Session Outline

UK higher education is undergoing sustained transformation, shaped by increasingly diverse student cohorts, widening participation priorities, rising staff-to-student ratios, and a continuing focus on student wellbeing. Within this shifting context, academic mentoring and personal tutoring remain essential mechanisms for fostering belonging, supporting progression, and enhancing student success. Research shows that a sense of belonging is a key predictor of engagement and continuation (Lochtie et al., 2025; Thomas, 2012), yet many traditional tutoring structures, originally designed for smaller and more homogeneous student populations, are now under pressure. These conditions highlight the need for adaptable and contextually responsive mentoring models rather than a single uniform institutional approach (Trowler, 2008).

This panel presents findings from institutional research conducted at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). Drawing on interviews with 23 departments, the research maps the varied academic mentoring models used across undergraduate and postgraduate programmes. The findings indicate a wide spectrum of approaches, including traditional faculty-led arrangements, hybrid structures that involve both academic and professional staff, and newly created specialist mentoring roles. This variation illustrates how departments are adjusting their practices to meet the needs of their disciplinary cultures, student cohorts, and resource environments. These adaptations build on earlier analyses of the pressures facing personal tutoring (Stephen, O’Connell and Hall, 2008) and reflect the increasingly complex realities of contemporary higher education.

Two departmental case studies provide deeper insight into how these models operate in practice. The first focuses on a specialist first-year academic mentor role introduced in the Department of Geography. This role is dedicated exclusively to mentoring an entire undergraduate cohort. Early indicators, including student satisfaction data and qualitative reflections, suggest that this model enhances consistency of support and may help address rising levels of student well-being concerns. This example also reflects on the challenges of providing personalised support in the context of mass higher education (Prowse, Ruiz Vargas and Powell, 2021).

The second case study examines an integrated model in the Department of Anthropology, where academic mentoring is combined with structured formative and summative feedback for all first-year students. This approach enables students to receive personalised and dialogic feedback, drawing on principles articulated by Nicol (2010), while also providing early-career teaching staff with opportunities to develop feedback and mentoring expertise. This model demonstrates how academic mentoring can simultaneously address student learning needs, promote a sense of belonging, and support staff development, as emphasised in sector guidance such as Lochtie et al. (2025).

Overall, the findings show that there is no single optimal approach to academic mentoring. Instead, departments require the flexibility to design mentoring structures that respond to their disciplinary traditions, student demographics, and staffing configurations. The session will invite participants to reflect on how institutions can balance this necessary diversity with a commitment to equity, consistency, and high-quality student experience. It will also encourage discussion about how institutions can support mentoring systems that are adaptable, sustainable, and aligned with the changing landscape of UK higher education.

Learning Outcomes

Bibliography