Peer mentoring – is a virtual form of support a viable alternative?

Smailes, Joanne; Gannon-Leary, Pat

doi:10.1080/21567069.2011.586675

Cited by 11 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Institutional support Student support services and online course orientation (Aversa & MacCall, 2013) Tutoring services (Nichols, 2010) Technological support (Parkes, Gregory, Fletcher, Adlington, & Gromik, 2015) Outreach and resources-sharing (Shaw, Burrus, & Ferguson, 2016;Smailes & Gannon-Leary, 2011) Deficient understanding of online students' needs and circumstances (Friðriksdóttir, 2018;Parkes et al, 2015) Curriculum or program level of difficulty Too-easy or too-difficult curriculum Nature of the course such as elective, distributional, or major requirement courses (Wladis & Hachey, 2017) or STEM domain courses (Wladis, Hachey, & Conway, 2014) Institutional support…”

Section: Institutional Factors Detailed Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Maintaining continuous engagement with students, at-all-times or ongoing support is brought up as one of the top recommendations. The support entails institutional active communication-social media is an effective channel (Aversa & MacCall, 2013;Smailes & Gannon-Leary, 2011),technological support including robust course management system and convenient access to technological tools (Aversa & MacCall, 2013;Blau et al, 2016;Eliasquevici et al, 2017). Tutoring centers, counseling or advising services, remedial programs (Boston et al, 2011;Gaytan, 2015;Heyman, 2010), and financial assistance (Aversa & MacCall, 2013) are essential as well and should be equivalently accessible to online students (Eliasquevici et al, 2017).…”

Section: At-all-times Supportmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Addressing issues around student retention in online learning is a multifaceted matter that requires a collective effort from both international and external entities. For example, early interventions Nistor & Neubauer, 2010;Raju & Schumacker, 2015;Shaw et al, 2016;Colorado & Eberle, 2010), ongoing support for students (Aversa & MacCall, 2013;Moore & Greenland, 2017;Nichols, 2010;Smailes & Gannon-Leary, 2011), and support for faculty and collaborative efforts all require synergies from multiple stakeholders (Aversa & MacCall, 2013;Harris et al, 2011;Leeds et al, 2013;Shaw et al, 2016;Smailes & Gannon-Leary, 2011). A dedicated investment in these areas also involves revisiting existing policies and procedures as well as refining the facilities like technology infrastructure (Aversa & MacCall, 2013;Blau et al, 2016;Eliasquevici et al, 2017).…”

Section: Recommended Strategies For Improving Student Retention In Onmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Gaytan, 2015;Hachey et al, 2013;Ice et al, 2011;Raju & Schumacker, 2015;Wuellner, 2013) At-all times support for studentsIn-depth understanding about students' perceptions of online learning(Pittenger & Doering, 2010) On-going research through collection of data from largesize online classes to analyze learning progress and design suitable interventions(O'Neill & Sai, 2014) Active communication and outreach(Aversa & MacCall, 2013;Smailes & Gannon-Leary, 2011) …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Factors Contributing to Student Retention in Online Learning and Recommended Strategies for Improvement: A Systematic Literature Review

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim/Purpose: This systematic literature review investigates the underlying factors that influence the gap between the popularity of online learning and its completion rate. The review scope within this paper includes an observation of possible causal aspects within the non-ideal completion rates in online learning environments and an identification of recommended strategies to increase retention rates. Background: While online learning is increasingly popular, and the number of online students is steadily growing, student retention rates are significantly lower than those in the traditional environment. Despite the multitude of studies, many institutions are still searching for solutions for this matter. Methodology: A systematic literature review was conducted on 40 studies published between 2010 and 2018. We established a set of criteria to guide the selection of eligible articles including topic relevance (aligned with the research questions), empirical studies, and publication time frame. Further steps were performed through a major database searching, abstract screening, full-text analysis, and synthesis process. Contribution: This study adds to expanding literature regarding student retention and strategies in online learning environments within the higher education setting. Findings: Revealed factors include institutional support, the level difficulty of the programs, promotion of a sense of belonging, facilitation of learning, course design, student behavioral characteristics, and demographic variables along with other personal variables. The recommended strategies identified for improving student retention are early interventions, at-all-times supports for students, effective communication, support for faculty teaching online classes, high-quality instructional feedback and strategies, guidance to foster positive behavioral characteristics, and collaboration among stakeholders to support online students. Recommendations for Practitioners: Since factors within the open systems of online learning are interrelated, we recommend a collective effort from multiple stakeholders when addressing retention issues in online learning. Recommendation for Researchers: We recommend that fellow scholars consider focusing on each influential factor and recommendation in regard to student retention in online learning environments as synthesized in this study. Findings will further enrich the literature on student retention in online learning environments. Future Research: Future research may investigate various data-mining and analytics techniques pertaining to detection and prediction of at-risk students, the efficacy of student support and faculty support programs, and ways to encourage struggling students to adopt effective strategies that potentially engender positive learning behaviors.

show abstract

Section: Institutional Factors Detailed Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: At-all-times Supportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Recommended Strategies For Improving Student Retention In Onmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Factors Contributing to Student Retention in Online Learning and Recommended Strategies for Improvement: A Systematic Literature Review

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research has been conducted about various aspects of peer mentoring in colleges and universities, including the experiences, benefits, and challenges of: undergraduate students (Christie, 2014;Cutright & Evans, 2016;Jacobi, 1991); underrepresented students (Shotton, Oosahwe, & Cintrón, 2007); early career faculty (Bottoms et al, 2013); underrepresented faculty (Murakami & Nuñez, 2014;Packer-Williams & Evans, 2011); peer mentoring in the online environment (Smailes & Gannon-Leary, 2011); traits and benefits of peer mentoring for mentees, and peer mentors (Booth et al, 2016;Bunting, Dye, Pinnegar, & Robinson, 2012;Colvin & Ashman, 2010;Terrion & Leonard, 2007). As previously discussed, few studies with EdD students as participants exist however (Booth et al, 2016;Noonan et al, 2007;Preston et al, 2014).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mentee Perspectives of a First-Year Peer Mentoring Program for Education Doctoral (EdD) Students

Lowery

McConnell

2018

IJDS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim/Purpose: In this paper, we examine how first-year education doctoral (EdD) students in a peer mentoring program may be supported in the academic and psychosocial domains to increase timely degree completion, decrease attrition, and improve the EdD program for students and faculty. Background: EdD students often face unique trials based on academic, social, professional, and personal challenges that arise during their degree program. The paper addresses how peer mentoring programs may help students overcome these challenges while completing their EdD program. Methodology: To investigate the effectiveness of a peer mentoring program for students, we focused on a single case study of an EdD peer mentoring program with 11 first-year EdD students who participated in the program. Using mixed methods, we collected and analyzed data from pre- and post-surveys, individual interviews, and a focus group. Contribution: Few studies about peer mentoring programs for EdD students exist. This study is unique because it focuses on first-year EdD students’ perspectives and, unlike other studies on peer mentoring programs, peer mentors are defined as graduates of the EdD program or current EdD students who are further along in the program. Whilst many studies of peer mentoring recommend peer mentoring for new students, our findings suggest that in the case of EdD students, extended or later peer mentoring may be more beneficial. Findings: From the quantitative and qualitative data results, five themes related to mentee perspectives of the benefits of EdD peer mentoring program emerged: 1) receiving academic advice and program support; 2) focusing on the future; 3) receiving emotional support and work-life balance advice; 4) having an experienced and relatable mentor; and 5) needing more mentoring to derive benefits. While mentees reported positive feelings about the mentoring program, many expressed that they did not yet have a need for mentoring. Considering that most mentoring studies focus on early program mentees, these results present the possibility of a need for extended or later-program mentoring. Based on the data, we identified a need for additional research which focuses on determining the correct timing for EdD students to begin peer mentoring program since students take coursework during their first year and have not begun work in the dissertation phase of the program. Recommendations for Practitioners: Sustainability of peer mentoring programs can present challenges based on the time and needs of mentees, mentors, and faculty. Doctoral faculty should evaluate the benefits of an EdD peer mentoring program for mentees on a regular basis to ensure that the program effectively supports and guides mentees to degree completion. Recommendation for Researchers: Literature and research on the evaluation, impact, and value of peer mentoring programs for EdD students and first-year doctoral students are limited. Researchers could study further the perspectives of mentees in an EdD peer mentoring program throughout their degree program from taking coursework to writing a dissertation. The benefits of early-program mentoring in comparison to later-program mentoring could be investigated further. Impact on Society: Providing mentoring opportunities to EdD students may help them overcome academic, social, and emotional challenges, and in turn, allow more education leaders to successfully complete their EdD and use their education to improve their school communities. Future Research: Future studies should examine other options of mentoring programs for first-year EdD students and EdD students who completed their EdD coursework and are working on their dissertation. Longitudinal studies are also needed to track mentees’ progression throughout the program.

show abstract