Guest Speaker session - Planning your end of session questionnaire

Having just posted my thoughts on evaluation forms to be used for my upcoming Guest Speaker session I could not park this topic and started to consider other elements of the evaluation other than just the format, the question types and some of the questions I would used.

I decided to take a step back and reflect on that last post and here are some of my thoughts regarding end of session evaluations , which may even be questions you should be posing yourself before you embark on creating your own evaluation forms for you own online sessions or interventions. 

• Why are you doing an end of session evaluation?
• Who will use the information and how will this information be used? 
• What specific questions will you ask?
• What should it look like ? Format and design
• Who will proof-read your evaluation before you distribute it?
• When and how will you distribute the evaluation form/questionnaire?
• How will you manage and analyze the data you have collected?
• What will you do with these results? 

This seems to be turning into consideration list or guideline, which anybody could work through before they embark on creating any type of evaluation and I had never really take then time to consider any of the above in much detail. The next question I posed myself is what else do I need to consider?   The following sprang to mind: 

• It must be easy to complete 
• I should always think about the audience
• Group questions together 
• Think about the length of the form  -  you will see in the examples I shared in my previous post that some of them are short and some can be quite lengthy 
• It's all about anonymity
• Provide a time frame for the participants to complete the evaluation 

This list of consideration could continue to grow, although what I hope to achieve is to collect REACTIONS! These could be reactions to several aspects of the Guest Speaker sessions and not to provide an exhaustive list I would like to received reactions to : 

• Content and Information provided 
• Materials shared 
• Activities 

As well as reactions to: 

• Pre-session information 
• Communication 
• Length, time 

When embarking on this project I did not envisage that I would take the time to consider these elements in so much detail, but it is clearly such an important aspect of the success of any intervention online and considering my chosen topic of Online Peer mentoring, where evaluating the success of the programme is crucial to its continuation. 

My Guest Speaker session - Question types and format

The blurb advertising my upcoming guest speaker session has been posted in WebCT the VLE ( Virtual  Learning Environment) and in the Edinburgh Napier University Exchange, which is also used at the University.  I never thought that I would be running a guest speaker session, although I believe that I have been able to source a lot of information over the last few weeks to provide the audience with an basic introduction to the concept of peer mentoring for online and distance learning courses and how it could be used, which is the first element of the project I am undertaking. 


In my previous post I had already discussed the topic of evaluation tools and provided some examples of tools used by other trainers, lecturers and educationalists. Whilst I was away on vacation I did not blog, but took the time to think about the questions that I would include in the post guest speaker session evaluation?  What about the number of questions and the question types?  Should the form only included the use of the  Likert Scale ?


How often should I make use of Dichotomous questions? Do simple Yes or No answers really provide you with valuable feedback?   I researched this further and looked at examples of evaluation forms that were used for online sessions, similar to the guest speaker session I am to run and it was clear that many evaluation forms include the following question with the following answer types:

•  Likert scale 
• Dichotomous questions
• Rating questions
• Open questions 

Although you many of you will have seen the following questions before I wanted to highlight some of the most pertinent questions that I would use 

• The pace of the webinar/broadcast was...
• What was the most useful information that you have learned during this webinar?
• What information will take away with you from this webinar?

If I had to pose one question, which would confirm whether my guest speaker session was a success or not, then it would be the following? 

• The webinar met my expectations based on how it was advertised? 

Whether there is a yes or no response in both cases this question would allow to ask the group to provide additional information as to how it met their expectations or not.  I found a selection of webinar evaluation forms that I would like to share with you.  Some of the questions I have chosen to share here are from the NACDA Webinar Evaluation Questions pdf, which I linked in this blog.

• NACDA Webinar Evaluation Questions
• Capita - Webinar Evaluation Form

I have chosen to share these two forms as they also highlight another consideration. What format? Online, PDF or a link to a survey product examples of which I shared with you in my last post. 

Preparing for my Guest Speaker session!

Blogging on the topic of peer mentoring over the past few weeks has already provided me with the elements to be incorporated into the webinar I will present on the 14^th March.  Luckily I am not too apprehensive about presenting my findings online having consulted customers on how to host and facilitate webinars during my time at WebEx, but I still have an entire activity plan created to ensure that it is a success.  

The success of any webinar is in the way you market it and this will be done by posting my blurb as an announcement to all cohorts on my course, but also to other cohorts who frequently use another university site- The Edinburgh Napier Education Exchange. This was already in my activity plan and I will also be running a discussion after my first webinar to understand what my peers think of the topic of peer mentoring. It is all about gather more information to support the proposal I plan to present during my 2^nd webinar.  I will use the Universities Online collaboration tool Elluminate, which I have some experience of using. Thankfully most of the online collaboration tools available have almost identical features sets.  It is how you use these features, which contributes to the success of any webinar regardless of the topic.

Yes, I have attempted to write a blurb and what do I hope to achieve by doing this? Well, I hope that it will spark some interest to join the session and not only take away something new about peer mentoring, but also contribute through feedback during  and post webinar to  a possible implementation of a mentoring scheme for cohorts on the MSc BOE.  I am not sure what to expect qua feedback, but will create moments in my webinar for responses and the next few days will be spent thinking about the questions to pose to the cohorts after they have attended my 60 minutes of fame. My 60 minutes of fame as a guest speaker will need to be evaluated and I am also looking at possible question to add to my evaluation questionnaire as well as thinking about the number of questions, the question types and how I will use this feedback.

There are a number of tools out there and I have already been toying with the idea of using one of the following:

• SurveyMonkey
• Google Forms

These are two tools that I already know and I will opt for a tool I am comfortable using for this first webinar, but one of the opportunities I could take advantage of is to try other tools, but rather than me searching for a suitable tool I decided to tap in to the Social Networking world and pose a question to one of the communities I am a member of on Yammer to see what a group of 1, 280 members has to say about evaluation tools.  The feedback brought with it an interesting mix of tools 

• Zoomerang 
• PollDaddy 

Through doing some research it was stated that the two were regarded as basic survey tools and SurveyMonkey also featured here too. Two other tools mentioned were regarded as lower class integrated tools: 

• Moodle 
• FormSite 

Evaluating the success of a mentoring scheme will include some type of evaluation and this is certainly feature in my list of recommendations to the programme leaders. Which tool is going to be the interesting question and challenge I now have. 

There is so much literature out there!

This is not a standard post, but one of the biggest challenges to date is finding good literature on the topic of peer mentoring and I felt that blogging about the literature so far will not only help the other cohort on the module that I am following, but also people interested in reading more about peer mentoring.


I am looking at peer mentoring from the perspective of online and distance learning education, but some of the literature listed below looks at this from other perspectives. It would be interesting to see if followers and readers of my blog can add to this list by commenting on this post: 

• Ashwin, P. (2003). Peer Support: Relations between the context, process and outcomes for the students who are supported. International Science, 31, 159-173.
• Griffin, B. (1995). Student Mentoring to Facilitate University Entry. Mentoring & Tutoring for Partnership in Learning, 3, 2, 21-24.
• Heirdsfield, A.M., Walker, S., Walsh, K., & Wilss, L. (2008). Peer mentoring for first year teacher education students: the mentors‟ experience. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 16, 2,109-124.
• Jacobi, M. (1991). Mentoring and Undergraduate Academic Success: A Literature Review. Review of Educational Research, 61, 4, 505-532.
• Klasen, N., & Clutterbuck, D. (2004). Implementing Mentoring Schemes: A practical guide to successful programs. Elsevier: London.
• Tabbron, A., Macaulay, S., & Cook, S. (1997). Making mentoring work. Training for Quality, 5, 1, 6-9.
• Treston, H. (1999). Mentoring: Making a positive difference for individuals and institutions. Innovations in Education and Training International.
• Treston, H. (1999). Peer Mentoring: Making a Difference at James Cook University, Cairns – It' s moments like these you need mentors. Innovations in Education and Training International, 36, 3, 236 – 243.

I chosen to share this selection on literature, as these sources have provided me with the most information to date. One of the biggest challenges is finding new literature on this topic. A lot of the literature is US centric, but still relevant. 

Benefits and problems of implementing peer mentoring revisited

My current research has brought me back to the topic of the benefits of peer mentoring, but also the problems, actually challenges establishments face when implementing a peer mentoring scheme.  Before I jump into this topic I also consider different approaches to mentoring and there are clearly a number of different approaches that can be taken:

1. Competence Based approach 
2. A Typology approach
3. Integrated approach

The first approach seemed pretty clear, and after further reading the second approach looks more at variety in the mentor role, but I was more interested in the last approach as this approach is a combination of four development approaches

1.    Coaching

2.    Counseling

3.    Networking/facilitation

4.    Guardianship

It is this final approach that appeals the most to me , an approach that I would associate with mentoring.  One of the other reasons that this final approach speaks to me is that it supports both the intellectual and emotional needs of a mentee a view that is also shared by (Klasen and Clutterback, 2004)

So, it is back to the benefits of mentoring schemes.   It is all about support.  According to Baginsky (2004) mentoring schemes allow the student mentor to take on the responsibility for and contributing to a supportive environment for the mentees. Support with online and a distance learning programme is detrimental for the success of a programme. We spent an entire module during my studies looking at Supporting Blended and Online learning! Mentoring schemes clearly provide social and development support for mentees (Jacobi, 1991). The word support returns here again!  I had already consider the idea that mentoring schemes seem to influence the attrition rates, especially on distance and online courses, but one final advantage links back to the approach I spoke about in an early post, the integrated approach.  There are clear mentee advantages that that this approach brings through the four development areas:

1. Identifying development needs, action planning and problem solving
2. Goal setting, motivation and satisfaction, networking opportunities
3. Personal change and time effectiveness

This is great for the mentee, but what about the mentor, who has invested their time to support the mentee in these development areas?  I believe it contributes to the entire learning experience and self-satisfaction

It was time to stop looking at the advantages and consider some of the problems (challenges) of implementing a mentoring scheme.  Before I am able to propose scheme it was time to understand the pitfalls.  When developing a training programme you set yourself some objectives.  If plan a meeting with a customer a set my own objectives for that meeting and clearly one of the challenges that can hinder the implementation of a peer mentoring scheme is the expectations and objectives are not clear and this for both the mentor and mentee.  

My first meeting with the BOE Programme leaders will be an objective setting meeting. What does the team hope to gain from this mentoring scheme and through the guest speaker sessions, what does the cohort perspective mentors see as the objectives of this programme. Aha, I already have a discussion question that I can pose to my cohort audience. I am sure that once we have a clear list of objectives for both mentor and mentee it will make it easier for both parties to accept this scheme.  I dread to think what would happen if we do not have this in place? Mentors forcing themselves on mentees, mentees feeling overpowered by the mentor presence, a situation that would bring with it unnecessary stress and possible failure.   I like lists of advantages and disadvantages here are a few of the disadvantages:

1. Lack of consistency in meetings
2. Absenteeism of the mentee
3. Frustration of mentor
4.  Lack of time
5. Pressure to take on the mentor role
6. Not taking feedback seriously
7. Not open to coaching
8. No perceived reward
9. Personality mismatches
10. Adequate support elsewhere, so no need for a mentoring scheme.

I will shortly be presenting my first guest speaker session where I will share much of the findings shared in these posts with my cohort audience.

For those interested in reading more on this topic here is a list of resources:

• Baginsky, M. (2004). Peer Support: Expectations and Realities. Pastoral Care.3-8.
• Klasen, N., & Clutterbuck, D. (2004). Implementing Mentoring Schemes: A practical guide to successful programs. Elsevier: London.
• Jacobi, M. (1991). Mentoring and Undergraduate Academic Success: A Literature Review. Review of Educational Research, 61, 4, 505-532.

Peer Mentoring and Learning Models

During a VOH session with a fellow cohort and one of our programme leaders we discussed the topic of peer mentoring, e mentoring and supplemental instruction and how they relate to certain learning models.  Julia one of programme leaders mentioned the Community of Inquiry Framework. I remembered that this framework provides a  set of guide lines to create effective learning communities in both online and blended learning environments (Garrison & Anderson, 2003; Garrison & Vaughan, 2008).  Looking at each of the elements of this framework: 

• Social presence 
• Cognitive presence 
• Teaching presence 

I started to think about where I could place peer mentoring within this whole educational experience?  my gut feeling went with Social presence. Why?  Well, if I consider that Garrison ( 2009) regard Social presence as   “the ability of participants to identify with the community (e.g., course of study), communicate purposefully in a trusting environment, and develop inter-personal relationships by way of projecting their individual personalities” (p. 352), then peer mentoring could also support this. 

I had already come to the conclusion in previous posts that mentoring provides a channel for  open communication and eventually group cohesion. It also provides mentees  with the opportunity to take part in open and purposeful communication and in turn this would be supported by the extra recognition, encouragement and interaction provided not only by the lecturer, but moreover the mentor. It seems that was also a view taken by Garrison and Anderson in 2003.  So, could this help resolve the problem of distance learning students feeling isolated and help universities retain student numbers. Yes! 

The term Cybergogy was dropped into the conversation during the VOH and if you are not sure what this is take a look at the following link: Cybergogy.   Firstly I have to thank one of our Programme leaders for introducing me to this model, a model that has come into light with the development in educational technology and its influence of teaching and learning.  When I looked at the Cybergogy model more closely and the elements that contribute to this model it seem quite easy for me to place peer mentoring within the framework. Where? Right in the middle. Peer mentoring is going to contribute to an engaged learning environment, through the interventions of the mentor whether this is ensuring that the mentee feels part of a community of engaged learners or whether the mentor can contribute this the engagement, but sharing their prior knowledge and experience with the mentee and final communication, which if you look at the model features in the three elements that contribute to " Engaged learning" . 

So why have a shared these two models in this post. It clear shows that peer mentoring fits into many of the learning models and contribute to them, whether this is to create a learning community or engaged learner.

Here are the resources which support this post: 

• Garrison, D. R. (2009). Communities of inquiry in online learning: Social, teaching and cognitive presence. In C. Howard et al. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of distance and online learning (2nd ed., pp. 352-355).  Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
• Garrison, D.R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-Learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. London: Routledge/Falmer.
• Cybergogy

It's all about Student retention

This post will concentrate on the benefits that peer mentoring bring to education establishment, having looking at the topic “what is a peer mentor?”  in a previous post  it was to understand the benefits that a peer mentoring scheme brings to any form of education establishment and specifically those offering online and distance learning programmes.

One of the first benefits I came across appeared in an  article written by Janet Truluck, an Academic Professional and Coordinator of an Online Master’s programme of Adult Education from the University of Georgia, USA. It is all about  STUDENT RETENTION.   She focused on the establishment of a Mentoring plan to improve retention in online graduate programmes. This is a theme that I had not even considered. Peer mentoring may resolve student retention.  What I was interested to hear was that retention issues were much greater in this format than in traditional campus based course.   I believe there are two challenges that programme leaders face:

• Maintaining contact with students
• Helping students overcome the feeling of isolation

This must be a challenge for most programme leaders, counteracted with the inclusion of VOH (Virtual Office Hours) and providing students pastoral support through a PDT (Personal Development Tutor). The question that needs to be asked is, is this enough to keep student churn down?   I remember when I first started the MSc degree  I am correctly reading the cohort was huge, although this number dwindled and there was really only a core group of students over with the first month of the trimester. Could we have saved a small percent of the drop outs by having a peer mentoring scheme?  So what are some of the reasons for student churn on online and distance learning programmes?

Online students face more distractions from work and family responsibilities which may account for a higher attrition rate than is seen in regular face to face classrooms. Some believe that distance education courses require significantly more time and effort on the part of faculty (Thompson, 2002)  Thinking about this even more,  a programme leader or programme teams  biggest challenges  are ensuring  that their course is  cognitively stimulating and that there is solid supportive environment in the virtual classroom (Wiesenberg 1999).  So distance education does bring with it a whole new set of issues to both instructors and learners with retention being at the forefront of concerns. A buddy scheme, mentoring programme is in many cases not on their list of priorities. It is challenges such as maintaining programme accreditation, creating stimulating modules to increase the appeal of their programme and ensuring that they are update to date on current trends that maybe push the topic of peer mentoring to one side.

For those of you interested in reading more Google the following.

Thompson, M. (2002, October). Faculty satisfaction. Sloan-C View: Perspectives in Quality Online Education, 1, 6-7.