All children need caring adults in their lives. Although positive, sustained relationships with parents represent a critical resource for children, other adults can provide support that is similar to the support that a parent provides. This support from other adults can either be in addition to that provided by a parent or in place of support that a parent refuses or is unable to give. For example, other adults can provide financial assistance, enhance children’s learning skills, and help build their self-esteem and self-control. They can also provide emotional support, advice, and guidance about subjects that adolescents might feel uncomfortable, apprehensive, or fearful discussing with their parents.
Such involvement may be especially important for at-risk youth, that is, young people from poor, struggling, often single-parent families who live in neighborhoods that offer few positive outlets and a limited number of positive role models. Mentoring programs can be seen as formal mechanisms for establishing a positive relationship with at least one caring adult. Indeed, mentoring is often defined as a sustained relationship between a young person and an adult in which the adult provides the young person with support, guidance, and assistance. The very foundation of mentoring is the idea that if caring, concerned adults are available to young people, youth will be more likely to become successful adults themselves.
The Scope of Mentoring
Although all mentoring programs aim to promote positive youth outcomes, they vary somewhat in their goals, emphasis, and structure. Some programs have broad youth development goals, while others focus more narrowly on improving academic performance, helping youth stay in school, preparing youth for a particular line of work, or reducing substance abuse and other anti-social behaviors. Some programs are unstructured, others are highly structured. The evaluations we reviewed of these programs run the gamut. These programs do have a lot in common, though. Most are community-based, in contrast to school-based, and most target an “at-risk” population. Many of the evaluations of these programs were conducted by Public/Private Ventures. One was conducted by Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation, and another by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. See References for complete citations for the program evaluations.
Health and Safety
The main health and safety outcomes targeted by mentoring programs are those related to substance use and delinquent behavior. What the evaluations found: Mentoring approaches show promise in the prevention of substance abuse. The experience of Big Brothers/Big Sisters is again illustrative. Youth mentored through these programs were 46 percent less likely than youth in a control group to initiate drug use during the period of the study (18 months). For minority youth, the impact was even stronger. They were 70 percent less likely to initiate drug use than other similar minority youth who were not in the program. The same pattern was found with alcohol use. Youth in Big Brothers/Big Sisters were 27 percent less likely than control group youth to initiate alcohol use during the study period.
Female minority youth in the program were about half as likely as other minority females to do so. Two other studies also examined substance use. One showed a similar pattern; the other found that mentored youth were less likely than non-mentored youth to initiate drug use over the long-term, but not in the short-term. Mentoring relationships appear to reduce some negative youth behaviors. Of the four programs that evaluated behaviors related to delinquency, all showed evidence of reducing some, but not all, of the negative behaviors examined. Mentored youth in the BELONG program committed fewer misdemeanors and felonies after program participation (offenses were reduced from 4 percent to 1 percent). In the case of Buddy System participants, youth with a prior offense history were less likely to commit a major offense after participation in the program.
One additional study evaluated the impact of mentoring programs on the social relationships of youth. This study found that participants in Big Brothers/Big Sisters felt that they trusted their parents more and communicated better with them. Participants also felt they had better emotional support from their friends than youth who were not involved in the program. This latter finding was especially true for minority males. Mentoring relationships do not consistently improve young people’s perceptions of their worth. Findings on this outcome across three studies are inconclusive; however, one of these studies provides some insight into how mentoring programs may indirectly influence young people’s sense of self-worth. That study, an evaluation of Big Brothers/Big Sisters, found that mentoring improved parental relationships and scholastic confidence, which then not only enhanced young people’s academic performance but also their overall sense of self-worth.
Lessons for and from Mentoring
Mentoring is not always effective at enhancing youth development. Non-experimental methods, which lack the rigor of the experimental methods that produced the impact findings reported above, can nonetheless provide insights into the specific characteristics and practices that may make the difference between a mentoring program that works and one that doesn’t. Here, we draw two sets of lessons from these studies.
Social and Emotional Development
Mentoring enhances many aspects of young people’s social and emotional development. What the evaluations found: participating in mentoring promotes positive social attitudes and relationships. For example, youth who received mentoring (in addition to other program activities) through the Across Ages program had significantly more positive attitudes toward school, the future, the elderly, and helping behaviors than youth in the comparison group; this finding is consistent in both studies that examine these outcomes. One additional study evaluated the impact of mentoring programs on the social relationships of youth. This study found that participants in Big Brothers/Big Sisters felt that they trusted their parents more and communicated better with them. Participants also felt they had better emotional support from their friends than youth who were not involved in the program.
This latter finding was especially true for minority males. Mentoring relationships do not consistently improve young people’s perceptions of their worth. Findings on this outcome across three studies are inconclusive; however, one of these studies provides some insight into how mentoring programs may indirectly influence young people’s sense of self-worth. That study, an evaluation of Big Brothers/Big Sisters, found that mentoring improved parental relationships and scholastic confidence, which then not only enhanced young people’s academic performance but also their overall sense of self-worth.
Referenceѕ
- LoSciuto, L., Rajala, A., Townѕend, T. N., & Taylor, A. S. (1996). An outcome evaluation of Acroѕѕ Ageѕ: An intergenerational mentoring approach to drug prevention. Journal of Adolescent Reѕearch, 11(1), 116-129.
- Aѕeltine, R., Dupre, M., & Lamlein, P. (2000). Mentoring aѕ a drug prevention ѕtrategy: An evaluation of Across Ages. Adoleѕcent and Family Health, 1, 11-20.
- Big Brothers/Big Siѕterѕ Tierney, J. P., Groѕѕman, J. B., & Reѕch, N. L. (1995). Making a difference: An impact ѕtudy of Big Brotherѕ/Big Sisters. Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventureѕ.
- Morrow, K. V. & Styleѕ, M. B. (1995). Building Relationѕhipѕ with youth in program settings: A study of Big Brotherѕ/Big Sisters. Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventureѕ.
- Rhodeѕ, J., Grossman, J., & Reѕch, N. (2000). Agents of change: Pathwayѕ through which mentoring relationѕhipѕ influence adolescents’ academic adjuѕtment. Child Development, 71, 1662-1671.
- Furano, K., Roaf, P. A., Styleѕ, M. B., & Branch, A. Y. (1993). Big Brothers/Big Siѕterѕ: A study of program practiceѕ. Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventureѕ.
- Groѕѕman, J. B. & Rhodeѕ, J. E. (1999). The teѕt of time: Predictorѕ and effects of durationin youth mentoring relationѕhipѕ. Unpubliѕhed manuѕcript.
- The Buddy SystemFo, W. S. O., & O’Donnell, C. (1975). The Buddy System: Effect of community intervention on delinԛuent offenses. Behavior Therapy, 6, 522-524.
- O’Donnell, C.R., Lydgate, T., & Fo, W.S.O. (1979). The Buddy System: Review and follow-up. Child Behavior Therapy, 1(2), 161-169.
