“One-to-one pupil mentoring”

Rationale

In September 2002 a “One-to-one pupil mentoring programme” was initiated at Forfar Academy in an attempt to effect positive behavioural changes in an identified group of disaffected pupils. It was hoped to successfully match identified pupils with volunteer (teacher) mentors.

Coordinators

• The programme was set up by a member of Angus Council’s ASPIRE Team. Within the school he took up the role of Training & Support Member of Staff (T&SMS).
• The DHT had overall responsibility for coordinating events. Her role was designated as Coordinating Member of Staff (CMS).


Duration of programme

• The programme was piloted over 3 phases, with each phase lasting 6 weeks. All phases were evaluated by the T&SMS.
• Mentors met with their mentees once a week for ½ an hour.
• It was agreed by the DHT to count each pupil contact as a ½ period “please take”.


Selection of staff

• All staff involved were volunteers.
• A total of 36 staff were trained as mentors.
• 28 mentors were used over the 3 phases.
• Staff could withdraw from the programme at anytime.


Selection of pupils

• All pupils involved in the programme “had to agree to any proposed match ups” – voluntary model.
• The initial list of pupils was generated by Guidance staff & SMT.
• Mentors then chose a pupil from the generated list.
• Mentoring took place on 49 occasions.
• This involved a total of 41 pupils.
• Pupils could withdraw from the programme at anytime.


Training of staff

• All mentors received 2 twilight training sessions.
• Several mentoring models were examined.
• Training sessions were informative and supportive in nature.


Content of training included :

• The aims and objectives of mentoring.
• Purpose of training.
• The process of selection and matching of pupils with mentors.
• Expected pupil contact time scales.
• Use of personal expertise – working at your own “level”.
• Requirements of staff in relation to the documentation and recording of meetings.
• Logistics involved in pupil interviews.
• Planning effective and problem-free pupil extractions.
• Advice on possible pupil disclosures / confidentiality / child protection issues.
• Liaising with other relevant staff (Guidance, SMT, CPDO, etc.)
• Accessing PPRs and other relevant information where appropriate.
• Possible materials / literature to be used in context.
• Counselling models (Solution focussed / 4 Stage Intervention).
• Termination of contact with pupils.
• Staff support mechanisms.
• Work load implications.
• General staff responsibilities.
• Protocols involved in one-to-one mentoring
• Any other general concerns.
Profile of mentors

• A broad spectrum of teachers were involved in the programme from trainee teachers to PT’s.
• Some had very little experience of mentoring.
• One mentor possessed a counselling certificate.


Evaluation

During the evaluation of each phase the following groups of people were asked to consider the effectiveness of the programme

• Mentors
• Mentees
• Subject teachers
• Parents


Results

• The majority of those involved in the one-to-one mentoring programme (Mentors, mentees, teaching staff and parents), viewed it as a successful initiative.

• Over the three phases of the programme, a total of (60%) of SUBJECT TEACHER comments indicated that the behaviour of those pupils involved had either “generally improved” or had shown “some improvement but [was] not consistent”.

• A significant minority of SUBJECT TEACHER comments (15%) suggested that the identified MENTEE had “never been a problem”.

• A relatively small number of SUBJECT TEACHER comments indicated that there had been “No improvement in behaviour” (22%), while (3%) a small number of comments assessed MENTEE behaviour as having “become worse.”

• A large majority of MENTOR comments (96%) suggested that the meetings with pupils were worthwhile in terms of improved pupil behaviour and, or, improved mentor / mentee relationships.

• A large majority of MENTEE comments (90%) indicated that the programme was “worthwhile.” A significant majority of MENTEE comments (69%) suggested that working with a MENTOR “helped [their] behaviour in the classroom.”

• Significantly, (65%) of MENTEES were able to identify specific behaviour management strategies that had been activated after discussion with MENTORS.

• A small number of MENTOR comments ( > 1%) were unsure if their input had helped improve their MENTEE’S behaviour.

• One area where the evaluation highlighted a weakness in the programme related to the collection of PARENTS’ / CARERS’ views. A more rigorous method of eliciting these views would undoubtedly assist in improving the credibility of future phases.

Contacts

An evaluation of the programme can be downloaded via the link on the right. Anyone wishing further information in relation to this programme should contact Barry Simmons (ASPIRE Co-ordinator) on 07917073389.