Twitter
FacebookLean on me
By Marilyn Smulders - January 15, 2010
 |
| A friend to count on: Peer mentor Courtney Larkin and first year student Maximilian Werner. (Bruce Bottomley Photo) |
For a bright kid ready to embark on his university education, Maximilian Werner arrived at Dalhousie last September with a “million dumb questions,” he says sheepishly. What elective should I choose? What’s the best way to make friends? Where’s the best place for lunch?
But the nice part, says the first-year student from Germany, is that his peer mentor Courtney Larkin would respond to all of his queries.
“Whatever dumb question I had, she would answer,” says Mr. Werner, 19. “I am so grateful.”
Paired together through Dalhousie’s new Peer Partnership Program, the two have become fast friends. “I only came from Cole Harbour and I found first year overwhelming,” says Ms. Larkin, last year’s DSU president who is now back taking classes and finishing up her degree. “So really it’s the least I could do to help first years deal with all the little things university can throw at you.”
On Thursday evening, organizers thanked students who helped launch the new program in September with a dinner and awards presentation. The student engagement initiative has been in the works since October 2008 when a Senate committee brainstormed ideas to help new students transition better from high school to university life.
In its first year, 212 peer mentors took part, as well as about 500 first year students from four faculties: Management, Computer Science, Engineering and Science. As the program moves forward, organizers are hoping the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences will come on board. They also plan to delay its launch until after Orientation Week, to give students a chance to settle in during their first week at university, and extend the duration of the program over both the fall and winter semesters.
 |
| Way to go! Students recognized for their mentorship include Katherine Magee, Nada El Sayid (accepting for her friend Neil McPherson), Courtney Larkin and Kristen Chafe. Maximilian Werner, far right, spoke of the significance the program had in helping him settle into life at Dalhousie. (Bruce Bottomley Photo) |
“We are inviting feedback on the program so we can improve it,” says Deborah Kiceniuk, associate director of Dalhousie’s Centre for Learning and Teaching.
Awards were given to recognize outstanding mentors from each of the participating faculties. Besides Courtney Larkin from the Faculty of Management, other mentors honored were Katherine Magee from Computer Science, Neil McPherson from Engineering and Kristen Chafe from Science.
“First year for me was definitely challenging,” says Ms. Magee, a science student who transferred to computer science. She says a PhD student she met in the faculty was patient with her questions and encouraging. “He had such an impact on me that I wanted to be that person for someone else.”
LINK: Peer Partnership Program
Readers Say
January 18, 2010 9:50 AM
January 18, 2010 1:14 PM
Everyone at our table at the appreciation dinner commented on how the program didn't turn out as expected, yet we heard from countless speakers about how amazing it is/was, and how it was such a great success.
I believe that there are a few individuals who benefited from this program, the ones who made the effort to meet with their mentors. The mentors who tried and were unable to meet with their "mentees" are not lazy students or disinterested. I hope that there will be some discussion on how a great concept could be majorly improved for future years (e.g. Do not assign ALL first-year students with mentors, because many have no need for one! Assign mentors to interested students only.)
January 18, 2010 1:14 PM
The Arts/Social Scienes faculty really need to get on board with this!
January 18, 2010 4:56 PM
I was a "peer mentor" and had absolutely no interaction with any first year students after orientation day. Others I know were in the same situation as me. I don't think the program was very successful at attracting first years to participate.
January 19, 2010 5:59 PM
At my table, we all (6 of us) agreed that the program was a complete joke. There was a lot of eye-rolling at the speakers. They seemed completely oblivious and kept going on about how great the program was.
I was pretty annoyed by all the self-congratulatory speeches, from those of the program designers, to those of the award recipients (like listening to gushing testimonials for a bad product - not hard to get, just give someone an award!), to the DSU president's uber-annoying "as a great leader, I just have to reflect upon the mentor who made me the huge success I am today...so mentorship is like so totally important!" speech (I thought, please stop, listening to this is starting to hurt).
I thought that the launch, which they announced in another dalnews article as a success, was an epic fail. We all sat around there forever before the speeches started, and it took an hour to get matched with the mentees. Then we waited in line at the LSC for another half hour for cold pizza. Then, we had this unbelievably stupid activity where we all had to do stupid things in front of someone with a disposable camera. It was sooo embarrassing that my whole group left!!
I hardly had any contact with my mentees after that, but I kept emailing them (like the program said to) and felt like a total stalker. I cringed when I hit send.
Haha, the positive comments on here are from people who are congratulating their friends for getting awards :p
Anyway, the program was dumb and I think the faculty behind it have got to be on crack or something, but I got free dinner and a certificate, so... whatever!
January 19, 2010 6:12 PM
What bothered me the most about this event was the "Peer Mentorship" certificates that were handed out.
I received an official certificate from the university for having done and learned absolutely nothing, coupled with the fact that I did not have to pass any kind of test or demonstrate any kind of competency whatsoever to earn the certification.
So what does the certificate mean? As the certificate does not say anything meaningful about the holder, it has no validity. All who signed up to the program were awarded a certificate, regardless of whether or not they maintained contact with their mentees, or were even assigned one at all. This is a problem for two reasons:
1. Deforestation is an increasing concern
2. By handing out worthless certificates, you do the university a disservice, as such a practice can in the long run only detract from the credibility of an institution that organizes itself around the awarding of certificates and degrees.
Nonetheless, I will gleefully add the certificate to my resume. A part of me rather appreciates this generosity on the part of the university, and hopes that someday full degrees might be awarded in the same spirit, as this would make my life here far less stressful.
Although my attitude toward the program is presently not positive, I would be happy to revise it should data show that the program is in fact associated with greater student retention. However, I think it is highly inappropriate to claim success without backing up that claim with data, and fiscally disrespectful (not quite the same thing as 'irresponsible') to throw a lavish event for a program that may be ineffectual. More modest behaviour on the part of the organizers would have been more becoming.
January 20, 2010 5:56 PM
The developers were looking out for the interests of students (by trying to increase support for first year students) as well as of the university (by trying to maximize student retention, which is a budget issue).
It helped some first years out, and was decidedly a boon to resume-building senior students. However, I would like to 'politely sugggest' that such initiatives be held to the same standard as any other serious intervention effort.
1. Pilot major projects. The program's embarrassments (poor organization at the kick-off event, privacy issues w/ disseminating the email addresses of first years who did not enroll in the program, eager mentors frustrated by apathetic mentees) could likely have been anticipated and addressed in a 'beta version'. Until you know what you're doing, keep it low-cost and low-key.
2. Proceed carefully. Be aware that mentors, who are given very little training and no post-application assessment, are being thrown into a largely unstructured and unsupervised relationship with their mentees. Since this a relationship with an inherent role-conflict (how can a 'mentor' also be a 'peer', or someone who is supposed to be 'professional' also be a 'friend'?). You asked us (training session suggestion) to invite our mentees out to campus or community events': so are we counselors, or drinking buddies?
3. Provide comprehensive structure and guidance. Throwing people together and leaving things mostly to fate is poor program conceptualization and execution.
4. Results and accountability. Don't blow the trumpets without showing the data first: that is just good science. Also, don't establish a facebook page then delete the critical comments people post: That is positive bias.
January 20, 2010 7:18 PM
Anyways, I would suggest whoever is in charge of the program, to get in touch with other universities who have a successful mentor program up and running. THEY DO EXIST!
I have friends in Ontario that say they love their mentors and their mentees...
Get in touch with someone who's got this program figured out cause there is a lot of potential here.
Good luck.
January 21, 2010 11:01 AM