Peer Mentor Schemes in Medical School: their need, their value and training for peer mentors
Objectives: To describe the setup, training and evaluation of a novel near peer mentoring programme adopted in the School of Medicine to enable such schemes to be established in UK medical schools and other HE institutions.
Methods: 49 second and third year medical student peer mentors were recruited and trained to be mentors for students in years below. The training and results of surveys of the peer mentors are described in this paper to review the effectiveness and appropriateness of the training.
Results: The effectiveness of the peer mentoring training programme was rated by the trainees as high with a mean (± standard deviation) session score of 4.37(±0.21) following the second training session and 4.33(±0.38) following the third training session, out of a possible maximum score of 5. Percentage satisfaction of preparedness was 93.7% (84.9-100%) for the first session and 89.7%(79.1%-100%) for the second session. There was also no statistically significant difference in the mean student perception of learning score comparing both sessions (p>0.05).
Conclusion: Our results suggest that the training program for our medical student peer mentors effectively equipped them with the confidence, knowledge and skills to support their mentees and to effectively signpost them to the appropriate professional. Additional findings show that our peer mentors themselves have a greater understanding of University processes and procedures which helps them in their own medical school journey.
Buddeberg-Fischer, B. and Herta, K.D., 2006. Formal mentoring programmes for medical students and doctors–a review of the Medline literature. Medical Teacher, 28(3), pp.248-257.
Colvin, J.W. and Ashman, M., 2010. Roles, risks, and benefits of peer mentoring relationships in higher education. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 18(2), pp.121-134.
Dewart, H., Drees, D., Hixenbaugh, P., & Thorn, L. (2006, July). Engaging first year students at a metropolitan university: Is electronic mentoring an effective strategy. In 9th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference, Engaging Students, Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, Australia (Vol. 30, pp. 10-3).
Frei, E., Stamm, M. and Buddeberg-Fischer, B., 2010. Mentoring programs for medical students-a review of PubMed literature 2000-2008. BMC medical education, 10(1), p.32.
Hamilton J, Stevens G, Girdler S. Becoming a Mentor: The Impact of Training and the Experience of Mentoring University Students on the Autism Spectrum. PLoS One. 2016 Apr 12;11(4).
Hill, R. and Reddy, P., 2007. Undergraduate peer mentoring: an investigation into processes, activities and outcomes. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 6(2), pp.98-103.
Kirkpatrick D. Great ideas revisited. Training and Development. 1996;50(1):54–9.
Kirkpatrick J. The hidden power of Kirkpatrick's four levels. Training and Development. 2007;61(8):34.
Kosoko-Lasaki O, Sonnino R, Voytko M. Mentoring for Women and Underrepresented Minority Faculty and Students: Experience at Two Institutions of Higher Education. Journal of the National Medical Association, 2006.
McLean M. Does the curriculum matter in peer mentoring? From mentee to mentor in problem‐based learning: a unique case study Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning 2007; 173-186.
NHS Health Research Authority: Determine whether your study is research. http://www.hra.nhs.uk/research-community/before-you-apply/determine-whether-your-study-is-research/. Last accessed 08/08/2017.
Ramani, S., Gruppen, L. and Kachur, E.K., 2006. Twelve tips for developing effective mentors. Medical teacher, 28(5), pp.404-408.
Singh S, Singh N, Dhaliwal U. Near-peer mentoring to complement faculty mentoring of first-year medical students in India. J Educ Eval Health Prof, 2014.
Smink, J., 1999. A Training Guide for Mentors. Available at http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED430125. Last accessed 08/08/2017.
Winfrey EC. Kirkpatrick's Four Levels of Evaluation. In: Hoffman B, editor. Encyclopedia of Educational Technology. San Diego (CA): College of Education; 1999.
Yusoff M, Rahim A, Noor A, Yaacob N, Hussin Z. Evaluation of medical students’ perception towards the BigSib Programme in the School of Medical Sciences, USM. Education in Medicine Journal 2010; e2-e11.
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).