Skip Navigation

Home Products We are starting a new mentoring program for students K-12. Any recommendations? Should we use permission slips? How do students get identified? What topics need to be covered when training our teacher mentors?

We are starting a new mentoring program for students K-12. Any recommendations? Should we use permission slips? How do students get identified? What topics need to be covered when training our teacher mentors?

Mid-Atlantic | November 09, 2021

Response:

Thank you for the question you submitted to our REL Reference Desk regarding mentoring programs for students K-12. We have prepared the following memo with research references to help answer your question. For each reference, we provide an abstract, excerpt, or summary written by the study's author or publisher. The references are selected from the most commonly used research resources and may not be comprehensive. References are listed in alphabetical order, not necessarily in order of relevance. Other relevant studies may exist. We have not evaluated the quality of these references, but provide them for your information only.

Response:

Thank you for the question you submitted to our REL Reference Desk regarding mentoring programs for students K-12. We have prepared the following memo with research references to help answer your question. For each reference, we provide an abstract, excerpt, or summary written by the study's author or publisher. The references are selected from the most commonly used research resources and may not be comprehensive. References are listed in alphabetical order, not necessarily in order of relevance. Other relevant studies may exist. We have not evaluated the quality of these references, but provide them for your information only.

Research References

  1. Chan, C. S., Rhodes, J. E., Howard, W. J., Lowe, S. R., Schwartz, S. E., & Herrera, C. (2013). Pathways of influence in school-based mentoring: The mediating role of parent and teacher relationships. Journal of School Psychology, 51(1), 129-142. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1001683
    Request full text available at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3593655/
    From the abstract: “This study explores the pathways through which school-based mentoring relationships are associated with improvements in elementary and high school students' socio-emotional, academic, and behavioral outcomes. Participants in the study (N = 526) were part of a national evaluation of the Big Brothers Big Sisters school-based mentoring programs, all of whom had been randomly assigned to receive mentoring at their schools over the course of one academic year. Students were assessed at the beginning and end of the school year. The results of structural equation modeling showed that mentoring relationship quality, as measured by the Youth-Centered Relationship scale and the Youth's Emotional Engagement scale, was significantly associated with positive changes in youths' relationships with parents and teachers, as measured by subscales of the Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment, the Teacher Relationship Quality scale, and the Hemingway Measure of Adolescent Connectedness. Higher quality relationships with parents and teachers, in turn, were significantly associated with better youth outcomes, including self-esteem, academic attitudes, prosocial behaviors, and misconduct. The effect sizes of the associations ranged from 0.12 to 0.52. Mediation analysis found that mentoring relationship quality was indirectly associated with some of the outcomes through its association with improved parent and teacher relationships. Implications of the findings for theory and research are discussed.”
  2. Herrera, C., & Karcher, M. (2013). School-based mentoring. Handbook of Youth Mentoring, 203-220.
    Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289823251
    From the abstract: “Schools are a primary context for the development of mentoring relationships outside of the family. Many naturally forming mentoring relationships develop in schools between students and adults such as teachers and support staff (DuBois & Silverthorn, 2005a). Schools are also a common site for implementing formal mentoring programs for youth. Indeed, more volunteers serve as mentors in school-based mentoring (SBM) programs (28%) than in religion-based (24%), workplace (16%), or sports-related programs (9%) (AOL, 2002). SBM programs were designed, in part, to overcome many of the challenges facing communitybased mentoring (CBM) programs. SBM programs typically involve mentoring once a week in a supervised school setting. This creates a lower burden on volunteers than CBM programs (e.g., less time involved, less pressure to determine activities), making recruitment easier and attracting volunteers who are less able to manage the commitment required by CBM programs. In addition, by relying on teacher rather than parent referrals, programs have opportunities to proactively seek to engage youth who are not typically targeted by more traditional CBM programs (e.g., youth whose parents might not take the initiative to involve them in CBM programs, youth with particular difficulties in academic areas). The school context also can afford easier access to training, support, and supervision, all of which could decrease costs. These potential benefits have made SBM appealing both to schools and to mentoring agencies nationwide.”
  3. Hickman, G. P., & Wright, D. (2011). Academic and school behavioral variables as predictors of high school graduation among at-risk adolescents enrolled in a youth-based mentoring program. Journal of At-Risk Issues, 16(1), 25-33. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ942899
    From the abstract: “Using official school data, this study examined a sample of 447 at-risk students enrolled over a 10-year period in a youth-based mentoring program. The primary objective of the program was to ensure high school graduation. Participants were identified by indices of academic and school behaviors that rendered them less likely to graduate from high school. This study used logistic regression to examine the extent to which academic (i.e., GPA, grade retention, and math and reading proficiency scores) and behavioral (i.e., expulsions) variables, as well as age at entry of program, and duration in the program predicted high school graduation. Results indicated that GPA and participants' age at time of enrollment in the program were significant predictors of graduating high school. Implications are drawn for designers of diversion, intervention, and mentoring programs.”
  4. Keller, T. E., & Pryce, J. M. (2012). Different roles and different results: How activity orientations correspond to relationship quality and student outcomes in school-based mentoring. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 33(1), 47-64. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ956547
    Request full text available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221820878
    From the abstract: “This prospective, mixed-methods study investigated how the nature of joint activities between volunteer mentors and student mentees corresponded to relationship quality and youth outcomes. Focusing on relationships in school-based mentoring programs in low-income urban elementary schools, data were obtained through pre-post assessments, naturalistic observations, and in-depth interviews with mentors and mentees. Adopting an exploratory approach, the study employed qualitative case study methods to inductively identify distinctive patterns reflecting the focus of mentoring activities. The activity orientations of relationships were categorized according to the primary functional role embodied by the mentor and the general theme of interactions: teaching assistant/tutoring, friend/engaging, sage/counseling, acquaintance/floundering. Next, these categories were corroborated by comparing the groups on quantitative assessments of relationship quality and change in child outcomes over time. Relationships characterized by sage mentoring, which balanced amicable engagement with adult guidance, were rated most favorably by mentees on multiple measures of relationship quality. Furthermore, students involved in sage mentoring relationships showed declines in depressive symptoms and aggressive behaviors. For disconnected pairs (acquaintances), students reported more negative relationship experiences. Findings suggest effective mentoring relationships represent a hybrid between the friendly mutuality of horizontal relationships and the differential influence of vertical relationships.”
  5. Tolan, P. H., Henry, D. B., Schoeny, M. S., Lovegrove, P., & Nichols, E. (2014). Mentoring programs to affect delinquency and associated outcomes of youth at risk: A comprehensive meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 10(2), 179-206. Retrieved from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4224303/
    From the abstract: “Objectives: To conduct a meta-analytic review of selective and indicated mentoring interventions for effects for youth at risk on delinquency and key associated outcomes (aggression, drug use, academic functioning). We also undertook the first systematic evaluation of intervention implementation features and organization and tested for effects of theorized key processes of mentor program effects. Methods: Campbell Collaboration review inclusion criteria and procedures were used to search and evaluate the literature. Criteria included a sample defined as at-risk for delinquency due to individual behavior such as aggression or conduct problems or environmental characteristics such as residence in high-crime community. Studies were required to be random assignment or strong quasi-experimental design. Of 163 identified studies published 1970 - 2011, 46 met criteria for inclusion. Results: Mean effects sizes were significant and positive for each outcome category (ranging from d =.11 for Academic Achievement to d = .29 for Aggression). Heterogeneity in effect sizes was noted for all four outcomes. Stronger effects resulted when mentor motivation was professional development but not by other implementation features. Significant improvements in effects were found when advocacy and emotional support mentoring processes were emphasized. Conclusions: This popular approach has significant impact on delinquency and associated outcomes for youth at-risk for delinquency. While evidencing some features may relate to effects, the body of literature is remarkably lacking in details about specific program features and procedures. This persistent state of limited reporting seriously impedes understanding about how mentoring is beneficial and ability to maximize its utility.”

Additional Organizations to Consult

Methods:

Search Strings. Develop student mentoring program OR student mentor program K-12 components OR student mentoring program structure OR quality student mentor program K-12 OR student mentoring program teacher training OR student mentoring school-based recommendations OR student mentor program elementary middle high school OR student mentoring design requirements K-12

Searched Databases and Resources.

Reference Search and Selection Criteria. The following factors are considered when selecting references:

Connect with REL Mid-Atlantic