PEER MENTORING: Making a Good Idea Better
Through Innovation and Assessment
Carolyn Bliss, Ph.D.LEAP Program Director
Carolan Ownby, Ph.D.Director of Peer Advisors
University of UtahSalt Lake City, Utah
Definition of terms
• LEAP: the name for the University of Utah Freshman Learning Community
• Learning, Engagement, Achievement, Progress
• Also the leap to college
Definition of terms continued
Peer Advisor [also known as PA]: the name of the experienced student who helps the freshmen in LEAP
May be known on other campuses as Peer Mentor
Some unique aspects of the LEAP Peer Advisor program:
• PA gets paid
• Integrated presence of the PA in the classroom
Changes in the PA Program
• Need to give PAs enough to do ($$)
• Acknowledgment of talents of PAs
• Growth of LEAP Program itself
• Outside recognition of the Peer Advisor Program
Ten Lessons I Have Learned
Lesson # 1
• Peer Advisors should be fully utilized
• That’s a lot of Peer Advisors! What should I do with them?
Lesson #2
• Peer Advisor role should constantly be evolving towards something better
Lesson #3
• Listen to Peer Advisors. They are creative and energetic people, and if we allow them ownership of their role, wonderful results will follow
Lesson #4
• Learn from mistakes
Lesson #5
• Formalize the training.
• Summer online class
• Mandatory two‐day workshop
• Bimonthly meetings
Lesson #6
• Think outside of the box
Lesson #7
• Follow the obvious trail
• See You at the U
• LEAP 2003
Lesson #8
• Let the Peer Advisors teach each other how to lead
Lesson #9
• Let Peer Advisors fail
Lesson #10
• Reward excellence
• 3 scholarships
• Jan Frost award for most outstanding Peer Advisor
• Open door to other leadership opportunities
Next year
• Campus Spelling Bee to benefit Adult Literacy
• Publicity committee
• LEAP LAN
THE ALLY PROGRAM
(“Advisors and Liaisons for the LEAP Year”)
• Impetus
• Features
• Evaluation
• Pilot program
• Moving on from here
Impetus
• Importance of the role of peers• Experience of other institutions with “success coaches”
• Vincent Tinto’s work on the importance of integration to retention and persistence to graduation
• Desire to honor the achievement of LEAP students and keep more of them connected to the program
Features
• Program pairs successful LEAP “alums” with freshmen for their first year
• The pairs ideally share interests, majors, or backgrounds
• Pairs meet once each week• The ALLY helps the student set reasonable goals and develop strategies to meet them
• ALLIES engage students with the campus and community
• ALLIES refer students to appropriate resources
Features (cont.)
• ALLIES meet as a cohort every two weeks
• ALLIES report to a peer supervisor
• ALLIES are paid $200/student/semester for up to three students
• ALLIES receive $50/student/semester to spend on activities with the student(s)
• ALLIES are trained in a 16‐hour workshop
Features (cont.)
• ALLIES introduce the program to incoming students early in fall semester
• ALLIES are offered to ALL incoming LEAP students• Some students are required to have ALLIES as a condition of their scholarships or academic standing
• ALLIES may earn credit toward Service Learning Scholar designation or Leadership Minor
• LEAP students offered extra credit for regular meetings with ALLIES
Evaluation
• ALLIES’ regular reports and final reflections
• Retention data on students with ALLIES
• GPA and credit hours of students with ALLIES
• Student assessment of experience
• Pre‐ and post‐tests of students skills based on the online “Academic Success” workshop required of students on academic warning or probation or the Student Readiness Inventory
The Pilot Program
• One semester rather than two
• Aimed at students on academic warning
• Recruited 11 ALLIES but only 10 students willing to work with them
• ALLIES enjoyed and profited from the experience
• Effect on the students is less clear
Where do we go from here with ALLY?
• Program has been re‐authorized for next year• Next year’s ALLIES were recruited by this year’s group in the spring
• 45 students were interested in applying• Aim for next year will be to connect students with an ALLY for the entire year and keep them off academic warning
• Website established for contact with ALLIES• Recruitment material developed for use at Orientation sessions
ASSESSING THE LEAP PEER ADVISOR PROGRAM
• The whole picture• Results of PA program assessment
Earlier Assessment Findings
• LEAP students are retained at higher rates than non‐LEAP students and are more likely to graduate within six years.
• LEAP students express greater satisfaction with their educations on the Senior Exit Survey than do non‐LEAP students.
• Differences are especially large on questions about appreciation of fine arts and humanities, creativity, getting along with and understanding the “other,” and verbal communication skills.
Assessment Findings (cont.)
• LEAP students’ admission indexes are slightly lower than those of non‐LEAP students.
• LEAP spring survey results mimic those of the Senior Exit survey.
• The matching study compares non‐LEAP, LEAP, and PA students demographically matched for:– Age– Gender– High school attended– Cohort– Admissions index (+/‐ 5 points)
Assessment Findings (cont.)
• Matching study compares for:– 1st and 2nd semester GPA– 1st and 2nd semester attempted and completed credit hours
– Fall to fall retention rate– Latest GPA– Graduation GPA for those who have graduated– Graduation rate– Number of credits at graduation
Assessment Findings (cont.)
• 1491 matches for non‐LEAP/LEAP garnered from 1999‐2006 entering students
• First semester:– GPAs: non‐LEAP 2.93/LEAP 3.04– Credits attempted: non‐LEAP 11.45/ LEAP 12.18– Credits completed: non‐LEAP 11.09/ LEAP 11.68
• Second semester:– GPAs: non‐LEAP 2.96 / LEAP 3.02– Credits attempted: non‐LEAP 11.07/ LEAP 11.19– Credits completed: non‐LEAP 11.30/ LEAP 11.46
Assessment Findings (cont.)
• Retention and graduation:– Fall to fall retention: non‐LEAP 61%, LEAP 66%
– Number graduated so far: non‐LEAP 15%, LEAP 18%
– Six‐year graduation rate: non‐LEAP 43%, LEAP 57%
• Latest GPA: non‐LEAP 2.92, LEAP 2.95
• GPA at graduation: non‐LEAP 3.27,LEAP 3.28
Assessment Findings for PAs
• 29 PAs matched with 170 LEAP and non‐LEAP students• First semester GPAs:
– Non‐LEAP 3.00– LEAP 3.18– PAs 3.66
• First semester credits attempted:– Non‐LEAP 11.35– LEAP 12.09– PAs 12.90
• First semester credits completed:– Non‐LEAP 11.17– LEAP 11.79– PAs 12.86
First Semester Experienceb=PA sig > Non‐LEAP; c=PA sig > LEAP; sig= p<.05
Assessment Findings for PAs (cont.)
• Second semester GPAs:– Non‐LEAP 3.08– LEAP 3.19– PAs 3.51
• Second semester credits attempted:– Non‐LEAP 11.13– LEAP 11.44– PAs 13.00
• Second semester credits completed:– Non‐LEAP 11.43– LEAP 11.46– PAs 12.87
Second Semester Experienceb=PA sig > Non‐LEAP; c=PA sig > LEAP; sig= p<.05
Assessment Findings for PAs (cont.)
• Overall GPAs:– Non‐LEAP 3.12
– LEAP 3.12
– PAs 3.46
• Graduation rates to date:– Non‐LEAP 20%
– LEAP 22%
– PAs 45%
Overall GPA’sb=PA sig > Non‐LEAP; c=PA sig > LEAP; sig= p<.05
Graduation Rateb=PA sig > Non‐LEAP; c=PA sig > LEAP; sig= p<.05
Possible conclusions:
• The more LEAP experiences students have, first as LEAP students and then as Peer Advisors, the better equipped they are to succeed in college.
• The Peer Advisor Program not only selects top students but helps them stay at that level of performance.
For more information:
• www.leap.utah.edu: complete LEAP program
• [email protected]: ALLY Program
• [email protected]: LEAP Peer Advisors