In analysing the data I gathered, I used several thematic analysis approaches, and found Braun and Clarke’s (2022) guide to this process very helpful. Initially I entered the student responses to the interviews into a word cloud, eliminating functional words to reveal key topics of conversation. The most frequently used words tended to be those that you would expect in a conversation around belonging and mentoring, such as ‘help’, ‘feel’, ‘grow’. However, much smaller on the word cloud were the more uncomfortable words- ‘struggled’, ‘overwhelming’, ‘lonely’ etc. which although small, felt significant.
This mirrored my observations of the Q&A session, where I asked a mixture of positive and negative questions. Students were particularly reluctant to answer the ‘negative’ questions on the public Padlet, however frequently mentioned difficult experiences verbally that had clearly had a significant impact upon them. This suggested to me an element of shame or embarrassment about struggling or not always having a great time at university. This was a moment where I did not feel the ‘data’ of what was being said truly reflected the experiences the students were communicating.
After immersing myself in the data I drew out key ‘codes’ (Braun and Clark, 2022) and identified these within the interviews. Notable codes were a perception of being different to the majority or feeling isolated, wishing to make friends and connections and a wish to improve things for others. Similarly to the Q&A, comments that suggested a lack of knowledge or confidence, or revealed a negative personal experience were often paired with a comment about changing things or coping- reflecting a sense of students being reluctant to complain, or feeling that negative experiences were a failing of some sort.
Codes chosen for Thematic Analysis
Coded interviews with third-year students
Highlighting these codes also provided an insight into the main motivations to participate in mentoring. I was surprised how frequently a desire to make friends and connections was mentioned by final year students. Most research around social integration focusses on new, first-year students making friends, which is where most institutional support is provided. It may be the case that final-year students also need support for social integration and perhaps feel an additional layer of vulnerability for having not ‘achieved’ this as fully as they might like.
Suggestions for improving the project, or negative feedback was often coupled with a reference to feeling uncomfortable or lacking confidence during certain situations. So while students evidently wish to connect with one another, they find it difficult and need support and structure in order to facilitate those initial encounters. The questionnaire responses suggest that students from different year groups felt more comfortable working with one another over time, but this needs careful management so that social encounters do not feel like another area where students might perceive they have ‘failed’.
The questionnaire (on previous blog post) also asked the third year students for their motivations for taking part in the programme, which were mainly altruism (83%) and professional development (87.5%) rather for the reward of the ‘reciprocal labour’ (54%). This fits with findings by Ajjawi, Gravett, & O’Shea, who explored how students wished to belong. ‘Students described wanting to have and make purposeful and meaningful connections with the university community … for a broader purpose … feeling like they were contributing to something communal beyond themselves as individuals’. (2023).
References
- Ajjawi, R., Gravett, K., & O’Shea, S. (2023). The politics of student belonging: identity and purpose. Teaching in Higher Education, 30(4), 791–804. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2023.2280261
- Braun V., Clarke V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A Practical Guide. Los Angeles: SAGE.