools on board 2013/14 - control group to establish more robust data Sustainable funding required to secure the long term future of the programme (should 3-4 students be prevented from leaving prematurely it would be self-funding). National Scholarship Programme – Group sessions - (to accommodate 650 new WP students 2014/15) – Please note if you would like to be involved in group sessions/peer coaching

19. The Mentoring & Coaching Team Jill Andreanoff Mentoring Manager Rachel Breskal Mentoring Co-Ordinator (NSP/Peer Coaching) Lorraine Clark Mentoring Co-Ordinator (NSP/Technology/Primary) Gill Knibbs Mentoring Co-Ordinator (Schools/NSP) Joshua Jeal Mentoring Co-Ordinator (NSP/Peer Coaching) Sarah Collins Mentoring Co-Ordinator (NSP/Peer Coaching) Gill Rance Mentoring Administrator Teresa Tinworth Mentoring Administrator Maija Lama Mentoring Assistant

20. Any Questions?