Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Foundations for Guiding the Mentors

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The STEM Pathway and Student Retention

  • 269 Accesses

Abstract

The mentor class is designed to have the greatest impact on the freshmen while giving the mentors just-in-time training regarding what they will be involved in during the coming week. The fall semester is the ideal time for the freshmen seminar course because most freshmen are just starting at the university, and this semester has the largest number of incoming freshmen. The mentors are required to enroll in the mentor course but also must be able to attend the freshmen seminar class. The purpose is for the mentors to be exposed to the practical laboratory experience when the mentors engage in what they have been trained in the previous week. The first meeting is the pre-semester meeting two days before the semester, where we provide information about icebreakers and give the mentors time to engage in role playing with their emeriti mentors. The next week, they attend and practice in the freshmen seminar class. A variety of icebreakers are selected and practiced through role playing in the mentor group. The mentors are encouraged to initiate icebreakers in the first meeting. They can select from several options listed in Appendix A.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Allen, D., & Tanner, K. (2005). Approaches to biology teaching and learning: From a scholarly approach to teaching to the scholarship of teaching. Cell Biology Education, 4, 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armbruster, P., Patel, M., Johnson, E., & Weiss, M. (2009). Active learning and student-centered pedagogy improve student attitudes and performance in introductory biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 8(3), 203–213. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.09-03-0025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barr, R., & Tagg, J. (1995). From Teaching to Learning — A New Paradigm For Undergraduate Education. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 27(6), 12–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.1995.10544672.

  • Borda, E., Schumacher, E., Hanley, D., Geary, E., Warren, S., Ipsen, C., & Stredicke, L. (2020). Initial implementation of active learning strategies in large, lecture STEM courses: lessons learned from a multi-institutional, interdisciplinary STEM faculty development program. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-0203-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D. J., & Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia. (1985). Problem-based learning in education for the professions. Sydney: HERDSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D., & Feletti, G. (1991). The challenge of problem-based learning. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, L., Culhane, K., Park, A., & Kucera, K. (2019). Course-based prefaculty training program introduces instructional methods, increases instructor self-efficacy, and promotes professional development. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 48(2), 156–167. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandsford, J. D., Pellegrino, J. W., Donovan, S., & National Research Council (U.S.). (1999). How people learn: Bridging research and practice. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colomer, J., Serra, T., Cañabate, D., & Bubnys, R. (2020). Reflective learning in higher education: Active methodologies for transformative practices. Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 12(9), 3827. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corrêa, B. B., Pinto, P. R., & Rendas, A. B. (2003). How do learning issues relate with content in a problem-based learning pathophysiology course? Advances in Physiology Education, 27(2), 62–69. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00021.2002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denial, A., Schreiner, L., Kammer, R., & Kim, Y. K. (2015). The validation of the active learning in health professions scale. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 9(1), 58–72. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grabinger, S., Dunlap, J. C., & Duffield, J. A. (2011, 1997). Rich environments for active learning in action: Problem-based learning. Research in Learning Technology, 5(2). doi:https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v5i2.10558

  • Holland, J. M., Major, D. A., & Orvis, K. A. (2012). Understanding how peer mentoring and capitalization link STEM students to their majors. Career Development Quarterly, 60(4), 343–354. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2012.00026.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, A., Laursen, S. L., & Seymour, E. (2007). Becoming a scientist: The role of undergraduate research in students’ cognitive, personal, and professional development. Science Education, 91, 36–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacob, S. A., Khan, T. M., Pusparajah, P., Velu, S. S., Lee, L. H., & Davey, T. M. (2016). Students’ perceived predictors of an effective active learning/problem-based learning session: A pilot study. Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research, 46(1), 42–46. https://doi.org/10.1002/jppr.1150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge, T. A., & Hurst, C. (2007). Capitalizing on one’s advantages: Role of core self-evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(5), 1212–1227. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiyama, J. M., Luca, S. G., Raucci, M., & Crump-Owens, S. (2014). A cycle of retention: Peer mentors’ accounts of active engagement and agency. College Student Affairs Journal, 32(1), 81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lake, P. F. (1999). The rise of duty and the fall of in loco parentis and other protective tort doctrines in higher education law. Missouri Law Review, 64, 1. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/molr64&i=11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumpe, A. T., & Staver, J. R. (1995). Peer collaboration and concept development: Learning about photosynthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 32(1), 71–98. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660320108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michael, J. (2006). Where’s the evidence that active learning works? American Journal of Physiology. Advances in Physiology Education, 30(4), 159–167. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00053.2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michael, J. A., & Modell, H. I. (2003). Active learning in secondary and college science classrooms: A working model for helping the learner to learn. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mierson, S. (1998). A problem-based learning course in physiology for undergraduate and graduate basic science students. Advances in Physiology Education, 275(6), S16. https://doi.org/10.1152/advances.1998.275.6.S16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, S., & Liu, M. (2003). Teachers’ beliefs about issues in the implementation of a student-centered learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(2), 57. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawson, R. E., & Quinlan, K. M. (2002). Evaluation of a computer-based approach to teaching acid/base physiology. Advances in Physiology Education, 26(2), 85–97. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00042.2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35(5), 31–38. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/44428296?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, H. G., Cohen-Schotanus, J., & Arends, L. R. (2009). Impact of problem-based, active learning on graduation rates for 10 generations of Dutch medical students. Medical Education, 43(3), 211–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03287.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spronken-Smith, R., & Harland, T. (2009). Learning to teach with problem-based learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 10(2), 138–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787409104787.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svinicki, M. D. (1998). A theoretical foundation for discovery learning. Advances in Physiology Education, 275(6), S4. https://doi.org/10.1152/advances.1998.275.6.S4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United States. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: the imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: The National Commission on Excellence in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y. (2020). Design-based research on integrating learning technology tools into higher education classes to achieve active learning. Computers in Education, 156, 103935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wawrzynski, M. R., Jessup-Anger, J. E., & Yao, C. W. (2011). Enhancing undergraduate education: Examining faculty experiences during their first year in a residential college and exploring the implications for student affairs professionals. The Journal of College and University Student Housing, 38(1), 56–69. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=66237388&site=ehost-live.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, M. D., & Dodge, B. J. (1992). Tracking and analyzing learner-computer Interaction. Paper presented at the 1992 National Conference of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P. J. (2011). STEM education: Proceed with caution. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 16(1), 26–35. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ916494.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA

    Carita Harrell

  2. Cell and Molecular Biosciences, School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA

    David G. Capco

Authors
  1. Carita Harrell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David G. Capco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Harrell, C., Capco, D.G. (2021). Foundations for Guiding the Mentors. In: The STEM Pathway and Student Retention. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65865-6_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65865-6_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-65863-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-65865-6

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation