What Makes an Effective Peer Mentor? Perceptions of Undergraduate Engineering Students During COVID-19

Quinn Alessandro Corrigan; Darcie Christensen; Idalis Villanueva Alarcón

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Baltimore , Maryland
Publication Date: June 25, 2023
Start Date: June 25, 2023
End Date: June 28, 2023
Conference Session: First-Year Programs Division (FYP) - Technical Session 6: Mentors & Teams
Tagged Division: First-Year Programs Division (FYP)
Page Count: 15
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--44618
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/44618
Download Count: 262

Paper Authors

biography

Darcie Christensen Minnesota State University, Mankato orcid.org/0000-0002-5061-4663

visit author page

Dr. Darcie Christensen is a probationary Assistant Professor in the Department of Integrated Engineering at Minnesota State University Mankato. She teaches for Iron Range Engineering, which is located on the Minnesota North Campus in Virginia, MN. Dr. Christensen received her Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Utah State University in the Summer of 2021. The title of her Dissertation is “A Mixed-Method Approach to Explore Student Needs for Peer Mentoring in a College of Engineering.” Darcie holds a Master of Engineering degree in Environmental Engineering (2019) and Bachelor of Science degree in Biological Engineering (2017), both from Utah State University. She is passionate about student success and support, both inside and outside of the classroom.

visit author page

biography

Idalis Villanueva Alarcón University of Florida orcid.org/0000-0002-8767-2576

visit author page

Dr. Villanueva Alarcon is an Associate Professor in the Engineering Education Department at the University of Florida. Her multiple roles as an engineer, engineering educator, engineering educational researcher, and professional development mentor for underrepres

visit author page

author page

Quinn Alessandro Corrigan Minnesota State University, Mankato

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

This complete research paper focuses on undergraduate engineering students’ perceived effectiveness of their peer mentors. The study was conducted at a Western Institution of the United States during emergency hybrid learning conditions due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Traditionally, mentors are thought to have more experience and may hold a power differential compared to their mentee. For example, a supervisor to an employee or a professor to a student. Contrastingly, peer mentorship occurs when a mentor and a mentee are at approximately at the same level regarding some part of their personal, professional, or academic path. For example, a peer mentor may be second year student with a first-year mentee or a one-year employee with a newly hired mentee. Peer mentorship has been shown to introduce a level of mutuality and interpersonal comfort that may not be available in traditional mentorships, allowing for trust and credibility to be built in the two-way relationship.

Identity, belonging, student experience, and emotional competency have all been shown to have improvements when in a positive peer mentorship as well as increased retention, particularly for those who are underrepresented or in the first year of their engineering program. These benefits can occur for both mentors and mentees in peer mentoring relationships. Even though the outcomes of peer mentorship are generally found to be positive, it is often underutilized as a way to support students psychosocially and in their academic trajectories. These responsibilities typically fall to faculty and staff who may not have the time or resources due to their other position demands to provide the additional mentorship students need.

At the end of 2020, amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, a mixed-methods dissertation study was conducted to determine students’ perceived needs for peer mentoring. In this study, 223 undergraduate engineering students provided their perceptions of peer mentoring needs via a newly developed exploratory mixed-methods instrument that was tested for both validity and reliability (i.e., quantitative Cronbach’s Alpha = .783; qualitative content and face validation in multiple rounds). The instrument started with a definition and examples of peer mentorship followed by a question to determine whether a student currently felt they had a peer mentor. This preceded 33 total quantitative items and 2 open-ended qualitative questions asked of all participants. Additionally, there were two additional open-ended qualitative questions for those who indicated they did not currently have a peer mentor and four open-ended qualitative questions for those who indicated they did currently have a peer mentor. All participants finished the survey with seven demographic questions.

The focus of this current analysis is to delve into the unexplored qualitative question: “What makes your peer mentor an effective peer mentor to you?”. Responses to this question were given by the 79 students who indicated they currently had a peer mentor. A phenomenological-type analysis of the responses to this question will summarize common practices and traits of an effective peer mentor. The paper will conclude with relevant and evidence-based practices mentors can use and should be trained on when participating in peer mentorships, particularly those that impact first year and underrepresented engineering students in an academic context.

Citation
Format

Christensen, D., & Villanueva Alarcón, I., & Corrigan, Q. A. (2023, June), What Makes an Effective Peer Mentor? Perceptions of Undergraduate Engineering Students During COVID-19 Paper presented at 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Baltimore , Maryland. 10.18260/1-2--44618

TY - CPAPER
AB - This complete research paper focuses on undergraduate engineering students’ perceived effectiveness of their peer mentors. The study was conducted at a Western Institution of the United States during emergency hybrid learning conditions due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Traditionally, mentors are thought to have more experience and may hold a power differential compared to their mentee. For example, a supervisor to an employee or a professor to a student. Contrastingly, peer mentorship occurs when a mentor and a mentee are at approximately at the same level regarding some part of their personal, professional, or academic path. For example, a peer mentor may be second year student with a first-year mentee or a one-year employee with a newly hired mentee. Peer mentorship has been shown to introduce a level of mutuality and interpersonal comfort that may not be available in traditional mentorships, allowing for trust and credibility to be built in the two-way relationship.

Identity, belonging, student experience, and emotional competency have all been shown to have improvements when in a positive peer mentorship as well as increased retention, particularly for those who are underrepresented or in the first year of their engineering program. These benefits can occur for both mentors and mentees in peer mentoring relationships. Even though the outcomes of peer mentorship are generally found to be positive, it is often underutilized as a way to support students psychosocially and in their academic trajectories. These responsibilities typically fall to faculty and staff who may not have the time or resources due to their other position demands to provide the additional mentorship students need.

At the end of 2020, amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, a mixed-methods dissertation study was conducted to determine students’ perceived needs for peer mentoring. In this study, 223 undergraduate engineering students provided their perceptions of peer mentoring needs via a newly developed exploratory mixed-methods instrument that was tested for both validity and reliability (i.e., quantitative Cronbach’s Alpha = .783; qualitative content and face validation in multiple rounds). The instrument started with a definition and examples of peer mentorship followed by a question to determine whether a student currently felt they had a peer mentor. This preceded 33 total quantitative items and 2 open-ended qualitative questions asked of all participants. Additionally, there were two additional open-ended qualitative questions for those who indicated they did not currently have a peer mentor and four open-ended qualitative questions for those who indicated they did currently have a peer mentor. All participants finished the survey with seven demographic questions.

The focus of this current analysis is to delve into the unexplored qualitative question: “What makes your peer mentor an effective peer mentor to you?”. Responses to this question were given by the 79 students who indicated they currently had a peer mentor. A phenomenological-type analysis of the responses to this question will summarize common practices and traits of an effective peer mentor. The paper will conclude with relevant and evidence-based practices mentors can use and should be trained on when participating in peer mentorships, particularly those that impact first year and underrepresented engineering students in an academic context.

AU - Darcie Christensen
AU - Idalis Villanueva Alarcón
AU - Quinn Alessandro Corrigan
CY - Baltimore , Maryland
DA - 2023/06/25
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - What Makes an Effective Peer Mentor? Perceptions of Undergraduate Engineering Students During COVID-19
UR - https://peer.asee.org/44618
DO - 10.18260/1-2--44618
ER -