Reviewing the effect of student mentoring on the academic performance of undergraduate students identified as ‘at risk’

Chris Maharaj,Margo Burns,Erik Blair

doi:10.47408/jldhe.vi20.605

Abstract

This paper outlines an early intervention programme based upon the belief that being proactive rather than reactive increases a student’s academic and social success. Twenty-one students from a cohort of 40 who were identified as being ‘at risk’ participated in a three-session mentoring programme. Grade-point averages (GPAs) were recorded pre- and post- intervention, for both the intervention group and those who did not participate in the programme. Results are interpreted through the lens of Attribution Theory – in which outcomes are related to how perceived challenges are addressed. The results show that, on average, the GPAs for those who received mentoring improved by 35% between semester 1 and semester 2, whereas the non-intervention group only increased their GPAs by an average of 15%.

Highlights

Admission to undergraduate programmes primarily revolves around an academic evaluation of potential students based upon standardised national tests
The purpose of this paper is to review the impact of a quasi-informal early intervention mentoring programme on the grade-point average (GPA) and course failure rates of 21 undergraduate Mechanical Engineering students at a Caribbean university who were defined as academically ‘at risk’
Of the 21 students, 18 had an increase in their GPA, and three participants saw a drop in their GPA in semester 2

Summary

Introduction

Admission to undergraduate programmes primarily revolves around an academic evaluation of potential students based upon standardised national tests. Intervention programmes are based upon the belief that being proactive rather than reactive increases a student’s academic and social success Research supports this premise (Foss et al.; 2014, Zhang et al, 2014; Harmening and Jacob, 2015), when proactive or early-intervention programmes address common challenges such as time management, study habits, skill development in self-regulation, and critical thinking (Kausar, 2010; Gentry, 2012; 2014). Undergraduate engineering students often struggle with balancing academic and psychosocial needs (AWE, 2005; Gentry, 2012; 2014) and may benefit from early intervention mentoring that encompasses both advising and mentoring; this cohort is an ideal sample for understanding the possible impact of mentoring

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion