RAPPORT ISSUE 5 | Page 51

RAPPORT Issue 5 (August 2020) personal tutoring and academic advising in UK Higher Education, highlights difficulties in directly mapping such definitions and distinctions onto the environments which interest us. Here, it should be noted, we are concerned with the staff-student relationship, as opposed to staff schemes of professional development, academic programmes of study in coaching or mentoring, or student-to-student peer mentoring schemes, whether supported by staff or students’ unions 3 . We also recognise that evidence consistently supports the view that social-emotional factors impact upon performance, including academic performance. The final report of the first phase of the What Works programme (Thomas, 2012: 10), for example, reported ‘a compelling case that in higher education, belonging is critical to student retention and success’. All of that said, in terms of the UK HE context, evidence in relation to the impact of coaching or mentoring approaches in institutional policy documents is sparse at best. A survey of twelve such documents from across the sector – in essence an ‘opportunity sample’ – did not include either term. Where it is to be found on institutional websites, for example at Manchester Metropolitan 4 and Reading 5 Universities it does not appear as a central feature of provision. And where the terms are used and defined 6 ‘much crossover’ between them is acknowledged. Similar issues, related to the overlapping usage and the lack of clear conceptual boundaries between these terms and their relationship to tutoring are noted in the literature (see e.g. D’Amato et al., 2003, Irby et al., 2018). These are confirmed by Pleschova and Macalpine (2015) in a systematic international literature review. For our purposes two perspectives may be useful to foreground by way of illustration.Wisker et al. (2008: 8) refer to ‘Coaching, mentoring and Personal Tutoring’ (my emphasis), suggesting that coaching and mentoring sit alongside tutoring rather than operate as approaches within it. They equally assert that broadly similar behaviours are required in each role and that the terms coaching and mentoring are often used interchangeably. Notwithstanding this, coaching is defined as: ‘non-directive, encouraging the coachee to take charge of his or her own development – to identify and meet goals, improve skills and develop discipline and motivation. The coach guides the coachee in dealing with current situations and planning for the future.’ (Wisker et al. 2008: 9). 3 See e.g. https://gpod.orgdev.coventry.domains/ and https://www2.aston.ac.uk/currentstudents/get-involved/mentoring-at-astonuniversity . The benefits of peer mentoring in particular have been demonstrated, (see e.g. Collings et al., 2009; Warren and Leben, 2017) and recognised within institutions as a means of supporting student engagement and enhanced levels of student support. (See e.g. https://studentmentoring.southwales.ac.uk/stud ent-mentoring/ ). 4 At https://www.celt.mmu.ac.uk/personal_tutoring/c oaching.php. 5 At http://www.reading.ac.uk/web/files/ATS-a- Guide-for-Tutors-Sept-2018.pdf page 5 6 See e.g. https://www4.ntu.ac.uk/adq/document_uploads/t eaching/196275.pdf 50