An academic evaluation of the Pathways Mentoring Scheme at Sheffield Hallam University.
Case study summary
Project leader/s: Dr Michelle Newberry
This case study presents a rigorous academic evaluation of the Pathways Mentoring Scheme at Sheffield Hallam University. The evaluation examined mentors’ and mentees’ perceived success of the scheme in terms of whether it helped them to identify and/or achieve their career goals, and whether it promoted improvements in psychological capital (characterised by confidence, self-efficacy, optimism, hope and resilience), self-esteem, job satisfaction, and job-related wellbeing (anxiety, contentment, and enthusiasm relating to one’s work). These attributes were measured using robust psychometric measures at three time points (pre, interim and post-engagement in the scheme) among mentors, mentees, and a non-applicant control group. Interesting differences were found between mentors, mentees and non-applicants on a number of the measures, and mentors and mentees derived different benefits from taking part in the scheme. This model can be applied by other HEIs and so a Good Practice Guide will be produced which sets out how to effectively evaluate a mentoring scheme using this academic approach. The use of this approach by other HEIs could lead to the development of a large data set which could be used to provide themes for benchmarking which the whole sector could benefit from.
Research theme/s: Identities, roles and careers, Culture, change and organisational development
Project leader
Dr Michelle Newberry, Senior Lecturer in Psychology, Sheffield Hallam University
Project's administrative ‘Home’ HEI
Sheffield Hallam University
Aims and objectives of the case study
The Pathways Mentoring Scheme was developed in 2014 to support academics in the Department of Psychology, Sociology and Politics at Sheffield Hallam University to identify and work towards achieving their career goals. Mentees are matched with a mentor based upon information they provide about their circumstances and aspirations. As an inclusive scheme, both males and females at all spinepoints are eligible to apply. This scheme was evaluated for two consecutive years (2014-15 and 2015-16) using a rigorous academic approach. Specifically, the evaluation examined mentees’ (n = 17) and mentors’ (n = 17) perceived success of the scheme in terms of whether it (a) helped them to identify/achieve their career goals, and (b) promoted improvements in psychological capital (self-efficacy, optimism, hope, resilience), self-esteem, job satisfaction, and job-related wellbeing (anxiety, contentment, enthusiasm).
These attributes were assessed at the pre, interim and post-stages of the scheme (September, January, and June) to explore whether mentors and mentees benefitted continuously or only at particular time points (e.g. pre > interim, or interim > post-stages). A non-applicant control group (n = 34) were also administered these measures at the same time points. This approach is consistent with the Leadership Foundation’s strategy Catalysing Change since it focused on evidencing ‘what works’ within the context of mentoring. Since much of the evaluation of the Pathways scheme is transferable, a Good Practice Guide which be developed which will outline the lessons learned and questions other HEIs will need to ask to inform the development of effective practices.
Approach to developing the case study and proposed outputs, outcomes and impact
Many mentoring studies have claimed that mentees have numerous career benefits “without examining whether or not non-mentored individuals had similar or different outcomes" (Underhill, 2006, p.294). In addition, many studies have used "psychometrically questionable measures", and have not considered the dyadic nature of mentoring (Allen, Eby, O’Brien & Lentz, 2008, p.344). The Pathways evaluation directly addressed these limitations. The unique selling point of this case study is therefore its academic rigour (the effects of mentoring were examined for mentors and mentees as well as a non-applicant control group using robust psychometric measures at multiple time points). This model can be applied by other HEIs and so a Good Practice Guide will be produced which sets out how to effectively evaluate a mentoring scheme using this approach.
Relevant to the LFHE’s call for collaborative activity and transferable outcomes is that the use of this approach by other HEIs could lead to the development of a large data set which could be used to provide themes for benchmarking which the whole sector could benefit from. The Pathways evaluation found that mentees reported an increase in self-esteem between the pre and interim stages of the scheme but a decline between the interim and post stages, which suggests that mentees may begin to question their confidence in putting their plans into practice, or feel concern over the time pressures involved in addition to the pressures of their workload.
If other HEIs find that wellbeing is a significant theme then this would raise questions about how HEIs can prepare mentees for feeling overwhelmed, and how they can support mentors to support/motivate their mentees. This could link to initiatives for promoting resilience in academic staff to aid their leadership and career building abilities.
Start/end dates
-
Development of the Good Practice Guide and contacting HEIs to determine their level of interest in the case study (March to April 2017);
-
Travel to HEIs to share the case study (April to May 2017);
-
Write-up of case study (June 2017).
