As freshmen enter the university setting, they begin a new era in their development that includes being away from their usual support system of family and friends. Some of these students will make the adjustment without difficulty; however, many find this transition difficult. Peer mentoring is a concept that began in the business and management environment and was transitioned into other disciplines once the benefits of mentoring became known (Dorsey & Baker, 2004). Mentoring is defined as a developmental relationship where an individual with more experience agrees to guide a less experienced person. Mentoring usually leads to mutual learning, dialog, and challenge, which become foundational to the relationship (Bozeman & Finney, 2007).
Mentoring is a common approach to provide support for nursing students. A review of the literature revealed several benefits of mentoring which include academic success (Robinson & Niemer, 2010), skill development (Dennison, 2010), personal and professional development (Glass & Walter, 2000), adjustment to the clinical setting (Li, Wang, Lin, & Lee, 2011), and socialization (Gilmour, Kopeikin, & Douche, 2007; Scott, 2005). In a study conducted by Robinson and Niemer (2010), a peer mentor tutor program was developed to provide academic support for academically high risk nursing students in a traditional baccalaureate program. Twenty-one peer mentors were assigned to ninety-seven at risk mentee’s during their first four semesters of nursing courses. The study found a positive correlation between participation in the peer mentoring program and academic success. As a result of the peer mentoring program student retention rates increased, and some student mentors expressed interest in pursuing a future career in nursing education (Robinson & Niemer, 2010). Dennison (2010) utilized peer mentoring in the nursing clinical laboratory. Five senior level nursing students were given compensation to assist lower level nursing students in the clinical laboratory setting. Mentors provided support to peers, and assisted with skills practice (Dennison, 2010). All participants experienced positive benefits. Mentees received academic and emotional support while mentors learned leadership skills and refreshed skills knowledge.
Gilmour, Kopeikin, and Douche (2007) found that peer mentors do provide first year nursing students with social support and ease their transition into the academic setting. Fifteen upper level nursing students agreed to mentor seventy-nine new freshmen students. This program assisted incoming freshmen in their transition to the university. Benefits for both mentors and mentees included peer support, acquired leadership and communication skills. Gilmour et al. (2007) concluded for the peer mentoring program to be successful, training needed to be provided for both mentors and mentees. Finally, a study by Scott (2005) found that peer mentoring was one way to teach leadership, collaboration, and professionalism to new nurses. Scott concluded that peer mentoring was one way to reduce burnout among new graduate nurses (2005). A review of the literature supports a positive association between peer mentoring and student nurse support both academically and socially.
Social support of freshmen college students is known to be an important factor in retention of students during this transitional developmental first year of college (Field & Morgan-Klein, 2012; Jensen, 2011; Tinto, 2012). This project was initiated due to the high freshman attrition rate that was experienced in the nursing program in the prior academic year. During this year, the nursing program retained 76% of the freshmen class. Although some of the attrition was due to academic issues, including low grade point average and decisions to change major, consideration of other factors for attrition, including social support and identification with their major area of study, was important.
The purpose of this three-year longitudinal study, now in its second year, was to increase social support through a peer-to-peer mentoring program for students in an undergraduate baccalaureate nursing program. Additionally, the researchers sought to determine if freshmen persistence was influenced by the peer mentoring program. Persistence is defined as freshmen students who return to college for the spring semester. The research questions posed were (1) Does perceived social support increase following participation in a peer-to-peer mentoring program; and (2) Does participation in a peer-to-peer mentoring program impact freshmen persistence rates? Additionally, the research team requested anecdotal reflections from the participants and these were examined for themes.
Nursing students in this private Midwest baccalaureate nursing program are admitted directly into the program for their freshmen year. During the first year of the study, a pilot peer-to-peer mentoring program was conducted where freshmen students were paired with junior and senior level nursing students. The pilot project led to revisions that were developed for the second year of the study. The results of the second year of the revised study are reported here. Methods: A mixed methods study was used to investigate the benefits of a peer-to peer mentoring program. A pre-test/post-test design with a convenience sample was used to determine if social support increased as a result of participating in the peer mentoring program. Persistence rates were determined from enrollment data. Themes related to program effectiveness were determined from student response to two questions. Human Subject Review Board approval was received and informed consent obtained. Freshmen nursing students were approached in coursework and asked if they were interested in being paired with a peer mentor. Sophomores, juniors, and seniors were also approached in coursework regarding their interest in becoming mentors. Students were provided with a brief interest form requesting information on interest in participating, contact information, living situation, and hobbies. Planned interventions throughout the academic year included a training session for mentors, three mentor-mentee scheduled activities during the academic year, one diversity educational session, an on-line community where mentees and mentors could participate in discussion boards. Additionally, mentors were encouraged to communicate personally with mentees at least once monthly. At the beginning of the academic year, the professional academic advisor assisted with matching mentors and mentees, using the information provided on the pre-program interest form. There were a total of 137 participants in the program, 88 mentors and 49 mentees. Since there were more mentors who volunteered to participate in the program, several mentees were assigned more than one mentor. A one-hour training session for mentors consisted of an overview of the mentoring program, goals of the program, a review of university resources, and provision of a mentoring manual for quick access of information.
The Interpersonal Support Evaluation List College Version (ISEL CV) (Cohen, Memelstein, Kamarck, & Hoberman, 1985) was administered at the beginning and end of the academic year to determine if perceived social support increased among mentors and mentees. The tool scores an overall social support measure, but is also available to score subscales including tangible, belonging, self-esteem, and appraisal (Cohen & Hoberman, 1983). The tangible scale measures the individual’s perceived availability of material aid (fiscal or physical resources). The appraisal scale measures the individual’s availability of someone to speak with about problems. The self-esteem scale measures the individual’s perceived ability to consider one’s self positively when comparing themselves to others. The belonging scale measures the individual’s perception of the availability of others to do activities with (Cohen & Hoberman, 1983). The tool has 48 items scored as either ‘probably true’ or ‘probably false’. The tool requires about 10-15 minutes for the average individual to complete. The internal reliability for the overall scale was determined using Cronbach’s Alpha and was found to be .77 - .86 for the undergraduate student population (Cohen et al., 1985). Additionally, students were asked to respond to “what has the peer mentoring program meant to you this year” and “please share any stories from your experience with the peer mentoring program” as a qualitative review of the program at the end of the academic year. These responses were reviewed for common themes expressed by students.
Results: The demographic characteristics for both semesters can be observed in Table 1. Most of the sample was female and white. Also, there were a higher percentage of mentors in the sample compared to mentees. The average age of the mentors sampled was 22.5 years and the mentee’s was 18.5 years of age.
Table 1: Demographic Characteristic for Fall Semester 2012 and Spring 2013
The data were analyzed using IBM’s Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS Version 19). Univariate analysis was repeated for the fall and spring semester where the means and standard deviations were compared. For all the statistical inferential tests, the significance level was set at p < .05.
The standard parametric paired t-test was completed to determine if there was any statistical difference in the two population means. In this study, before and after ISEL CV social support scores were observed and changes in scores were recorded. All statistical analysis procedures were particularly focused on the changes in these scores. The freshman nursing students’ persistence classification was observed and comparisons were made for the students who participated in the mentoring program versus the students who did not participate. A non-parametric Chi-square Homogeneity Test was used to determine if a qualitative variables percentage was homogeneous (similar) with regards to the distribution of two population groups.
The ISEL CV tool was administered at the beginning and the end of the academic year to determine if perceived social support increased in students participating in the mentoring program. The administration of the fall semester survey yielded 61 responses and the spring survey 53 responses. Only data from natural pairs were used for analyses to measure changes in perceived social support for each student from the fall to the spring semester. The data captured 39 natural pairs where the student completed the survey tool both in the fall and spring semester. Table 2 shows the overall mean and standard deviation for both the fall semester and spring semester ISEL CV scores and subscales. Additionally, the table presents the paired difference in student’s scores after an academic year of mentoring interventions. With the exception of the appraisal subscale, all the remaining perceived social support measures increased. Although these differences were not statistically significant (p > .05), anecdotal conclusions about the positive affect of the mentoring program can be made.
Table 2: Fall Semester ‘12 and Spring Semester ‘13 Mean ISEL Scores
There were 92 traditional freshman nursing students that started in the fall 2012 semester, of which nearly half participated in the mentoring program. Of particular importance was the number of students enrolled in fall who returned for the spring semester, defined as persistence. A statistical test was performed to determine if persistence rates differed for students who participated in the mentoring program. Chi-square analysis revealed that the distribution of persistence rates for the students who participated in the mentoring program were significantly different from the students who did not participate (χ2(1) = 8.626, p = .003). These persistence rate distributional differences can be observed in Figure 1. Specifically, a 98% persistence rate was determined for the freshman nursing students who participated in the mentoring program compared to 77% persistence rate for the students that did not participate. There appears to be enough statistical evidence to conclude that the mentoring program for incoming freshman nursing students increased persistence rates.
Figure 1: Persistence Percentages by Mentee Status
Qualitative Results: Students responded to the question, “what has the peer mentoring program meant to you this year”, and “please share any stories from your experience with the peer mentoring program.” Students were contacted through their college email account to ask for these responses with a poor response of only 3 students. Social media was then utilized (Facebook) to message students and ask for feedback with additional responses. This method quickly produced almost 20 responses.
Themes that emerged were ‘connection and formed relationships’, ‘positive impact on the participants’, and ‘support’. The theme of ‘connection and formed relationships’ resonated through many responses. One mentor explained in her response:
“I really enjoyed the experience as a peer mentor. I was able to connect not only with my mentee, but also many other underclassmen as well...the mentorship program allows everyone to connect and feel more comfortable...I was able to make new friends through the program that I may not have made otherwise...” (Junior student mentor, 2013).
Other participants stated:
“I feel as though my participation had a positive influence on my mentee. Half way through the semester she knocked on my dorm door and asked me for some help on her anatomy homework; shortly after I learned she couldn't afford the book and therefore didn't have one, making homework and the class difficult. I fortunately kept mine from the previous year and let her borrow it for the rest of the semester and she was extremely grateful. Without the peer mentoring program this connection wouldn't have happened...” (Sophomore student mentor 2013).
“I think forming relationships through this program also bridges the gap between classes, making it easier for the different classes to bond....we can ultimately become one united community.” (Junior student mentor, 2013).
Another theme that emerged was that of ‘support’, especially through a mentee’s difficult transition to college or in stressful life situations where the mentor gave support to the mentee, as illustrated by the following responses of a mentee and her mentor:
“...She (the mentor) has been a blessing to me and been there when I needed her...she went through the nursing program the same way I am now (Advanced Entry program)...she reassured me...when I felt awkward and out of place...she assured me she knew how I was feeling and it was going to be ok. The mentor program really helped me get through my first year of school here...”. (Sophomore student mentee, 2013).
“(My mentee) was going into the Advanced Entry program...I knew I had to get to know her and stay in touch...turns out we are alike and she is actually a younger version of myself! I continue to make sure to check in on her and make sure she’s doing alright because I know how hard that first summer (of the program) was for me...I want to make sure she has someone to tell her it is doable...I’ve made my place open for her to come get help studying whenever she needs. I hope...she’ll join the program as a mentor and that she’ll find someone to help go through the process the way I did.” (Junior student mentor, 2013).
Other student responses also illustrate the theme of ‘support’:
“All in all it is a great thing. All of my mentors have helped me through some tough times. I think it is a great program and I enjoy being a part of it!” (Sophomore student mentee, 2013).
“It offered us the chance to get to know the younger nursing students coming into the program and offer them advice, assistance and support when they needed it.” (Junior student mentor, 2013).
“I had a good experience with my mentor . . . she was very sweet and helpful, knowledgeable, and had lots of great advice for the next two years. We talked maybe once every other week.” (Sophomore student mentee, 2013).
“I think it really helps (the mentees) because it shows that there is someone supporting them...they can look to me to see how the future will be...I help them with their work....and just be supportive with whatever they need help with...being a mentor does not only help someone else, it helps me become a strong person.” (Junior student mentor, 2013).
Stories emerged of mentors contacting mentees who were going through a difficult time, mentors ‘adopting’ more mentees than originally assigned, and mentors feeling a sense of helping and fulfillment in supporting their mentees.
Discussion: Peer mentoring is an effective way to support students enrolled in baccalaureate nursing programs. Although this study did not result in significant quantitative findings regarding social support, other studies have found a relationship between peer mentoring and social support (Dennison, 2010; Gilmour, Kopeikin, & Douche, 2007; Scott, 2005). Students who choose to participate in a peer mentoring program may already have significant support and thereby increases over the course of the program may not be relevant to program effectiveness. Overall means on the ISEL CV in the fall were already high and the change in spring was not significantly different. Of interest on the ISEL CV was that the subscale’s mean scores of self-esteem and belonging were the lowest in both fall and spring. Expectations related to the social support provided by the peer mentoring program are improved self-esteem, the individual’s perceived ability to consider one’s self positively when comparing themselves to others, and belonging, the individual’s perception of the availability of others to do activities with. However, these two subscales had lower means in both fall and spring than the other subscales. This will be an area for further consideration as programming is planned in the next academic year.
The positive outcome of significant persistence rates of mentee’s as compared to freshmen who did not participate in the mentoring program was similar to results found by (Robinson & Niemer, 2010). Persistence rates are indicative of students becoming acclimated to the college campus. Becoming engaged with peers and activities are generally critical to students’ persistence. These findings along with the anecdotal themes that were determined from feedback provided by both mentors and mentees support the continuance of the program. Strong themes emerged including ‘connection and formed relationships’, ‘positive impact on the participants’, and ‘support’. Administration and faculty acknowledge the benefits of the mentoring program for both the college and the university.
Limitations: One limitation of the study was the survey response rate among participants. This was partly due to the environment where the tool was administered with no adequate opportunity to hold the student’s attention for survey completion. Additionally, an unexpected limitation was the larger number of students who volunteered to be mentors than the number of mentee participants recruited. The original design of the study did not include a plan for this occurrence, so changes were made to allow for all mentors to participate in the program. The limitation was in the design, not in the outcome, as this led to some mentees having two students assigned to them as mentors. A final limitation, mentioned by students in the program evaluations, was the limited amount of time to participate in mentor/mentee activities due to the rigorous academics in the nursing program. Strategies that encourage engagement between mentors and mentees that would potentially facilitate interactions, such as study groups, will be considered in future studies.
Future Research: The College intends to continue the peer-to-peer mentoring program to support students, increase persistence and retention rates, and develop leadership and mentoring skills among nursing students. Future work will include recruiting more faculty support, linking the mentors with faculty advisors. Additionally, more intentional work with mentors to encourage regular communication with mentees will be investigated as a means to improve social support. Those mentees who had more regular contact with their mentors reported positive experiences and relationships that resulted from the program. Although the large group activities provide social support throughout the academic year, interpersonal support is primarily built at the individual level.
Whether students who most need mentoring are willing to voluntarily participate in the program is also a point of further investigation. Since no academic coursework or scholarships are associated with the program, students cannot be required to participate. Investigation into ways to motivate students to participate in the program is needed.
Conclusions: Results of the study did not provide quantitatively significant results related to improved social support; however, persistence rates for students who participated in the peer-mentoring program were significantly different than for those who did not participate in the program. Additionally, anecdotal results were strongly positive. Focus in the next academic year will be on persistence and retention rates and development of leadership and mentoring skills that are essential to promote student success and to facilitate their development as future health professionals.
The peer-to-peer mentoring program was designed to improve nursing student’s social support, thereby impacting persistence and retention rates. However, the results of this study did not find significant improvement in social support. This could be related to the sensitivity of the tool that was used to measure social support, the small sample size, or simply that the students who voluntarily participated in the study already had adequate social support. The significant findings regarding persistence rates for the freshmen nursing students who participated in the program support the value of the peer-to-peer mentoring program in this population. Although quantitative results did not show significance in the area of increased support, the anecdotal qualitative themes are supportive of peer mentoring and show increased perceived support along with connection and formed relationships that will ideally continue to provide support to the mentees. Further studies will build on these results seeking to increase participation of freshmen in the program for the next academic year.
This study was supported in part, with funds from Grant #D11HP22187-01-00, I CARE: Increasing Baccalaureate Nursing Enrollment, Nurse Education, Practice, Quality and Retention, (NEPQR).
REFERENCES
Bozeman, B., & Feeney, M. K. (October 2007). Toward a useful theory of mentoring: A conceptual analysis and critique. Administration & Society 39 (6): 719–739. doi: 10.1177/0095399707304119
Cohen, S., & Hoberman, H. (1983). Positive events and social supports as buffers of life change stress. ( No. 258). Carnegie Mellon University Research Showcase: Department of Psychology, College of Humanities and Social Sciences.
Cohen, S., Memelstein, R., Kamarck, T., & Hoberman, H. (1985). Measuring the functional components of social support. In I. Sarason, & B. Sarason (Eds.), Social support: Theory, research and application (pp. 73-94). Martinus Nijhoff: The Hague.
Dennison, S. (2010). Peer mentoring: Untapped potential. Educational Innovations 49(6). 340-342.
Dorsey, L., & Baker, C. (2004) Mentoring undergraduate nursing students: Assessing the state of the science. Nurse Educator, 29, p. 260-265. doi 10.1097/00006223-200411000-00013
Field, J., & Morgan-Klein, N. (2012). The importance of social support structures for retention and success. In T. Hinton-Smith (Ed.), Widening participation in higher education: Casting the net wide? (pp. 178-192).London: Palgrave.
Gilmour, J., Kopeikin, A., & Douche, J. (2007). Student nurses as peer-mentors: Collegiality in practice. Nurse Education in Practice 7. 36-43.
Glass, N. & Walter, R. (2000). An experience of peer mentoring with student nurses: Enhancement of personal and professional growth. Journal of Nursing Education. 39(4). 155-160.
Jensen, U. (2011). Influencing student retention in higher education. Summary of influential factors in degree attainment and persistence to career or further education for at-risk/high educational need students. Pacific Policy Research Center. Honolulu, HI: Kamehameha Schools, Research & Evaluation Division.
Li, H., Wang, L., Lin, Y., Lee, I. (2011). The effect of a peer-mentoring strategy on student nurse stress reduction in clinical practice. International Nursing Review 58(2). 203-210. doi:10.1111/j.1466-7657.2010.00839.
Robinson, E., & Niemer, L. (2010). A peer mentor tutor program for academic success in nursing. Nursing Education Perspectives 31(5), 286-289.
Tinto, V. (2012). Taking student retention seriously: Rethinking the first year of college. Syracuse University, Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education. Retrieved from: http://www.gvsu.edu/cms3/assets/B85DAC41-B7B8-3B9F-A116121D5AE29B05/Taking%20Student%20Retention%20Seriously.pdf
