Peer Mentoring and Psychology Program Success Factors

Introduction

Stoloff, Good, Smith, and Brewster (2015) determined measures of success in a number of ways: (1) whether students attended graduate school within five years of graduating, (2) the departmental score on the Major Field Test for Psychology (MFT), and (3) completion of the program by students. Other factors had been tested before, including student-teacher interaction, and used as measures of success. The study by Stoloff et al. (2015) aimed to build on prior works and to show what the relationship between student success and test scores, graduate school attendance, and program completion was overall.

This paper provides a summary of the article by Stoloff et al. (2015), discusses the characteristics of psychology programs that lead to success, and identifies other ways that success can be measured. It also addresses ways in which successful peer mentoring programs could bridge the gap, or actively support, department efforts to address shortcomings in student success. Finally, it offers commentary on how activities as a peer mentor translate into a successful undergraduate experience, both for the mentor and for the students served.

Summary of Stoloff et al. (2015)

Stoloff et al. (2015) recruited 278 chairs from 976 psychology departments throughout the United States: 62 from schools granting doctoral degrees, 144 from schools granting master's degrees, and 72 from schools granting bachelor's degrees. The researchers used the survey method of collecting data to gauge the perspectives of these department chairs. One of their aims was to assess the "frequency with which students had experiences that we believed might be important to the success of psychology majors" (Stoloff et al., 2015, p. 100). The researchers wanted to see whether these experiences correlated with measures of success.

One of the experiences they examined was the achievement of APA learning objectives. The researchers asked department chairs how many courses emphasizing these objectives were completed by 80% of students. They also asked about class sizes and a range of other student experiences, including: student participation in research, practice with communication skills, use of technology, engagement in field placement, study abroad, participation in co-curricular activities, engagement in career preparation activities, and interaction with faculty. Development of research skills, communication skills, technology skills, and all the other experiences were measured and scored to obtain averages. These measures of student experience were then compared to the measures of student success described above.

The researchers found that students who had more favorable and active learning-based experiences in their courses had higher measures of success. For example, they noted that school programs in which students are active in student organizations related to their psychology major scored higher on the MFT/ACAT and that these students also tended to go on to graduate school at a higher rate. In short, the more engaged learners are in their subject — in developing their skills, preparing for a career, and getting to know their teachers — the more likely they are to succeed.

Other Characteristics of Programs That Lead to Success

One of the areas in which schools commonly fall short is classroom size. The smaller the classroom, the more engaged the student is likely to be, which translates into a greater likelihood of academic success. If a school cannot afford small classes across the board, the best solution is to allow introductory courses to be large while keeping upper-level courses small. Another area where universities tend to fall short is in student-faculty interaction. Teachers sometimes disregard the importance of this interaction because they do not have a clear way to quantify its effect — but the effect is almost certainly present and serves as a significant motivator for students. Departments should therefore promote student-faculty interaction as a means of supporting student success.

Additionally, schools should focus on helping students realize that they need to develop skills applicable across a number of career paths. Skills that are not marketable will not help students find careers in their chosen field. If the purpose of schooling is to serve as a foundation for a career, educators should take time to help students prepare for this important transition.

Overall, schools need to consider more than just the quality of their courses. They also need to consider the activities they offer and how engaged their students are able to be. Students should be encouraged to participate in psychology-related activities, and teachers should be encouraged to maximize their relationships with students so as to promote a culture of success and provide motivation to persist.

Conclusion

Stoloff et al. (2015) showed that engagement is a major factor in determining student success, at least from the perspective of psychology department chairs. However, the study also revealed that measuring success solely in terms of graduation, course completion, and graduate school enrollment may be insufficient. The researchers recommended gathering the student perspective as a complement to chair perceptions, a recommendation that merits strong agreement.

From personal experience, peer mentoring is an effective way to get students engaged and committed to their studies. It has provided focus and growth both for the mentor and for the peers who have been mentored. Another meaningful way to measure success, however, would be to take a longer view — examining how many students go on to have satisfying careers in psychology. Since a fulfilling career is typically the ultimate goal, it would serve as a valuable success metric, one that could be compared against earlier student experiences such as the quality of teacher relationships or participation in peer mentoring programs.

References

Ashbaugh, K., Koegel, R. L., & Koegel, L. K. (2017). Increasing social integration for college students with autism spectrum disorder. Behavioral Development Bulletin, 22(1), 183.

Hughes, A., & Fahy, B. (2009). Implementing an undergraduate psychology mentoring program. North American Journal of Psychology, 11(3).

Page, D., & Hanna, D. (2008). Peer mentoring: The students' perspective. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 7(2), 34–37.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.

Stoloff, M. L., Good, M. R., Smith, K. L., & Brewster, J. (2015). Characteristics of programs that maximize psychology major success. Teaching of Psychology, 42(2), 99–108.