As the University of Glasgow’s Thesis Mentoring Programme approaches it’s fourth birthday, and we approach the midpoint of it’s eighth round, it seems high time to reflect on the journey the programme has made to date.
What is Thesis Mentoring?
Thesis Mentoring pairs PGR Thesis Writers (Mentees) with an experienced Thesis Mentor. Mentors are Research Staff and Research Professionals at UofG with doctorates. The programme provides training for all participants and pairs mentors and mentees together to have conversations focused on building healthy writing habits and practices and to process the emotional challenges they may face as they approach writing their PhD thesis. Pairs are matched for 16-weeks and meet approximately eight times over this period. The programme runs twice each year, and so a new intake is never too far down the line for Thesis Writers, with new mentees and mentors joining every six months. All programme materials are open access: Information for Mentors, Information for Mentees.
It’s now an award-winning programme
Earlier this year, Thesis Mentoring won the European Coaching and Mentoring Council Award for best Mentoring Programme 2024 (EMCC), a huge accolade for the programme. It was a thrill just to have been nominated, let alone to win. Nominations came from within our Thesis Mentoring community and from external colleagues who have a keen interest in the programme.
We have long been aware of the value the programme brings to Thesis Writers as well as benefits for our Thesis Mentors and we have celebrated and recognised the incredible work of our mentors through inviting our mentees to name them in our Thesis Mentor Hall of Fame. Receiving the EMCC award this year meant so much as it showed that the programme we have designed is also recognised and valued externally.
The evolution of Thesis Mentoring
I have been programme lead for just over two and a half years. One of the first things I did was hold an event to meet current programme participants and find out what they thought of the programme. I heard some interesting perspectives, which ultimately led to enhancing the programme in a three different ways, described below.
Lived experience matching criteria
When participants join the programme, they are asked if they would like to share any information about their personal situation, for example are they a Late Career-Early Career Researcher, a parent or carer, an international student, self-funded or do they speak English as an additional language. Providing any response to this question is entirely optional, and answers collected as free text enabling participants to share as much or as little detail as they like. Responses to this question are noted and used to drive matches with those who have similar experiences, where possible.
Cross College matching criteria
All participants are asked to indicate their preference of being matched with someone from within their College (a closely related discipline), or with someone from a different College. They can also indicate that they do not have any preference.
Outcomes of enhanced matching
Following the introduction of the enhanced matching criteria, participants were asked if they would like to share anything about how they felt the matching process worked for them. Responses to this question were grouped into positive, negative and neutral comments and 69% of mentor and 72% of mentees provided positive comments. Additionally, when asked what worked well (and not so well) in terms of the mentoring relationship, 91% of mentors, and 92% of mentees reported only positive feedback.
The quotes below, provided by Thesis Mentees, nicely outline how including lived experience matching, in conjunction with the offer of cross-discipline matches, have together been beneficial overall and have ensured that the ethos of the programme remains clear to participants.
[They have] “a very different academic background but actually I found that really helpful. I had to explain what I was doing and what it involved plus [their] questions helped me challenge assumptions and worries.”
“A similar personal experience really helps. Different research interests don’t matter that much.”
“The matching process was very successful. It was clear that people who run the programme to the time to match mentors and mentees. Having common experiences outside academia was very helpful and useful to build a good relationship as our fields were completely opposite, which was actually the purpose of the whole programme.”
Mid-point check in
Throughout the programme, there are several check-in points, two weeks in, half-way through, two weeks to go, and at the end of the programme. The scientist in me saw the mid-point check-in as an opportune moment to collect a bit more data on the programme and how participants were finding it. Earlier this year, I launched a pulse survey, and I am pleased to share that many participants reported that their mentoring relationships were going well and that programme materials and facilitation had supported them with this.
Figure 1: Programme participants’ (mentees and mentors) thoughts on their mentoring relationship at the mid-point of the programme. Data from 43 participants, gathered in Round 7.
Where next?
As we look ahead to launching round nine, with 314 experienced Thesis Mentors and 446 mentees as alumni, sustainability, scalability and user experience are at the forefront of our minds. We are currently exploring options to partner with a software developer to create a platform which will enable us to streamline aspects of the programme management, including housing participants’ profiles and facilitating programme comms.
Outlined above as the evolution of the programme, this has been the development of Thesis Mentoring 1.2 and massive step toward a digital evolution which will bring version 2.0! Rest assured, the evolution of this thriving, award-winning programme is just getting started.
The Auditorium: a research culture and researcher development blog 