Wednesday, 4 April 2012

Evaluation for Training Sessions: 30th March and 3rd April 2012

Kirk, thanks for your reply and feedback on our work. it has really helped having another perspective for some constructive criticism. I hope your managing to balance your hectic work life! I look forward to seeing you again in July.
The following is an evaluation I have created over the first two training sessions, which I think went relatively well,


30th March

I feel the first academic mentor session went well. I think that it was inevitable to have some areas that we needed to improve on or include. A particular thing I found interesting was the concern over mentors recruiting their mentees, which is something we never really considered. I think for future sessions we must consider addressing these issues:

-         Better time management and structure, we need to plan out when and who’s saying what especially when we add slides because no one will know when their slide comes up.
-         Less pressure on Luke to do most of the speaking.
-        Clearer advice and guidelines on recruiting mentees, and confirmation of every mentors staff partner.
-        Group Brainstorming session: instead of writing down their ideas on paper, get them to present their thoughts in front of the group. .
-        Icebreaker activity – sit with everyone, interact with the group more.
-        Confirm that both student services AND Centre for Academic Success will be turning up.
-        More information about the blog
-        I think their needs to perhaps be apart where mentors are given advice or techniques to draw in mentees especially because it is a difficult time around exam period.
-         My confidence in speaking to a large group made me struggle to express myself clearly.

I do feel that several aspects of the induction went according to plan:
-        The introduction helped to settle the awkward atmosphere of no-one knowing each other.
-        Mentors were clearly sold the high number of benefits that being involved in the scheme can offer.
-       Mentors were clearly addressed on the ways in which they must submit their work and be assessed.
-        Mentors were provided with techniques to recognise their skills and use them for employment purposes.
-         They knew how they would be rewarded e.g. mentor of the week and mentor of the year. Good incentive.
-       We worked well as a team, helping each other out when we struggled.
-        We improvised well when CAS didn’t show up. Perhaps we could get the young lady who worked there to turn up and say a few words instead, she might be more reliable.
-      I think the videos are a good touch, because it makes the mentors relax in a present, like we are actually human instead of presenting robots!!

3rd April

This session I felt went remarkably better than the first, I think the smaller group number and more intimate and in depth ice breaker and brainstorming activity settled not only the mentors but the three of us presenting also. A notable difference was the quality of our presentation, since we evaluated our first session and added bits in that we needed after it, Such as tips for the mentees on what to do next.
Several problems again came up:

-         Mentors still were not clear on who their member of staff was that was supervising them.
-         Mentors still weren’t sure on how to recruit their mentees, their biggest worry. Perhaps include slides on - what they need to do to recruit their mentees.
-         Need ss and CAS to be committed and turn up to every session to do their bit.
-         Mentors, some in particular were not clear on what to do in their sessions, e.g. some said things such as talking about football. Perhaps a section on what to do in their sessions.
-        Maybe take some pressure of Luke, since he was doing a lot of the talking, however he is the best speaker and giving him the key point s to do aided in the clear expression of what the mentors needed to be doing.
-        Again ss and CAS were not there, I think their presence is vital for the mentors.

There were also many things that were improved from the first:
-        Mentors were given advice on ‘what is next’ after the session, so they had steps in which to prepare. -- ---- Advice such as networking themselves in lectures was given.
-         his also helped to recruit the mentees, which again was an issue that was raised.
-        We were able to express what we meant clearly, because it was a more comfortable atmosphere.
-        The group brainstorm and icebreaker were a lot better. More quality, the icebreaker activity with the pitch filming was a good idea, which we can use as a source of evaluation for the mentors.
-        The brainstorming session was also good, since we already knew the benefits we sat with the group and helped them come up with the ideas, instead of them just thinking of stuff by themselves and presenting it, followed by us asserting it again, saved time.

Summary
Overall I do feel that the sessions went well. The mentors were given a clear indication of what is expected of them throughout the scheme.  I think the introduction activities are a key part of the training session because they create an active atmosphere, which is beneficial for when we talk for a longer period of time they will be more likely to listen after their brains are engaged.  I think just in case the mentors need re-assurance we should make our presentation available online, since a hard copy of the handbook may be forgotten if the mentor ever goes to a session, whereas if the mentor is at University running a session the internet is readily available. I think the main thing that needs to be addressed is how the mentors gain mentees, since there is a lot of work still to be done on their side there may be a number of things we can to help to help matters improve and quicken. There was an idea in the conference at York to let mentees also sign up to the scheme, and from that collection they would be asked to take a survey. This would contain information on their hobbies, religion, age, gender. These would be allocated to the mentors, who would also fill out their own survey with the same information being asked of them. A particular component we were told that was vital was age, since younger people felt intimidated by people that were significantly older, and people that were mature students felt a low level of connection with younger people. Who most likely would not have kids etc.? I think this is a possible solution for mentors to gain mentees, to let mentees sign up voluntarily who wanted to be mentored and then were allocated to our mentors. As discussed with Melissa, we felt that in regards to mentors and their lack of knowledge over their staff supervisors, which they should perhaps make their own efforts to gain contact. Since it requires minimal effort and will show signs of initiative and passion towards carrying out the project. I also feel that maybe I and Melissa should talk for 5 minutes or so instead of Luke talking for long periods of time, just for an equal balance of pressure on us all.

No comments:

Post a Comment