Does Near-Peer Mentoring Improve Honours Research Grades? Evidence from a Randomised Pilot in Economics

Nicky Nicholls (), Roula Inglesi-Lotz () and WiZelle Kritzinger
Additional contact information
Nicky Nicholls: Department of Economics, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X20, Hatfield 0028, South Africa
Roula Inglesi-Lotz: Department of Economics, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X20, Hatfield 0028, South Africa
WiZelle Kritzinger: Department of Economics, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X20, Hatfield 0028, South Africa

No 202639, Working Papers from University of Pretoria, Department of Economics

Abstract: This paper examines whether structured near-peer mentoring improves the research performance of Honours students in economics. Using a randomised stage-rotation design at the University of Pretoria, 50 Honours students were assigned to a PhD-student mentor during either the research proposal stage (Semester 1) or the research paper stage (Semester 2), ensuring that every student was mentored while a comparison group was preserved at each stage. We estimate intention-to-treat (ITT) effects of assignment and, using random assignment as an instrument for self-reported contact, local average treatment effects (LATE) of actual engagement. Compliance was high, at 87 percent in Semester 1 and 100 percent in Semester 2. All point estimates are positive but statistically insignificant: assignment is associated with increases of 0.52 points (out of 10) in the proposal grade and 1.86 points (out of 100) in the research paper grade, with corresponding LATE estimates of 0.99 and 4.29 points. Among mentored students, more frequent meetings are associated with significantly higher proposal grades (1.26 points per additional frequency level, p = 0.024), but not with research paper grades. The findings suggest that engagement intensity, rather than assignment per se, is the more likely channel of any mentoring effect, and that generic research guidance is most valuable while the research question is still being formulated. The design offers a low-cost and ethically defensible framework for evaluating postgraduate research support.

Keywords: Peer Mentoring; Near-Peer Mentoring; Postgraduate Supervision; Randomised Evaluation; Economics Education; Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: A22 A23 I23 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 14 pages
Date: 2026-10
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://drupalwebprod-files.up.ac.za/Public/2026-1 ... 3NPgNnXETqKw4aUSzHyv (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pre:wpaper:202639

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Papers from University of Pretoria, Department of Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Rangan Gupta ().