How Effective Are Mentoring Programs for Youth? A Systematic Assessment of the Evidence

Abstract

gate increasingly well-specified models of how different types of program practices and processes may be instrumental in shaping consequential features of mentoring relationships and ultimately, the realization of particular desired outcomes for youth; and (d) establish a research registry to improve the quality and synthesis of available evidence regarding the effectiveness of youth mentoring as an intervention strategy.

Mentoring Relationship Closures in Big Brothers Big Sisters Community Mentoring Programs: Patterns and Associated Risk Factors

“…However, meta-analyses of youth mentoring programs have produced effect sizes that are modest at best with little evidence of sustained positive program impacts over extended periods (DuBois, Portillo, Rhodes, Silverhorn & Valentine, 2011;Meyerson, 2013). In addition, there have been instances where youth involvement in mentoring was found to have no impact at all (Roberts, Liabo, Lucas, DuBois & Sheldon, 2004) or to be counterproductive resulting in unintended negative consequences (Rodriguez-Planas, 2014).…”

The moderating influence of perceived competence in learning on mentored students' school performance

“…In fact, mentoring is intended to provide care, structure, limits and feedback in a context in which the mentors and mentees continuously affect each other perceptions (DuBois et al, 2011). These characteristics transform SBM into a privileged relational context in which to tackle the negative or weak PCL of vulnerable students, which may ultimately result in positive school performance becoming integrated into the mentee's personal value set.…”

“…Some meta-analyses found that SBM impact ranged from un-existent (Wood & Mayo-Wilson, 2012) to modest, but significant (DuBois et al, 2011). There is accumulated evidence that SBM effectiveness is influenced by a wide array of factors such as: the mentees' gender (Darling, Bogat, Cavell, Murphy, & Sanchez, 2006) or level of relational risk (Schwartz, Rhodes, Chan, & Herrera, 2011); the mentor's profile, including his/her background in caring and educational roles (DuBois et al, 2011); or the specific implementation of the SBM program (DuBois et al, 2011), such as the existence of appropriate activities (Karcher, 2008) or the duration of SBM relationships (Grossman, Chan, Schwartz, & Rhodes, 2012).…”

“…Frequently, vulnerable students have not mastered basic academic skills and this negatively influences their perceptions of competence in learning (Schüler, Sheldon, & Fröhlich, 2009;Schunk & Pajares, 2005). Given that SBM is provided to vulnerable students with the intention of compensating for their previous academic deficits/failures (DuBois et al, 2011), our overriding objective is to understand the role of perceived competence in learning (PCL) on mentees' school performance when SBM is delivered by teachers.…”

“…Some SBM programs involve supporting mentored students to develop their needs of competence, relatedness and autonomy (blind for review), but most of them tend to focus on school performance issues (DuBois, Portillo, Rhodes, Silverthorn, & Valentine, 2011).…”