Walker and Verklan ( 2016 ) examined the effect a peer mentor program had on freshmen students ’ anxiety in clinical activities . Students in the experimental group worked with a senior nursing student during clinical once a week , while the control group participated in the same clinical but did not have a mentor . Mentors worked with freshman mentees to complete clinical , patient care , communication , and clinical reasoning skills during the program ( Walker and Verklan , 2016 ). All the students in both groups completed surveys to rate their anxiety levels ; overall , those who had a mentor had a greater reduction in anxiety in various aspects of clinical care such as use of equipment and providing direct patient care , than those who did not .
Making it Happen Before developing the mentor program , a survey was sent to all SNA members to determine if they believed a peer mentor program would be beneficial . With the help from my professor , Dr . Devon Manney , we found that 96.21 % of the 132 students who completed the survey believed this program would be beneficial . Next , we created a handout to explain the project ’ s purpose and goals and to provide guidelines for participants to follow , such as the requirement for the pairs to meet at least bi-weekly . We then recruited nursing students over a twoweek period after presenting the program at an SNA meeting . After the recruitment period , we had 15 BSN students and one nurse practitioner student interested in participating . Finally , we established short- and long-term goals for this new program at our university . Those goals included that students would agree this program is beneficial to their success , that the SNA would want to continue the program long-term , and that the program increased retention of students progressing through and graduating from the program each year .
Underclassmen students were randomly paired with upperclassmen . Pairs were given the guidelines for the program , and the four-week implementation period began . After the first two weeks , students were contacted for a mid-point evaluation . Mentors helped their mentees schedule classes for the next semester , provided advice for clinical and academic success , and served as a support system during this time . Due to COVID-19 regulations , meetings occurred over video chats , phone calls , and texting . A final survey was completed to determine satisfaction , as well as collect suggestions for future implementation . Finally , I met with the SNA student executive board to discuss established guidelines and findings . Because of the program ’ s success , the executive board decided to integrate it into SNA , permanently , in upcoming semesters .
Evaluation At the halfway point , Dr . Manney and I evaluated the program by emailing participants to make sure they have been in contact with each other and completed their first meeting . We also asked if anyone had questions or concerns ; no students reported any issues . At the end of the implementation period , participants completed an anonymous survey regarding their satisfaction and their perceived benefits of the program . An open-ended section for students to write any comments or suggestions was included . As many as 94.1 % of participants agreed they were satisfied and that the program was beneficial to their education . We received many positive comments and a few suggestions for future programs .
Recommendations Among the recommendations for future implementation of similar programs one was to include more students as the pilot program was limited to 16 . Another recommendation was that students should meet in-person and that the program should run over a longer period of time , as the pandemic and subsequent shortened semester prevented this . One student had been paired with a graduate student and reported that it would have been easier to form a connection with someone in the same program , rather than with someone who has graduated . This led to the recommendation that mentees should be mentored by a student in the same program . Last is the recommendation that future programs should follow students over time and seek ongoing feedback to determine long-term effects on student satisfaction , progression , and graduation rates . •
References Lombardo C ., Wong C ., Sanzone L ., Filion F ., Tsimicalis A . ( 2017 ). Exploring mentees ’ perceptions of an undergraduate nurse peer mentorship program . J Nurs Educ . 56 ( 4 ): 227-230 .
Vandal N ., Leung K ., Sanzone L ., Filion F ., Tsimicalis A ., Lang A . ( 2018 ). Exploring the Student Peer Mentor ’ s Experience in a Nursing Peer Mentorship Program . J Nurs Educ . 57 ( 7 ): 422-425 .
Walker D ., Verklan E . ( 2016 ). Peer mentoring during practicum to reduce anxiety in first-semester nursing students . J Nurs Educ . 55 ( 11 ): 651-654 .
Dayhoff
Manney
Travis Dayhoff , BSN , RN , is recently graduated magna cum laude from Bloomsburg University with a BSN and a minor in Aging Studies and Gerontology . He is currently a Registered Nurse working on a pediatric medical-surgical / oncology unit .
Devon Manney , PhD , RN , is a tenured assistant professor in the Department of Nursing at Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania , where she teaches adult medical-surgical nursing . She is the faculty advisor of Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania ’ s NSNA chapter and a cofaculty advisor for Bloomsburg University ’ s Student Nurses ’ Association . She has conducted multiple poster and podium presentations at the regional , state and national levels .
40 NSNA IMPRINT • SEPTEMBER / OCTOBER 2021 • www . nsna . org