does peer mentoring increase retention of the mentor

7/28/2019 Does Peer Mentoring Increase Retention of the Mentor

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/does-peer-mentoring-increase-retention-of-the-mentor 1/6

Session T1H

1-4244-1084-3/07/$25.00 ©2007 IEEE October 10 – 13, 2007, Milwaukee, WI

37th

ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference

T1H-14

Does Peer Mentoring Increase Retention Of The

Mentor?

Amy E. Monte 1, Kerri A. Sleeman 2, and Gretchen L. Hein 3

1 Amy E. Monte, Department of Engineering Fundamentals, Michigan Technological University, [email protected] Kerri A. Sleeman, Educational Opportunity, Michigan Technological University, [email protected] Gretchen L. Hein, Department of Engineering Fundamentals, Michigan Technological University, [email protected]

Abstract - The Michigan Tech’s GUIDE (Graduate and

Undergraduate Initiative for Development and

Enhancement) and ExSEL (Excelling in Science and

Engineering Learning) programs have been using peer

mentoring to help retain female and underrepresented

minority engineering students for over five years.

Mentoring has been a successful retention strategy. Most

mentoring programs measure success by looking at the

retention of the mentee. This paper will address the

question, “Does a peer mentoring program also increase

retention of the mentor?” To demonstrate how being a

peer mentor helps retain the students who are mentoring,

retention data will be analyzed and anecdotal evidence willbe presented. Survey results regarding how the mentoring

experience has helped the mentor academically, socially

and professionally will be provided. Additionally, peer

mentor performance data regarding job placement,

campus activities, and academic success will be examined

and compared to the Michigan Tech College of

Engineering (COE) average.

Index Terms – Student retention, Women, Minority, Peer mentoring.

INTRODUCTION

In the late 1990’s, Michigan Tech followed national trendsand experienced declines in first year retention. According to

ACT, Inc., the average national first year retention rate at four

year public institutions fell 2% from the early 1990’s to the

second half of the decade (75% to 73%) [1]. Michigan Techaveraged 87% in the first half of the 1990’s; the second half of

the decade saw the average retention drop to 80%. The

Michigan Tech College of Engineering (COE) did not escapethis trend. COE first year retention rates dropped from an

average of 90% to 84% over the same time period. Michigan

Tech also experienced small declines in second year retention

rates during this time. Additionally, enrollments of femalesand minorities at Michigan Tech and within the COE

remained constant, despite higher numbers of females andminorities attending college nationally.

Nationally, there is a gap between the retention rates of

minority and women students in engineering and non-minoritymale students. For example, in the 1990’s, the national

graduation rate for minority engineering students was

approximately 37%, while the non-minority graduation rate

was 68.3% [2].In the fall of 2006, Michigan Tech’s COE had

approximately 3,200 undergraduate students;

underrepresented minority students (African American, NativeAmerican, and Hispanic/Latino) and women represented 4%

and 16% of this population, respectively. The first year

retention rates for minorities and women engineering students

are the same as the COE average, 83%. The retention rates for

women and minority engineering students from sophomore

through senior year at Michigan Tech are lower than those for non-minority males, mirroring national trends [3].

In response, Michigan Tech initiated numerous partnerships, outreach efforts, and programs, in an effort to

attract and retain more students, especially those traditionally

underrepresented in engineering. Five years after the inception

of these programs, it is clear that many of these initiativeshave served their purpose, increasing student success,

retention, and underrepresented student enrollment.

MICHIGAN TECH SUPPORT SYSTEMS

As noted by Vincent Tinto [4] in 1993, institutions were beginning to appreciate the necessity of retaining as many

students as possible. The onslaught of research on successful

retention practices during this time enabled best practice

techniques to emerge. In 2004, ACT, Inc. published a studyexplaining that retention practices responsible for the greatest

contribution to retention in four-year public college’s fell into

three main categories: academic advising, first-year programs,

and learning support, confirming much of what Tinto reporteda decade earlier [1, 4].

Raymond Landis showed that implementation of a

successful minority retention program should includecollaborative learning communities, cohort scheduling for

first-year students, and a first-year seminar focusing on study

skills, time management, student organization involvement,

and faculty and peer interaction [5]. Also, looking at minorityretention in 2005, Gaither noted that educational programs and

institutions need to teach students to cope with racism, providementoring programs, promote community involvement, and

improve the environment for minority students [6]. The

National Resource Center For The First Year Experience &Students In Transition includes learning communities,

mentoring programs, thematically linked courses, validating

in- and out-of-class environments, and connections among



Session T1H


37th


T1H-15

faculty, students, and peers as key programs to foster student

retention [7].Michigan Tech has an extensive history of student

outreach and success initiatives including: learning centers,

cohort scheduling of first year engineering students, andimproved communication training for academic advisors and

instructors. This paper will focus on two initiatives: GUIDE

(Graduate and Undergraduate Initiative for Development and

Enhancement) and ExSEL (Excelling in Science andEngineering Learning). Since there is no control group of students with similar demographics, the COE average will be

used as a comparison group. When applicable, sophomore

students will be compared to the mentors in the above programs.

GUIDE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

In 2002, Michigan Tech received a National ScienceFoundation Grant for the GUIDE program. This scholarship

program was implemented to support first and second year

engineering students through mentoring and guidance. Over

the past five years, GUIDE has awarded scholarships to 59

different undergraduate students. The program focuses onfunding students who not only are underrepresented in

engineering but also do not typically qualify for academic

scholarships due to high school performance and/or highschool coursework [8].

Students are actively recruited for the program through

high school recruiter visits, Michigan Tech website

advertisements, and direct mailings to targeted students.Students are referred to the program from the Michigan Tech

Financial Aid Office, ExSEL Program staff and engineering

faculty [9].

Each year three groups of students participate in GUIDE:first year students (undergraduate student mentee), second

year students (undergraduate student mentor), and graduatestudents (graduate student mentor). The first year, second year and graduate students are grouped into mentor teams, where

each first year student has a second year and graduate mentor.

The graduate mentor acts as team leader and mentor to both

the first year mentee and second year mentor. The

undergraduate student mentees that successfully completetheir first year become undergraduate mentors for new first

year students. Because the graduate mentors typically have

earned their bachelor degree from another university, the

undergraduate mentors bring campus knowledge to the team.All mentors are required to attend a training session at the

beginning of each year. This provides them with the skills

needed to help the first year mentees during the transition touniversity life.

Throughout the school year, the undergraduates

participating in the program meet twice a week with their

graduate mentors. The mentors informally monitor studentacademic progress, and assist the students in the successful

completion of their courses.

As part of the GUIDE program, all scholars attend weekly

GUIDE Seminars throughout each semester. Topics include:engineering career options, campus resources, study skills,

career development (i.e. resume writing, mock interviews,

how to get a co-op/internship, study abroad, undergraduateresearch), and team building activities. To help improve these

seminars, students participate in semester reviews as well as

anonymous surveys [10]. Students also attend the fall andspring on-campus career fairs where they meet with

prospective employers and submit their resumes. In addition,

the students are required to meet with their academic advisor

to create a graduation plan, maintain a minimum GPA of 2.5,and participate in a professional organization.

The GUIDE program has helped retain underprepared

students and helped them undertake a career in engineering.

The benefits of this program are manifested by increasedstudent retention, higher GPAs, and greater participation in

research, study abroad, co-ops, internship and campus

activities [9].As part of the GUIDE program, the graduate mentors

have presented papers regarding the mentoring aspects of the

program at national conferences [11, 12]. In 2003, Touton

conducted a survey and found that:

• The undergraduates felt:

• Interacting with their mentor was beneficial.• Having a mentor made it easier to come to college

and helped them focus on the future rather than just“fitting in” [11].

• The undergraduate mentors felt:

• Being mentors sharpened their listening skills.

• One student commented “I am more focused on the

first year student as opposed to having all the

attention on me” [11].

In 2005, Marszalek completed another GUIDE survey [12].

This survey found that the overall satisfaction with the

GUIDE program was high, scoring 3.8 out of 5.0 and the

satisfaction with mentors was even higher, scoring 4.1 out of 5.0. In addition, 67% of the GUIDE scholars felt that the

biggest benefit of the program was the help it provided in

adjusting to life at college [12].

GUIDE MENTOR R ETENTION AND ACADEMIC SUCCESS

Over the five-year period of the program, GUIDE has

maintained an overall participant retention rate of 86%.

Twelve students have left the GUIDE program for various

reasons. Five have left GUIDE but remained at Michigan Techin math/science/engineering fields or in other degree

programs. Since they are still at the university, these students

are considered retained. GUIDE students have left Michigan

Tech for several reasons: experienced homesickness, wantedto live in larger city, joined the national guard, and did not

want to study engineering, to name a few. Of the eight GUIDE

students that have left Michigan Tech, only one was anundergraduate mentor resulting in a mentor retention rate of

97%.

The GUIDE undergraduate mentors, typically sophomore

students, have been active academically as well as in the area

of career development. The GPAs for these students haveconsistently exceeded the COE average (Table I).



Session T1H


37th


T1H-16

TABLE I

GUIDE MENTOR AND COE U NDERGRADUATE DATA [9]

Average Cumulative GPA after Spring Semester

Year GUIDE Sophomore COE

2002-3 3.36 3.00

2003-4 3.30 3.08

2004-5 3.32 3.05

2005-6 3.37 3.03

The GUIDE undergraduate mentors have been activelyworking towards their career goals (Table II). Anecdotal

evidence suggests this is a result of the GUIDE peer

mentoring and seminars where topics regarding co-ops, studyabroad and Michigan Tech Enterprise are introduced and

encouraged. The Michigan Tech Enterprise program consists

of student teams that operate like companies to solve real-

world problems (www.enterprise.mtu.edu). Students typically

join an enterprise their sophomore year and participate/work in the enterprise through their senior year. It serves as their

senior design project as well as developing team, leadership

and management skills. The GUIDE mentors have actively

sought and obtained co-ops at more than twice the rate of the

Michigan Tech COE average and three times the rate of thenational average (9%) [13]. GUIDE mentors participated inthe Michigan Tech Study Abroad and Enterprise programs at

eight times the rate of the Michigan Tech COE average.

TABLE II

U NDERGRADUATE MENTOR CAREER DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES

Career Development Activity GUIDE COE

Co-op (National Average: 9%) 28%* 12%

Study Abroad 16%* 2%

Enterprise 31% 10%

* Data does not include current GUIDE mentors; they are noteligible to participate in the activity and be a mentor at the

same time.

Over the five years of GUIDE there have been 35undergraduate mentors. Table III includes the demographics

of these students. 26% were ethnic minority and 74% were

female compared to the COE percentages of 4% and 18%,respectively. The mentors, typically sophomore engineering

students, have a cumulative GPA of 3.11 while comparable

students in the COE have an average cumulative GPA of 3.04.

All mentors started in an engineering field and six of those

students left engineering while only one student left MichiganTech. This results in a retention rate of 97% while the COE

has a 88% retention rate for sophomore students. Since the

program has been active for five years and undergraduatementors are typically sophomore students, only six (17%)

have graduated.

TABLE III

OVERALL GUIDE MENTOR DEMOGRAPHICS FALL 2002-FALL 2006

GUIDE COE

Number of Students 35 --

Ethnic Minority 26% 4%

Female 74% 18%

Cumulative GPA 3.11 3.04*

Engineering Field 83% --

Retention 97% 88%*

Graduated 17% --

* Data for sophomore engineering students.

EXSEL PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Developed in 2000, the ExSEL Program is a partnership

between the Michigan Tech Department of EducationalOpportunity and the State of Michigan’s King-Chávez-Parks

Initiative. The program serves approximately 150 students

each year, focusing on academically or economicallydisadvantaged students but involving students of a wide range

of preparedness. While originally intended solely for this

target group, ExSEL actually provides support for a wide

variety of students. By stressing the importance of utilizingsupport regardless of the academic background, ExSEL

escapes the stigma often associated with student support

initiatives. Students are recruited in a similar fashion to

GUIDE, utilizing referrals from across campus as well asoutside organization partnerships. ExSEL also contacts

incoming first-year students and parents to make them aware

of the opportunity; parents are often surprised and pleased tolearn this type of support structure exists at Michigan Tech.

ExSEL’s strategy combines coursework, progress

monitoring, peer mentoring, and personalized services to help

assure the success of student participants.Participants are required to enroll in the Frameworks for

Success (UN1000) course, which focuses on the tools

necessary for first-year success. It is a one credit gradedcourse which includes topics such as: time management,

academic skill development, and introduction to campusresources. ExSEL students build relationships with the ExSEL

staff and mentors during this class, which opens the door for

future discussions if the student begins to struggle [14].Progress monitoring is a critical component of the

program. A contract, including a grade release, is completed

before the student enters the program. This release allows for

review of grades twice early in the semester as well asallowing ExSEL staff to discuss student progress with

parents/guardians. Therefore, ExSEL has two opportunities to

contact students who may be struggling and direct them

toward assistance before their academic situation becomesirreversible. The ExSEL program offers multiple options for

support, including pairing students with an ExSEL program

mentor, referring them to campus resources or study sessionsand having one-on-one meetings to discuss their current

course of action for achieving success.

The peer mentoring portion of the program involves both

volunteer and paid mentors and tutors. The mentors’ primaryresponsibilities are to provide direction, encouragement, and

academic support (as necessary). Partnerships with student



Session T1H


37th


T1H-17

organizations provide collaborative opportunities for mentors

and mentees. All mentors are active in some organization or group on-campus, and referrals for future mentors generally

come from current mentors. Mentors are required to attend a

mentor training at the beginning of the year. They havemeetings throughout the year with the ExSEL coordinators.

This helps keep the mentors on track and the coordinators up

to date on the mentees. In addition, there are ExSEL social

events and professional seminars that the mentors and menteesare invited to attend.

ExSEL’s strategy for improving student performance is

through the use of in-place campus resources. This includes

utilizing established resources including the Outreach andMultiEthnic Program Coordinators, academic learning centers,

student organizations, Counseling Services, and Michigan

Tech’s Office of First-Year Programs. For example, if astudent can receive adequate tutoring from a learning center

instead of from an ExSEL peer mentor, it frees that peer

mentor to tutor students for whom the learning centers are not

a good fit.

Honored as a Noel-Levitz Retention Excellence Award

winner in 2006, ExSEL has experienced considerableevidence of success since program inception (Fall 2000). Most

noteworthy is the increased ExSEL student retention rates.

ExSEL Engineering student retention increased over 28%,while the COE first-year retention rates has experienced 3.5%

increase during the same time [14]. Additionally, ExSEL

students have experienced increased semester GPAs, whilefewer are on academic probation and more are on the Dean’s

List during their first year [14].

EXSEL MENTOR R ETENTION AND ACADEMIC SUCCESS

The mentors of the ExSEL students have grade benefits (TableIV). The first and second year students’ GPAs are greater for

the ExSEL mentors than for the COE average during the sametime period. However, the 3rd, 4th year and cumulative GPAsare lower for the ExSEL mentors than for the COE average.

TABLE IV

EXSEL MENTOR AND COLLEGE OF E NGINEERING U NDERGRADUATE DATA

Average Cumulative GPA after Spring Semester

2002-2006

Year in

School

ExSEL COE

1st 3.26 2.98

2nd 3.14 3.04

3rd 2.98 3.08

4th 2.99 3.16

Cumulative 3.01 3.10

ExSEL has provided mentors for students since 2002.

During this time there have been 42 undergraduate mentors;demographics for these students can be found in Table V. 79%

of the students were from an ethnic minority group and 50%

of the students were female, while the COE percentage of ethnic minority and female students are 4% and 18%,

respectively. Most of the mentors were in an engineering field.

As seen in Table IV, the 3rd, 4th year and cumulative GPAs are

lower for the ExSEL mentors than for the COE average. This

may be due to the higher retention of students who without

ExSEL would have left the university (Table V). In total, threeExSEL mentors left Michigan Tech which is equivalent to a

93% retention rate compared to the COE average of 88%.

During the five years the program has been supportingmentors, thirteen mentors (31%) have graduated.

TABLE V

OVERALL EXSEL MENTOR DEMOGRAPHICS FALL 2002-FALL 2006

ExSEL COE

Number of Students 42 --

Ethnic Minority 79% 4%

Female 50% 18%

Cumulative GPA 3.01 3.10*

Engineering Field 86% --

Retention 93% 88%**

Graduated 31% --

* Data for all undergraduate engineering students.

** Since most mentors are Sophomores or older, retention data

for the Sophomore cohort is used as a comparison.

MENTOR SURVEY R ESULTS

In the spring of 2007, a student survey was sent to all GUIDEand ExSEL mentors with a 40% and a 36% response rate,

respectively. The GUIDE and ExSEL mentors responded

positively to career building activities such as co-op,internship, research, study abroad, campus employment, and

professional organizations (Table VI). GUIDE and ExSEL

mentors participated in co-ops at two and six times the rate of

the COE average, respectively. They participated in theMichigan Tech Study Abroad program eight times more than

the COE average. Twice as many were employed on-campus

as the COE average. In addition, many of the mentors participated in internships, undergraduate research and most of

the mentors were active in professional organizations. This

data is not collected by the University and therefore can not becompared to students in the COE.

TABLE VIMENTOR SURVEY R ESULTS R EGARDING CAREER ACTIVITIES

GUIDE ExSEL COE

Survey Responses 14 15 --

Total Students 35 42 --

Response Rate 40% 36% --

Coop 21% (28%*) 60% 12%

Internships 43% 60% NA

Undergraduate Research 43% 27% NA

Study Abroad 21% (16%*) 13% 2%

Employed on Campus 79% 93% 45%

Professional Organizations 93% 93% NA

* Data from university data including all GUIDE mentors. NA = not available

The survey asked questions regarding the mentors’

responsibilities. Responsibilities of being a mentor can vary

from student to student depending on the mentee’s needs.Table VII shows how the mentor and mentee spent their time

together. GUIDE mentors spent time participating in informalas well as program structured social activities, while ExSEL



Session T1H


37th


T1H-18

mentors used the phone or e-mail to communicate with their

mentees and spent time tutoring their mentees.

TABLE VII

MENTOR SURVEY R ESULTS R EGARDING MENTORING ACTIVITY

PARTICIPATION RATES

Mentoring Activities GUIDE ExSEL

Informal social activities 93% 60%

Phone or e-mail conversations 57% 80%

Studying together 57% 67%Program sponsored social activities 93% 27%

Tutoring 50% 87%

In addition to improved GPA and retention, the results of

this study show there are many other benefits to being amentor. From the survey, approximately 80% of both mentor

groups felt the biggest benefit was personal satisfaction from

helping others (Table VIII). Most of the ExSEL mentors andhalf of the GUIDE mentors felt that the mentoring improved

their communication skills. Half of GUIDE mentors stated

they became more aware of campus resources and obtainedsupport from the program advisors.

TABLE VIII

MENTOR SURVEY R ESULTS R EGARDING PERCENT R EPORTING POSITIVE

PERSONAL BENEFITS

Benefit to Mentor GUIDE ExSEL

Communication skills 50% 73%

ExSEL or GUIDE organized events 43% 20%

Networking 43% 47%

Personal satisfaction from helping others 79% 80%

Campus resource awareness 50% 27%

Self confidence 36% 47%

Support from ExSEL or GUIDE program advisors 64% 33%

Time management 36% 33%

When asked, “If a friend was thinking about being amentor, what would you tell him/her?”, some mentors

responded as follows:

• The ExSEL program is an excellent opportunity to test

leadership and communication skills in a positive andreinforcing manner.

• Being a mentor is a great opportunity to be supportive toincoming students and help them succeed through their

first year of school. Be prepared to work with students of

all different backgrounds and personalities. It will teachyou interpersonal skills.

• Two words: "Do It"

• I would encourage anyone to be a mentor. It has been agreat experience helping out a freshman student. I have

learned so much about myself over the last few years and

it has been nice to share some of my own experienceswith someone.

When asked if they would be a mentor again, only one of

the 29 students responding to the survey indicated that he/she

would not. This student stated, “I felt unconnected once Imade my decision to switch out of engineering …I can put my

skills to work in areas where I may have a better ability to be

of service.” From this student’s comment it is evident that

he/she is still interested in “service” just not mentoring

engineering students. Most students commented on wanting tohelp others as the main reason to be a mentor. One student’s

mentored because “I remember coming to school here, and my

brother was a mentor to me. I know not everyone has that, so Iwant to help out.” Overall, the survey results indicate the

positive experiences the mentors had while participating in

their mentoring program.

CONCLUSION

Both GUIDE and ExSEL were developed to improve first year engineering retention rates of the mentee students. This study

shows that there is a secondary benefit of these programs; theyhave also improved retention of the mentors. In addition to

improved retention, most of the mentors have higher GPAs as

well as obtained job experience though co-ops, internships,

undergraduate research and participation in the Michigan TechEnterprise program.

The best practice techniques intended to help the first year

students, have also helped the mentors. These include:

• creating faculty mentoring relationships,

• providing both academic and non-academic advising,• financial assistance,

• promoting and supporting career development

opportunities,

• development of campus community, and

• knowledge of campus resources.

In GUIDE and ExSEL the mentors have benefited from

both the social and the informational aspects of the programs.

The programs provided the mentors with opportunities for

involvement as well as knowledge of campus resources and

career development through personal contact with faculty andstaff across campus.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

We would like to thank the Michigan Tech College of

Engineering, Harold Meese Career Center, Financial Aid

Office and Department of Educational Opportunity for

supporting these programs and working with the program

advisors. We thank the King-Chávez-Parks Initiative and the National Science Foundation for funding these programs that

have helped many students at Michigan Tech. This material is

based upon work supported by the National ScienceFoundation under Grant No. 0220500. Any opinions, findings,

and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this

material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect

the views of the National Science Foundation.

R EFERENCES

[1] Habley, W, R, McClanahan, R, “What Works in Student Retention?

Four- Year Public Colleges”, ACT, Inc., 2004.

[2] Georges, A, “Keeping What We’ve Got: Effective Strategies for

Retaining Minority Freshmen in Engineering”, The National Action

Council for Minorities in Engineering Research Letter , Vol 9, No 1.,

September 1999.



Session T1H


37th


T1H-19

[3] Anderson, C, “Michigan Technological University, 2000-2001 Select

Student Support Services Project RISE Proposal”. Grant Period: October

1, 2000 through September 30, 2001, Senate Bill No. 967 of 2000.

[4] Tinto, V, Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition, Second Edition. The University of Chicago Press, 1993.

[5] Landis, R, B, “Retention By Design: Achieving Excellence in MinorityEngineering Education”, The National Action Council for Minorities in

Engineering , California State University, Office of the Chancellor,

2005.

[6] Gaither, G, H, “Minority Retention: What Works?: New Directions for

Institutional Research”, Wiley Periodicals, Inc., No 125., April 2005.

[7] Rendon, L, I, Garcia, M, Person, D, (Eds.) “Transforming the first year

experience for students of Color”, National Resource Center For The First-Year Experience & Students In Transition, Monograph No 38.,

Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina, 2004.

[8] Monte, A, E, Hein, G, L, “An Innovative Program to Support

Undergraduate Engineering Students from Underrepresented Groups”, Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education

Annual Conference & Exposition, June 2004.

[9] Hein, G, L, Monte, A, E, Sleeman, K, A, "Four Years of Helping

Underrepresented Students Succeed in Engineering", Proceedings of the

2007 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference

& Exposition, In Press, June 2007.

[10] Monte, A, E, Hein, G, L, “GUIDE: Helping Underrepresented Students

Succeed in Engineering”, Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, June 2005.

[11] Touton, S, H, McDonald, C, P, Hein G, L, Monte, A, E, “Engineers Need Mentors Too!”, Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for

Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, June 2004.

[12]

Marszalek, M, A, Snauffer, A, M, Good, S, P, Hein, G, L, Monte, A, E,“Mentors Improve the College Experience of Engineering

Undergraduates”, Proceedings of the 2005 35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in

Education Conference, Session F2G (http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie2005).

[13] Beausoleil, G, “University Career Center Cooperative EducationProgram 2002-2003 Annual Report”, Michigan Technological

University, Michigan, 2003.

[14] Sleeman, K, A, Hein, G, L, Monte, A, E, "Programs and Partnerships

that Impact Retention", Proceedings of the 2007 Women in Engineering

Programs and Advocates Network Annual Conference, In Press (#0018),

2007.

does peer mentoring increase retention of the mentor

Documents