Experience and perceived requirements of a peer mentoring program in undergraduate nursing education: insights from faculty and students

Abstract

Aim

This study aimed to explore the perceived needs, structural requirements, and expected outcomes of a peer mentoring program from the perspectives and experiences of undergraduate nursing students and faculty at the College of Nursing, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences (KSAU-HS), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Background

Peer mentoring, a relationship between students of similar academic standing and institutional affiliation, has been shown to enhance academic achievement, psychosocial well-being, and professional development. While peer mentoring has been widely studied in Western and coeducational contexts, there is limited evidence in Saudi nursing education, particularly in English-medium programs delivered in an Arabic-speaking environment. These factors may influence both the nature of student challenges and the structure of effective mentoring models. Therefore, understanding locally relevant mentoring needs is essential to inform contextually appropriate program design.

Design

An exploratory qualitative design was employed to gain an in-depth understanding of participants’ perceptions and expectations related to peer mentoring.

Methods

Participants were recruited through purposive sampling and included nine female faculty members and 33 female nursing students representing all academic levels. Data were collected through in-depth faculty interviews and five online student focus groups, analysed using inductive content analysis. Trustworthiness was maintained through credibility, dependability, and confirmability, with adherence to ethical principles of privacy, confidentiality, and anonymity.

Results

Three themes emerged: understanding the functions and value of mentor–mentee relationships; addressing academic and personal challenges through mentoring; and the supportive role of peer mentors in achieving academic and personal goals. Both students and faculty emphasized early program introduction, voluntary participation, and structured mentor selection.

Conclusions

Findings indicate a strong need and positive attitude toward peer mentoring in nursing education. Such programs can enhance student success, personal growth, and resilience. Future research should examine program feasibility and evaluate outcomes in practice.

Clinical trial number

Not applicable.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12912-026-04822-6.

Background

Mentoring has evolved steadily since the 1970s, both as a practice and a concept for supporting healthcare professionals and it was formally introduced into medical education in the late 1990s. The Standing Committee on Postgraduate Medical and Dental Education defines mentoring as “a process in which an experienced, highly regarded, empathetic person (the mentor) guides another (usually younger) individual (the mentee) in the development and re-examination of their ideas [1].” Mentoring is typically characterized by confidential discussions in which the mentor provides guidance and support to the mentee, within the same organizational or professional context [2].

Peer mentoring, a distinct form of mentorship, fosters a one-on-one relationship between students who share a comparable age, academic standing, and institutional affiliation.³ In this type of mentorship, a more experienced and knowledgeable student (the mentor) offers guidance by sharing relevant skills and experiences with their peers or junior students (the mentees). By participating in peer-mentoring programs, both mentors and mentees can gain many personal and professional benefits and engage in their continuous professional development [3].

In universities, peer mentoring is increasingly recognized as valuable not only for students but also for faculty members. While faculty develop competencies through classroom experience and enhancement activities, a more sustainable and impactful approach lies in faculty-to-faculty peer mentorship. This collaborative model enhances individual competencies, cultivates a culture of continuous learning, and fosters mutual support and growth. By investing in faculty development, institutions can enhance engagement, improve the quality of teaching and research, and strengthen operational performance across departments [4]. Although student achievement remains central, faculty members play an equally critical role in shaping future professionals. Supporting their development through peer mentorship elevates instructional quality and contributes to the broader advancement of academic communities and institutional excellence [4–6].

Peer mentoring benefits both students and faculty. For students, it enhances academic performance and supports overall development. For faculty, it can increase work achievements, improve outcomes, and foster satisfaction [7]. Universities are therefore showing growing interest in mentoring programs, whether among peers or across levels, to promote continuous skill development, improve academic outcomes, and build supportive academic communities [8].

Peer mentoring facilitates both academic and personal development among students. Peer mentoring programs provide an environment in which students can build competence, develop a positive sense of self, and strengthen critical thinking skills [9]. For nursing students specifically, peer mentoring has been shown to reduce attrition rates, improve academic achievement, and promote positive personal and professional development during both the early and advanced years of study [9, 10]. Mentoring also benefits peer mentors themselves, supporting the development of leadership skills and a sense of professional fulfillment. Consequently, mentoring programs aimed at strengthening the nursing workforce should be informed by existing evidence while also addressing current gaps in knowledge [11].

The rationale for assessing the requirements of an effective peer-mentorship program for nursing students is to enhance program quality by identifying the learning needs of students and understanding their experience of knowledge transfer. The assessment findings can inform the development of peer-mentoring programs that strengthen nurses’ leadership, organizational, and self-management skills while accelerating their personal and professional growth.

Accordingly, the aim of the present study was to explore the requirements of effective peer-mentoring programs from the perspectives of students and faculty at the College of Nursing, King Saud Bin Abdul-Aziz University for Health Sciences (KSAU-HS), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Materials and methods

Research design and setting

The study followed a qualitative design.

The study setting included the College of Nursing at King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (KSAU-HS-R), a government university. KSAU-HS has two sister campuses in the Jeddah and Al-Ahsa regions of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). KSAU-HS is accredited by the Ministry of Education in the KSA for various undergraduate and postgraduate degree programs. At all three sites, the Colleges of Nursing exclusively enroll female students, as each campus is designated as a female-only institution.

Study subjects/sample

The population included female nursing faculty and undergraduate student nurses. At the time of the study, there were approximately 40 faculty members and 686 students. Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants. Email invitations were sent to all eligible faculty members and undergraduate nursing students within the College of Nursing. Participation was voluntary, and individuals who expressed interest were included according to the study’s inclusion criteria. Faculty members were included if they were currently employed at the College of Nursing at KSAU-HS, were involved in undergraduate teaching or academic advising, and were willing to participate in an in-depth interview. Students had to be enrolled in the undergraduate nursing program from the first year through the internship and be willing to participate in a focus group discussion.

Students on academic leave during data collection were excluded. No other exclusion criteria were applied in order to capture a wide range of perspectives across academic levels. To get a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon under study, all efforts were made to ensure representation across different academic levels and faculty roles.

Sampling began with three to four participants per participant category (faculty and students) and continued concurrently with data analysis until data saturation was reached. Data saturation was achieved during the later stages of data collection, when no new codes or themes emerged in consecutive interviews and focus groups. The research team continuously monitored saturation and agreed that sufficient depth and consistency had been reached.

A total of nine faculty members and 33 nursing students were included in the study. The 33 nursing students were stratified by educational year: first year (n = 5), second year (n = 7), third year (n = 6), fourth year (n = 5), and internship year (n = 10).

Data collection

Data collection occurred in November 2023 and included individual in-depth interviews with nursing faculty and focus group discussions (FGDs) with nursing students. 5 Focus groups and 9 interviews lasted between 30 and 45 min. Only participants and the researcher were present during these data collection sessions.

Participants signed a consent form at the beginning of the data collection sessions. An interview guide composed of questions related to the program’s categories was used. Categories included the knowledge, skills, and values instilled by the program, as well as recommendations for its management and suggestions for improvement.

The categories were based on the study’s aim: to explore the perceived needs, structural requirements, and expected outcomes of a peer mentoring program. Academic and practical needs were reflected in the knowledge and skills domains, personal and professional outcomes were reflected in the values domain, and structural and implementation aspects were addressed within the development/improvement domain. These categories shaped the interview guide to make sure all parts of the aim were covered, while the data were analyzed using an inductive content analysis approach. The specific focus of questions included program knowledge (knowledge of student peer mentoring programs, challenges faced in academic or personal life, and the potential role of peer mentoring programs to help overcome these challenges); skills (previous experience in peer mentoring, how the program helped contributed to achieving academic or personal goals, and suggested activities to be offered); value (desired short-term and long-term benefits of participation; and development and improvement (suggestions for improvement and implementation). The interview guide was piloted during two individual in-depth interviews, resulting in the refinement and finalization of the questions. Example of questions included: “How can a peer mentoring program be structured to meet the needs of nursing students?” and “How do you think a peer mentoring program could help overcome students’ academic and personal challenges? Pilot data was not included in the final analysis. Data collection was conducted using both in-person and virtual methods, utilizing Microsoft Teams, due to the unavailability of some faculty members and students for in-person data collection. All interviews were conducted in a private and quiet space and were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Reflexive and field notes were kept by the researcher during data collection to support the researcher’s understanding of the data. They were not formally used in the analytical process.

FDGs were kept to a manageable size to ensure equal participation by all participants. The groups were stratified by the year of training to ensure homogeneity within each group. The principal investigator moderated the sessions, ensured equal contribution by participants, and prevented dominance by individual participants. The focus groups were conducted virtually due to logistical barriers. Participants were advised not to disclose any information outside the group. Interviews and FDGs lasted between 30 and 60 min and were conducted in English (See appendix 1).

Data analysis

Data were analyzed using an inductive content analysis approach supported by NVivo 12 (QSR International Pty Ltd, Version 12). Three researchers independently conducted the analytic steps, and analysis began concurrently with data collection, allowing early insights to inform subsequent interviews and focus groups.

The analytical process commenced with reading and re-reading the interviews to gain a general understanding of the data. At this point, the text was divided into smaller units, namely meaning units. Thereafter, the meaning units were condensed further, retaining the essence of the core meaning, into codes, then categories, sub-themes, and ultimately themes. Codes were compared within and across transcripts to identify similarities and differences, then grouped into broader categories. These categories were refined into sub-themes and overarching themes. Researchers continuously revisited raw data, codes, and themes to ensure interpretations stayed grounded in participants’ accounts. For example, the meaning unit “For example, the meaning unit “My challenge is the anxiety before examinations; I always feel anxious; I wish I had someone experienced like a mentor to share with me her experience so that she can support me in this” (Student Year 2, P6) was coded as exam anxiety, categorized under personal challenges, under the sub-theme personal, academic, implementation challenges, and weakness of the program within Theme 2: challenges faced by undergraduate nursing students and proposed solutions, and strength of the program.

There was no predefined coding framework; an inductive coding approach was used: the codes emerged from the data and were refined iteratively. NVivo software was used to organize the data, manage coding, and keep analytic notes. The researchers met regularly to discuss the emerging codes and interpretations. Any discrepancies were discussed until a consensus was reached.

Academic rigor

The principle of trustworthiness was upheld by ensuring credibility, dependability, transferability, and confirmability.

Credibility

Credibility was ensured through member checking after developing preliminary themes and sub-themes. Participants reviewed the final themes to confirm that the analysis reflected their words. Minor clarifications were incorporated to enhance accuracy and authenticity.

Transferability

Transferability in this study will be achieved by providing a rich and thorough description of study processes, also known as “thick description” [12].

Dependability

Dependability was achieved by providing a detailed methodological description that allowed for the replication of the study.

Confirmability

Confirmability was ensured by the researchers’ independent analysis of the data, which helped avoid bias and ensured that the findings were data-driven. Further, the researchers sought the expertise of a qualitative expert to complete an external audit of the analytical process. This was done to ensure the data were accurate, relevant, and meaningful. Following their recommendations, minor refinements were made. The qualitative experts are research scholars who have conducted numerous qualitative studies and have a strong publication track in this field. Confirmability was also ensured by using direct quotes from participants to ground subthemes and themes in the data. The primary data collector had no academic or administrative relationship with participants and was solely responsible for collecting the data. This minimized the possibility of any potential power imbalances. Other team members were involved in supervision, methodological guidance, and tool refinement but did not participate in data collection. Throughout the entire study, all researcher were part of reflexive discussions to acknowledge and mitigate potential biases related to their institutional affiliations.

Ethical considerations

This study was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Data collection commenced only after institutional review board (IRB) approval was obtained from King Abdullah International Medical Research Centre, Ministry of National Guard-Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia – (IRB number: SP23R/192/08). Privacy, confidentiality, and anonymity were ensured by collecting de-identifying information. No data can be traced back to participants, and data is secure on a password-protected computer device. Nursing students were assured that participation is voluntary and that they can withdraw at any time without any consequences to their academic standing in the nursing program.

Audio recordings were stored on a secure, password-protected institutional computer accessible only to the research team. Transcripts were anonymized prior to analysis, and identifying information was removed. Data will be retained for 5 years in accordance with institutional policy, then permanently deleted.

Funding declaration

Funding was not provided for the conduct of this study.

Results

Realization of sample

The final sample consisted of nine faculty members, eight of whom held the rank of Assistant Professor and one held the rank of Lecturer, aged between 30 and 47 years. The faculty included a national mix of Saudi, Egyptian, and Filipino nationals. Thirty-three Saudi students were included, aged between 19 and 24 years. The nursing students were stratified by educational year: first year (n = 5), second year (n = 7), third year (n = 6), fourth year (n = 5), and internship year (n = 10).

Three main themes emerged: understanding the functions and value of mentor–mentee relationships, academic and personal challenges that could be addressed through peer mentoring, and the role of peer mentors in supporting academic and personal goals see (Table 1).

Table 1.

Themes and subthemes

Theme	Sub-themes	Brief Descriptor
1. Understanding Relationship Between the Mentor and Mentee	Specific Roles	It emphasizes a supportive, collaborative relationship that is not based on supervision, but rather on providing guidance, direction, and shared understanding. “The goal is to improve the mentee through the mentor (by providing) information, guidance, and(knowledge) about the rules and regulations.” (Assistant Prof., IDI-4)
	Experience Feedback	It reflects generally positive past experiences, while also acknowledging that some advice can be confusing or not entirely reliable. “If she helped me in how to join and know people, they do activities to have experience in talking to people and to improve my self-esteem and confidence (Student year 2, P2)
	Optimal Timing	There’s an ongoing discussion about whether it’s better to start as early as possible or wait until after completing the preparatory year. “Sooner is better because it is a concept of the learning process…. they need to learn from the beginning until it becomes a habit.” (Assistant Prof., IDI-1)
2. Academic and Personal Challenges and Program Solutions	Multi-faceted Challenges	Addresses academic gap and personal stressors. “My challenge is the anxiety before examinations; I always feel anxious; I wish I had someone experienced like a mentor to share with me her experience so that she can support me in this.” (Student Year 2, P6)
3. Peer Mentoring in Support of Student Goals	Academic Success	Targets improved study methods, exam performance, and feedback on projects. “She helps and guides me on how to study well to succeed… so I can achieve my academic goal.” (Student Year 3, P4)
	Personal Growth	Focuses on building self-confidence, emotional support, and future career guidance. “To help me overcome challenges in the short term and in the long run, to help me decide where to go after graduation.”(Student Intern, P7)

Theme 1: Understanding the relationship between the mentor and mentee

Most students in the study were aware that a peer mentoring program was available at the institution. Students had a general understanding of a peer mentoring relationship and expressed that a mentor-mentee relationship is designed to help students share their experiences of overcoming challenges during their educational journey. Students stated that the less experienced student is guided by the experienced student to navigate the challenges of student life. Another student expressed that this kind of relationship allows for the sharing of knowledge between students.

sharing knowledge between students in the same field (where) one has more experience than the other, and helps the less experienced to pass the challenges and difficulties… it is like sharing knowledge. (Student year 1, P2)

I understand it is like helping students in their educational journey and sharing knowledge between them (Student Year 4, P3).

Participants described the goals of the peer mentoring relationship as guiding students to seek knowledge and improve their learning quality.

The faculty highlighted the specific roles within the mentor–mentee relationship. They emphasized that this relationship should be collaborative in nature, with the mentor facilitating, supporting, and guiding the mentee throughout the process rather than supervising.

The goal is to improve the mentee through the mentor (by providing) information, guidance, and(knowledge) about the rules and regulations. (Assistant Prof., IDI-4)

Student participants also expressed perceptions that were consistent with the faculty’s perceptions of what goals the peer mentoring could achieve. They believed that peers could help them acquire more knowledge of the subjects and orient them to the teaching styles demonstrated by faculty, which can result in improved learning and greater performance in examinations. Others believed that peer mentoring could help strengthen their self-esteem and confidence, especially during interaction with people.

A peer mentor should be a supportive figure, helping mentees …, providing insights into coursework, and facilitating their overall growth. (Assistant Prof., IDI-1)

If she helped me in how to join and know people, they do activities to have experience in talking to people and to improve my self-esteem and confidence (Student year 2, P2)

The student participants were asked about their experience with mentorship, and the results showed that more than half (57%, n = 19) had prior experience as mentees. Most of the student participants who were previously mentees themselves found their experience positive and helpful.

Students shared instances where they received guidance and support from their mentors and how this experience was beneficial for them.

Yes, she helped me a lot, for example, sharing assignments with me so I can have a sample to know how to solve it, I mean not to copy it, but as guidance, it is very helpful. (Nursing intern, P8)

Yes, I had a student from the 4th year, she helped me a lot in my first year, to have an idea about the courses and the way of the exams, like this. (Student year 2, P2)

Although the majority of students recalled positive experiences as mentees, one student shared an unpleasant experience as a mentee. She reflected on a personal experience in which mentorship advice was thought to have had a detrimental impact on her learning, which influenced her perspective. However, the student continued to report that their mentorship experience was generally positive.

In my junior level, it was an unpleasant experience. I reached out to a colleague who was older than me, and I asked her about two courses, she told me from her experience that I should focus on one course because it was the hardest that I would face in my life, so I followed what she told me, but actually it was the opposite, and I wasted my effort on the easy subject. Yeah, but besides this point, the senior students were always helping me. (Nursing intern, P1)

The best time to start peer mentoring was another important issue brought up by participants in relation to the program’s structure and operations. Faculty members offered in-depth viewpoints, highlighting the appropriate timing for introducing such a program in a student’s academic career. Peer mentoring would be most successful if it were introduced early in the learning process, according to many participants, who concurred that “the sooner, the better.

Sooner is better because it is a concept of the learning process…. they need to learn from the beginning until it becomes a habit. (Assistant Prof., IDI-1)

However, only a few participants suggested starting the mentorship program during the second academic year, which follows the preparatory year - a year of general education intended to help students acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to pursue undergraduate studies through university programs.

I think from the second level… (when the) students (are) done (with) the orientation and become more knowledgeable about the subject faculty team. (Assistant Prof., IDI-3)

Theme 2: Academic and personal challenges and program solutions

Students emphasized these needs by highlighting the importance of peer support for issues such as research methodology, study skills, understanding challenging subjects, and English language proficiency.

…studying in English; maybe if I have… someone to help translate for me or help me with the studying, it will be easier (Student year 1, P5)

Yes, I would like help in understanding some of the nursing subjects. (Student Year 3, P1)

Additionally, participants listed personal struggles for which they thought peer mentors could offer helpful assistance. These included issues with time management, juggling personal and academic obligations, boosting confidence, managing stress and anxiety, and requiring psychological counselling. One student also emphasized the potential role of peer mentors in this area by pointing out that it can be challenging to get help for psychological problems like stress and anxiety.

My challenge is the anxiety before examinations; I always feel anxious; I wish I had someone experienced like a mentor to share with me her experience so that she can support me in this. (Student Year 2, P6)

…no one guides us in the psychological part, like anxiety (and) stress… they were always focusing on the academic part only. (Student Intern, P3)

Faculty participants also acknowledged numerous challenges faced by nursing students, including a lack of English proficiency, weak academic arguments, poor articulation, and difficulties in applying theoretical knowledge to practical situations.

Furthermore, they highlighted several personal challenges, including financial difficulties, transportation issues, general stress, time management, social media distractions, and other social concerns.

Challenges include language barrier, and pressure from the trimester system as students’ progress in their studies. (Lecturer, IDI-6)

We have a new system, totally different than in the high schools. Language barrier, personal issues affecting learning experience, financial or transportation issues (are the main challenges). (Lecturer, IDI-8)

Faculty participants also highlighted the challenges that might arise during the implementation phase of the peer mentoring program, including time constraints and finding supportive, dedicated mentors for a large number of students.

Challenges include finding supportive mentors, following up with relationships, and handling the large number of students. (Assistant Prof, IDI-4)

Participants from the faculty also identified several perceived program flaws. These included a lack of trust between mentees and mentors, the possibility of mentors feeling overburdened, mentees becoming overly reliant on their mentors, and uncertainty about the objectives and purpose of peer mentoring. They proposed that addressing these problems would be crucial to improving the program’s overall quality and effectiveness.

Weakness would be… (that mentees) might actually think that if there are some difficulties, the mentors are there to do it for them. (Assistant Prof, IDI-2)

The faculty participants also highlighted that students’ challenges could be addressed through a structured implementation approach in consultation with students. It is crucial to identify mentors with specific characteristics in order to be eligible as mentors. Faculty also proposed that the interests and weaknesses of mentees be regularly assessed, rather than at the end of the program:

It should be structured and thorough… keep in mind their interests or weaknesses. Assess the program maybe twice, not only once, at the end. (Lecturer, IDI-8)

Theme 3: Peer mentoring in support of student goals

The participants expressed perceptions on the role of peer mentors in supporting academic and personal goals. In relation to academic goals, students mentioned studying effective study skills and learning methods as key drivers of academic success. Moreover, effective time management and networking opportunities were important for skill development. Mentees expressed that the sharing of information about mentorship by mentors was one of the key expectations that students identified as a requirement to meet the ‘mentors’ expectations. Additionally, providing feedback, reflecting on assignments, and projects were also important expectations of the mentee from the mentor.

…if she helps me in how to overcome challenges and how to study well (Student Year 2, P3)

She helps and guides me on how to study well to succeed… so I can achieve my academic goal. (Student Year 3, P4)

The students shared how a mentor could help them build self-confidence and achieve personal growth, as well as provide emotional support and encouragement, and offer guidance for future job opportunities.

To help me overcome challenges in the short term and in the long run, to help me decide where to go after graduation. (Student Intern, P7)

…when she shares her experience and feelings, I can know and feel like I am not alone in this (Student Year 2, P2)

Thank you, I think it is very important and effective for all students. (Student Year 3, P5)

Faculty members expressed that a peer mentoring program is effective, and student mentees are more likely to be open and trusting when their mentors are from within their own peers rather than their teachers.

…student mentees… will have someone to ask (and) they could be more open with them, rather than with faculty… (whom) they might feel embarrassed to ask. (Lecturer, IDI-8)

Additionally, some students in the FGDs provided recommendations for implementing the program and believed it would be effective in improving student outcomes. One student participant shared that although most students want to be mentored, it is quite possible that some students may not be interested in mentoring their peers; in such cases, the program should not be mandated but offered as a voluntary option. Individuals who are forced to be mentors might have a negative impact on the mentee within the program.

For me, this program will be very helpful for the students, or anyone who needs a mentor, but perhaps the mentor might not be willing to accept the idea, so it might negatively affect the mentee, so it should be voluntary. (Student Intern, P2)

The advantages of peer mentoring programs were also highlighted by faculty members, who noted that many teachers’ positive attitudes toward the mentorship program can enhance its effectiveness. They also conveyed a strong desire for the mentorship research findings to be expanded and reproduced nationwide.

Mentoring is a very good program, and the ongoing studies about peer mentoring could be very helpful in establishing a structured peer mentoring program. It will be beneficial also to other professions and other colleges as well (Assistant Prof, IDI-2).

Discussion

This study explored faculty and undergraduate nursing students’ perceptions of the requirements for a peer-mentoring program at a tertiary institution in Saudi Arabia. The findings indicate that participants view peer mentoring as a multidimensional support mechanism addressing academic, linguistic, and psychological needs concurrently.

Students viewed peer mentoring as a space to share knowledge and receive feedback. They expected mentors to guide them in assignments and offer advice based on experience. Faculty shared similar views. Both groups saw mentoring as an important part of the educational process, not just an optional activity.

Previous research has linked peer mentoring to improved academic confidence, professional growth, and psychosocial support [13–15]. The current study findings are consistent with this work. However, unlike other studies conducted in coeducational settings and Western countries, institutional structure and language were major concerns in this study context. Students repeatedly mentioned the difficulty of studying nursing in English. Recent research in nursing education has shown that peer mentoring can support both academic and linguistic development for students studying in a second language [16]. In this setting, mentoring may help students better understand terminology and course expectations. This possibly suggests that peer mentoring in English-medium programs, particularly in non-native English contexts, may serve as a bridge between language proficiency and professional competence. Peer mentoring offers distinct advantages over traditional faculty support. Faculty members typically deliver content in formal academic language, whereas peer mentors can simplify complex concepts and terminology. This shared experience allows mentees to seek clarification in a less formal, psychologically safe environment. This is especially when mentees may feel hesitant or embarrassed to approach faculty [9, 17]. As a result, peer mentoring serves as a bridge between language proficiency and academic understanding. This results in increased comprehension and confidence in English-medium nursing education [10, 16].

In Saudi higher education, contextual factors such as linguistic demands and structured academic environments have been shown to influence students’ academic motivation and engagement across university years [18]. Such influences may shape how students perceive and rely on peer mentoring as an accessible source of academic clarification and psychosocial reassurance within demanding educational settings. In this study students reported feeling embarrassed to ask faculty members for clarification on language or basic concepts e.g., “…student mentees… will have someone to ask (and) they could be more open with them, rather than with faculty… (whom) they might feel embarrassed to ask.” (Lecturer, IDI-8). Thus, being less hierarchical and more approachable, peer mentors allow mentees to be more open and trusting, which is essential for language acquisition and the normalization of academic stress.

The call for early program introduction matches research showing that early engagement leads to smoother transitions into higher education [19]. In this context, early mentoring acts as a support system for students during crucial transition periods, where academic expectations and professional identity formation increase. Another important point is that the program aligns well with the academic calendar and other milestones students need to meet [20]. This demonstrates participants’ understanding that mentoring should be built into the structure rather than casually implemented to have a lasting impact.

Participants emphasized voluntary involvement to mitigate concerns regarding mismatched mentor–mentee relationships and potential disengagement, consistent with previous studies [21]. This emphasis reveals a tension between institutional regulations and individual autonomy. Although participants endorsed organized programs, they cautioned against compulsory participation. These findings suggest that effective mentoring programs require a balance between oversight and flexibility to prevent unintended dependence or pressure on mentors.

Participants identified academic challenges, including rigorous courses, language barriers, and research difficulties, alongside psychological stressors such as anxiety and workload pressure. The findings indicate that students perceive these challenges as inherent to adapting to academic life. Peer mentoring functions not only as academic support but also as a mechanism for social bonding, normalizing stress, and promoting coping through shared experiences [22].

Another key finding is that mentors assist mentees in managing psychological stress commonly associated with academic work [23]. While prior research has identified social and emotional benefits of peer mentoring, the present findings demonstrate a close interconnection between psychological and academic support within this specific educational context [10, 24, 25]. While formal academic advising and counseling services are typically embedded within higher education institutions, evidence suggests that peer mentoring operates as a complementary form of support that differs from structured institutional services. Systematic reviews of near-peer mentoring and peer support interventions indicate that students often experience peer mentors as more approachable and less hierarchical than faculty or formal advisors, which may enhance psychological safety and engagement [9, 17]. In nursing and medical education contexts, mentoring relationships have also been associated with reductions in stress and improved confidence during academic transitions, reinforcing the value of peer-based relational support alongside formal institutional systems [26].

This study provides insights specific to a female nursing college in Saudi Arabia, where English is the language of instruction in a predominantly Arabic-speaking environment. The frequent language-related challenges indicate that peer mentoring may function as a bridge, facilitating comprehension of professional terminology and academic standards. Furthermore, in a gender-segregated educational system, shared cultural experiences are likely to foster trust and openness, underscoring the importance of peer support.

Participants perceived mentoring as beneficial for enhancing academic achievement and career planning. Previous studies have reported similar advantages. However, these results extend the existing literature by illustrating how institutional factors, language demands, and cultural context influence perceived mentoring needs and expectations.

Strengths and limitations

The study’s strength rests in its inclusion of faculty and student perspectives, therefore delivering a holistic view of program needs. However, the single-institution, all-female sample limits the transferability of the findings to coeducational contexts. However, conducting a study in a homogeneous learning setting enabled the exploration of gender-specific experiences within a shared academic and cultural context. Data collection employed an online approach, which may have affected rapport between the researcher and participants and, in turn, the richness of responses. In addition, data collection was conducted using both in-person and virtual methods, which may have influenced the level of interaction and depth of responses, particularly due to differences in non-verbal communication and participant engagement. Additionally, as this was a pre-implementation study, the benefits described are the participants’ expectations rather than the program’s effectiveness once implemented. Although participation was voluntary, this may have introduced selection bias toward individuals already interested in mentoring.

Although English was not the participants’ first language, the Bachelor of Science in nursing program at KSAU-HS is delivered entirely in English, which supports participants’ proficiency in academic and clinical communication. Nonetheless, conducting a focus group in English may have influenced the depth of some responses.

The study relied on self-reported answers from focus groups and interviews; the results may be influenced by selective disclosure and social desirability bias, thereby withholding critical perspectives.

Recommendations

To support the translation of these findings into practice, practical actions can be considered. First, nursing programs could incorporate structured mentor training within faculty development initiatives. This type of training would help prepare student mentors with key skills such as effective communication, giving constructive feedback, and recognizing when a mentee may need referral to additional support services.

Peer mentoring could also be introduced earlier within the nursing curriculum, particularly in the first year. This is especially important for students transitioning to English-medium instruction, where peer support may help them build confidence, adjust academically, and develop professional language skills in a better supportive environment.

Institutions may also consider developing a clear and voluntary framework to guide mentoring programs. Keeping participation optional can help avoid unnecessary pressure on students and reduce the risk of mentor fatigue. In addition, having a well-organized process for mentor selection and matching, overseen at the departmental level, can enhance the program’s success and durability.

More broadly, the results may have consequences for nursing education policy within the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region. Peer mentoring initiatives do serve as indicators of program quality, particularly in settings where language barriers affect student progress. Policies that support culturally responsive approaches may further increase student engagement and trust. Finally, investing in scalable digital mentoring approaches could help expand access and sustain these initiatives across institutions.

Conclusions

This study highlights that both student and faculty participants demonstrated a positive attitude toward peer mentoring programs. They believed that there is a strong need for such programs in nursing education, as it is a valuable approach for supporting academic achievement, personal growth, and resilience. While challenges were acknowledged, participants viewed the emergence of peer-mentoring as an exciting new approach to address academic, personal, and professional demands, especially if delivered early and offered as an optional opportunity.

From a nursing education policy perspective, these findings highlight the need for structured implementation strategies, including mentor preparation, curriculum integration, and institutional support. In Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries with similar educational contexts, these findings may guide contextually transferable approaches rather than universally generalizable models. Since this study reflects a single institutional setting, broader application should take local factors into account.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Author contributions

Noof Albaz, Sarah Alghumaiz, Seema Nasser, and Alaa Althubaiti (i.e., all authors) contributed to the Conceptualization, Methodology, and Validation. Sarah Alghumaiz contributed to data collection.Noof Albaz, Sarah Alghumaiz, and Alaa Althubaiti participated in the Formal data analysis. Noof Albaz and Sarah Alghumaiz wrote and reviewed the manuscript.

Funding

Not applicable.

Data availability

The interview and focus group transcripts, along with the analysed data and identified themes, are available from the corresponding author or research team upon reasonable request.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board of King Abdullah International Medical Research Centre, Ministry of National Guard–Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (IRB No. SP23R/192/08). Data were obtained from nursing students and faculty. Participation was voluntary, and informed consent was obtained from all participants before their involvement. Data were anonymized, and confidentiality was strictly maintained throughout the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.