Dr. Albert D. Widman adw@berkeleycollege Berkeley College

1. Dr. Albert D. Widman adw@berkeleycollege.edu Berkeley College Utilizing Practitioner Mentors in Online Education

2. Utilizing Practitioner Mentors in Online Education • The Question: Mentors are acknowledged as a great resource for undergraduates in on-campus programs, but can they provide value for online learners? • Lessons from a successful online mentoring program in a Nonprofit Management course at Berkeley College.

3. Are Mentoring Benefits Transferable to An Online Environment? • What are the anticipated benefits of Mentoring? • Learning from a seasoned professional. • Acquiring insight into company cultures, dynamics, politics, and etiquette. • Exploring concepts with a professional removed from grading. • Receiving coaching and feedback. • Gaining greater career clarity.

4. Recommended Resources • Marszalek, Snauffer, Good, Monte (2005). “Mentors Improve the College Experience of Engineering Undergraduates.” Frontiers in Education, Vol.19 (22). • W. Brad Johnson. On Being A Mentor: A Guide for Higher Education Faculty. Routledge Publishing (2006) “Mentoring college students can be deeply rewarding for faculty and genuinely life-altering for undergraduates.”

5. How is Online Mentoring Usually Done? • Usually faculty mentors or graduate students. • Overcoming e-Learning barriers • “Social Connectedness Initiators” • Rarely on content issues (other than public health curricula). We matched practitioners with students to assist primarily with content issues in a nonprofit management course.

6. Recommended Resources • Chang, S. (2004). The Roles of Mentors in Electronic Learning Environments. AACE Journal. Vol. 12 (3). • Dyer, Linda. (2008). The Continuing Need for Nurses in Nursing. Journal for Nurses in Staff Development. Vol 24 (2).

7. Constraint: Practitioner Time • Practitioners are busy…particularly at the upper levels. • Two Executive Directors • One Corporate Counsel • Three Vice Presidents • Budget Director and several Program Managers. Need for Professor to set guidelines with students about what appropriate access is.

8. Constraint: Practitioner Time • I assigned one Mentor per two students. • Designated point of contact was email unless Mentor preferred something else. • Told that responses should be within 48 hours. • Limited to a five week period leading up to the student’s final project. • No part of the project was to be written by Mentors. Mentors responded to questions, provided guidance from their experience, communicated issues and problems with draft student work (but no re-writing).

9. Phases of the Relationship: Advice to Mentors • Build trust and rapport. • Provide guidance and feedback. • Challenge students to apply their knowledge to a practical problem or issue.

10. Project Results: Students • Students said they immediately recognized the uniqueness of the mentor experience. • Students loved the idea of being able to show a draft of their ideas to a practitioner. • All students, except one, successfully completed a difficult final project. Submissions were more advanced than would have otherwise been expected. • Enrollment in the next offering of the class doubled due to “word of mouth.” An additional section was added.

11. Project Results: Mentors • All said they would participate in the future with similar “rules of engagement.” • None felt that the process, as structured, was overly intrusive on their time. • Many mentioned the hope that more students might consider a career in nonprofit management due to the exposure.

12. How Did I Attract Practitioner Mentors? • Personal contacts. • Organizations you donate to. • Email to midsize local organization. • Contacts used by the college’s career services department. • Former students working in the field.